S.Hoffman Remix / Remaster list

Is there anywhere I can find a list of Steve's work? I'm interested in songs he's remixed as well as remastered.

Thanks!

 

There's a link to a SH discography on the main page of this site!

 

I can't seem to find it!

 

Its a big text link that reads "discography." It is directly below the image of the tape reel in the upper left hand corner. Ali

 

Thanks! I see it now, on the Home page - I was stuck looking on the Forum main page.

Thanks again!

 

I found these six remixing entries:

More Rock 'n Roll Rarities Berry, Chuck MCA/Chess CHD-9190 1986 CD "Reissue Produced and Remixed by Steve Hoffman"

Rock 'n Roll Rarities Berry, Chuck MCA/Chess CHD-92521, JVC-473 1986 CD "Reissue Produced And Remixed by Steve Hoffman"

Original Cast Recording Man Of LaMancha Remixed & Remastered by Steve Hoffman MCA MCAD-1672 CD

Charles, Ray Greatest Country and Western Hits Dunhill DZS-040 1988 CD ADD - Digitally remixed by Ray Charles and Steve Hoffman from the original 1962-1965 ABC-Paramount session masters

The Buchanan Brothers, The Buchanan Brothers, Collectables Records COL0599 1995 CD Remixing only

Ray Charles Anthology Charles, Ray Rhino R2-75759 CD remixing: Steve Hoffman remastering: Bill Inglot

Is that it for remixing, or are there any others?

Thanks.

 

I don't get this ?

 

Michael.

Me thinks our young apprentice wants to know if Steve did any other remixed as well as remastered albums.

 

"O"

 

Remixes

Friends,

While I can never speak for Steve, he has gone on record in the Forum and stated that his attitudes about remixing have changed over the years. As I recall, he now regrets some of the remixes he completed. Not because they were poorly done but, rather, because they changed the historical record of the original recording. At the same time, I know there are times when he has to complete a mix because he is working with the original multi-tracks. Collectively, in reading through threads, Steve has definitely expressed his concern on re-mixing, however, as a professional, as we have all observed, Steve is thoughtful with his comments.

I once asked Steve, directly, if he were asked to remix the Beatles catalog by the EMI or the "the committee" would he do so? His reply was, "Yes". The point here, I believe, is that "if he were asked to do so".

Remixing of vintage material always seems to create a lot of controversy. My attitude is this, and this may seem a bit odd:

I believe with vintage material that the original Mono single mixes are sacred because so much sweat equity went in to getting those mixes just right for AM Radio airplay. I also believe that high quality Stereo mixes are pretty sacred as well. However, in far too many cases, Stereo mixes from the late 50's through the 60's, were poorly done because so little importance was placed on them. Until the Beatles changed the sales landscape with album sales, albums were often after thoughts. Some labels were notorious for poor Stereo mixes. There are many stories about how the Artist, Producer, Engineer and even Label owner would toll for hours upon hours with the exact mix of a single. Once completed, there were cases where the Stereo mix was quickly thrown together in just a short time period without a great deal of care given to the sound of mix. One label was even famous for having lower level staffers complete Stereo mixes for album release. That label was very singles oriented. I do not consider these inferior Stereo mixes to be sacred. Remixing is a highly effective way to create a enjoyable Stereo listening experience while maintaining the impact and power of the historical Mono single mix. They must, simply, be done right!

Bob

 

Bob,

Isn't sad that a lot of the shoddy stereo mixes (as decribed in your post) are now the usual representation of songs (from that period) on CD for later generations (just because they're stereo/doesn't matter about the quality)...

 

But then there are people that only want stereo versions no matter what the quality.

 

Please the Time Of The Season thread where only Pat explained why he preferred the Stereo mix on the basis of better sound stage, whereas the Mono supporters were explicit in their preference for the Mono mix.

A well-made point, Bradley!

Bob

 

Re: Remixes

Another vote for remixing under the conditions Bob describes.

By the way Bob, I hope you don't mind me editing your original post (this issue came up in another thread). I wanted to focus on this one aspect and I don't believe I am misrepresenting you by doing so. What are your thoughts?

