The Monkees "More of the Monkees" Rhino Handmade Deluxe Box Set

I do this kind of thing regularly and I think there are two issues here, one possibly philosophical.

The philosophical possibility? I have no clue about it, but if Andrew wanted to keep digital manipulation to an absolute minimum, that could explain the slightly lagging vocals in the synched remixes. Using various time manipulation digital plug-ins, I find it very easy to align and keep aligned tracks not all originally on the same source. If Andrew wanted this "pure," using vari speed on the analog tape deck and flying in a phrase at a time might have been the only way to keep it analog, which can lead to the issues we hear.

Related to that, one thing I noticed on the backing tracks is that they did a LOT of speed manipulation between the initial backing track recordings in NYC and the final versions. Both "Look Out" and "Sometime In The Morning" were sped up for the vocal overdub session. "Sometime In The Morning" in particular was noticeably sped up. It could be that in those pre-quartz lock motor days, the speed on the final 4 track that holds all the vocals has enough fluctuating speed variation throughout the track vs. the original backing track 4-track that even with digital time manipulation, it was a real slog to get things even close to lined up. (It's not to hard to imagine that if they were as sloppy in NYC as it sounds in production and playing, that their equipment may not have been kept at the highest level of maintenance either. The distortion I hear on the pre-bounced backing track of the NYC version of "I Don't Think You Know Me" says a lot to me.)



Am I being clear? (No, seriously...did what I say make sense? )

Related to that, Andrew doesn't have the luxury that EMI has with their similar Beatles projects of lotsa money for budgets, time, and access to, if not the original equipment used on Beatles' sessions at least correct period equipment...equipment that was always kept in absolute tip-top shape in the 1960's. Unlike us faster and looser Americans.

 

Just reporting that #3380 has arrived on my doorstep.

 

It was reported on Facebook that half of the MOTM sets have already been sold. To me, that's a good sign that HQ super deluxe will be coming sooner than later.

 

That would be the fastest sales of a Super Deluxe since BB&M. Good news for fans.

You could say that HQ will be here in no time...no time at all!

 

I could also say You Told Me, For Pete's Sake

 

What happened to the acetate of "The Love You Got Inside"? I heard that there was one in existence in the collector circuit.

 

Bugger, bugger, bugger.... (It's a well known British phrase)


Just had a card through the post saying "unfortunately we can't deliver your item as there's a customs charge".


Sixteen bloody pounds and 95 pence!
(I make the assumption that the £8 handling charge is included here)


Guess I have to take the hit and be thankful that this is the first customs charge on several Monkee items in my collection.

 

Another week, still no sign. Received e-mail 22nd December that it had been shipped.

 

Same as Nobby (above). I too received a card with a customs charge of £16.95. I shall be collecting mine at lunchtime (in about 2 hours) and will post the number at some point today for those keeping count

 

Yes, I had the card yesterday telling me there was an item with a £16.94 customs charge as well. Collected it today and MOTM Super Deluxe #2741 has arrived. Now to enjoy, oh yes, enjoy.

 

Debt to the taxman duly paid.

3026 on the way home now.

 

This is the reason why I haven't been able to buy any of The Monkees deluxe sets. In the UK they work out costing about £70-£80 each, which is not something I can justify unfortunately

 

Got it at last Mine is 2504.

 

I assume since the multi-tracks for "When Love Comes Knockin' (At Your Door)" are lost, the same applies for the first version of "The Girl I Left Behind Me," recorded at the same session? I have to believe the bulk of the strings on this track were added in early 1968 to comport with the "heavy on the strings & horns" arrangements for Davy in '68-'69. This track is really "noisy" to my ears. I've always hated the "percussive guitar as drum" sound on both of the Sedaka tracks.

Is there any theory or consensus as to what the burst of "bled noise" is on the outro of "Mary, Mary?" It almost sounds like a "pitchy" backing vocal from Peter that bleeds into the mix at 1:55-1:56. I thought that it might have come from the "vocal overdub" session featured on disc two, but Peter is not prominent on that recording. Plus, I don't think they ever made it through a full take...

 

Should've waited to post - it's arrived, but had to pay custom's charges! No 2031.

 

I just received #290 in Anaheim.

I've been reading this thread and am looking forward to listening to it over the weekend.

 

I hope the folks overseas are getting their boxes in unscathed condition....unlike my first one here in the U.S.

As someone else mentioned earlier, the barest of cardboard boxes are used. Luckily, the 2nd one came with
a lot more bubble wrap.

 

That would explain why TGILBM sounds so different to the rest of the tracks for this album - it's a shame no bounce of the '66 backing track survives if that's the case.

 

Mine was unscathed even though there seemed to be minimal bubble wrap inside the box. Unfortunately some carriers must handle their packages harshly.

 

Ditto. No damage to mine, I think the tight shrink wrapping on the single will cause more damage to it than the shipping.

 

Was Of You from the 2 disc set a mono mix? I remember it was on the"mono" disc. Is a stereo mix on Music Box?

 

Both had a 1966 mono mix. There are two different sets of vocal overdubs - one from 1966 and one from 1969. The 1966 vocals are in stereo for the first time on this set, though it's an oddly-balanced pro-tools mix. The 1969 vocals are in stereo (though somehwat folded in) on "Missing Links".

 

What exactly does "Oddly-balanced pro-tools mix" mean? Not sure if you're complaining about the result or the process used. Ron

 

Both, I guess. It's a fancy, spread out mix with way too much organ. Doesn't sound anything like the original. But it's something different. Personally, I would like to see a vintage style mix that is fully wide....of both vocal attempts. At this point we don't have one.

 

If I may, being a remix means different elements on the master (or even from the session tape) can be brought to the fore, or relegated to the background. We've heard other mixes, including underground one's that feature the guitars mixed forward, I sort of like the organ brought up. As far as being a "fancy, spread out mix" well, ain't that what most folks want? Narrow stereo isn't much of a draw and for this song we have a vintage mono mix. A wide stereo mix? Bring it on!! And as I've argued on many threads. What's the point of doing NEW remixes that are faithful to the original? In this case, a song that was taken from the archives and survives with original vocals and re-recorded vocals. All mixes of the song, including a few I have from boots, feature the instrumentation and vocals differently. I like hearing the many mixing attempts. A nifty little tune too! Ron