John

 

Thanks Bob and Todd. Now, finally, I begin to understand the ongoing and spirited "mono/stereo" discussions on this forum. However, I'm not sure that I'd completely agree with Todd's statement that "just because they're stereo/doesn't matter about the quality." While there may be those who dogmatically believe that either stereo or mono ALWAYS sounds better, most of us probably value the quality of the sound first and foremost (that is, those of us who can still tell the difference).

 

Re: Re: Remixes

John,

Editing, in your example, is fine because the intent of the thought is not lost.

Bob

 

Larry,

I'm not really talking about "us" when I mention that people usually want stereo over mono, even if the mix sucks. I know a lot of people (who are casually into music) who think of mono as inferior just because it's "old fashioned" or what ever (you know what I mean). It's almost like how a lot of people I've encountered avoid B&W movies because they believe that they're inferior to color (eeeegads). I just get annoyed sometimes when I buy a disc and everything is stereo (for the sake of stereo) when I know there are better mono versions. Here's a slight example. How many people under the age of 25 have ever heard the mono 'Sgt. Pepper'? I'm not knocking the stereo version (it's great) but the mono was considered "the" representation of that album and it has never been officially released on CD. It is a memory...

 

Todd,

Well put. I absolutely agree!

 

Thanks!

Like my original post says, I'm interested in which projects Steve has done remixing on, not just remastering.

D-104

 

"Surf Legends and Rumours" was remixed (referred to as rebalanced) mostly from the three track multis - sounds great!

Donovan's mid 60's acoustic stuff (I think it's called "Colours" - I'll check when I get home) is also remixed by Steve and great.

I suspect (but don't know for sure) some of the songs on Steve's compilations have been remixed too. "Remember When" on the Garland label is really good and I would love to know which songs were remixed.

 

Re: Remixes

Hi Bob,

Since most mono mixes were done in order to get things "just right for Am Radio airplay", do you ever find that playing that material on today's high quality stereo systems changes the sound that was "massaged to sound good through AM radio? In other words if it was mixed for Am radio might it not sound right played back on high quality stereo systems?

I have always been somewhat dogmatic about preferring stereo mixes to mono mixes. The great threads about mono vs. stereo have made me rethink things.

 

Re: Re: Remixes

Joseph,

Thanks for asking. The honest answer is that they still have the impact and power that I remember as the made for AM Radio mix but, with more accurate reproduction because of higher quality playback equipment. In some intances this makes for more enjoyment of the selected track and in somes cases it merely makes the flaws of that recording more noticeable. The most noticeable flaws are not in the Mono mix, of course, but rather, in notice of such sonic qualities as distortion and compression, while always present, they have become more noticeable or sonically present.

Generally, the made for AM Radio mixes sound from good to excellent because the mixes are well-balanced with just the right historical amount of "wetness" or dryness", as an example. They certainly sound better than a poorly done Stereo mix.

Bob

 

Todd,

I agree with you that most young people have probably never heard "Pepper" in mono, but I'm 23 years old and I've heard the mono "Pepper". Last March at Beatlefest in Secaucus, New Jersey I picked up a UK original Parlophone from Rockaway Records. Very nice copy, although it skips (not repeats) about one or two spaces in the groove (about 2 or 4 seconds of music) on "Getting Better". I was upset at first since this thing was $150, but I didn't want to return it since I may never see another copy again in at least the same condition. I also have a (somewhat beat-up) U.S. mono LP which is a poor representation of the mono mix (IMO). I've had this for a few years and almost had to force myself to listen to it. It sounds awful. But since I got my U.K. mono copy, I can now appreciate the mono mix. I have to get my hands on an original U.K. Parlophone stereo LP now to really do a proper comparison of the two. The best stereo copy I have is the EAS JPN stereo LP from 1977 (I think?). As of now I like some things about the mono and some things about the stereo.

MMM

 

Re: Re: Re: Remixes

Ok Bob,

I'll bite! I'm only going with the stereo mix if it is equal to or better than the mono mix, IMO. I think it's time I opened up to some of the great mono mixes that you and others have talked about.

One thing I have noticed recently when listening to a really good mono mix is how little I miss or even notice the lack of stereo. I'm always learning something new on this site!