The Rolling Stones On Air In The Sixties Book and Album

Discussion in 'Music Corner' started by joe1320, Jul 6, 2017.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Some flawed releases are still enjoyable.
     
    Sean, Terry, Matthew Tate and 3 others like this.
  2. EsotericCD

    EsotericCD Forum Resident

    Location:
    Chicago, IL
    A very depressing thread. And I refer to the tone of (most of) the commentary herein.

    This is why it gets harder and harder to spend time around here.
     
    Sean, danielbravo, Digu and 6 others like this.
  3. oxenholme

    oxenholme Senile member

    Location:
    Knoydart
    No idea what you mean.
     
    jonj likes this.
  4. The Beave

    The Beave My Wife Is My Life! And don’t I forget it!

    Yeah, the Vinyl Gatefold is nicely done. And take it for what it is, a fun historical release of things recorded to be played on AM radio with a frequency response of 200 to 6000 hz! Lol!
    For me, a much more enjoyable listen than The Beatles BBC records, which I find sterile sounding and kinda dead.
    Beave
     
  5. The Beave

    The Beave My Wife Is My Life! And don’t I forget it!

    Well a healthy sense of humour is needed here that's for sure! ;)
    Remember, you can tag a poster that bugs you and 'ignore' them. Just click on the posters avatar and click 'Ignore', you can always in ignore them, but their posts won't be visible to you when your on a thread. Really works well and might just be the thing you need to start re enjoying the conversation here.
    But don't go away, we need you here, we Stones fans need you!! :righton:

    Beave
     
  6. WonkyWilly

    WonkyWilly Forum Resident

    Location:
    Paradise, PA
    My intention is not to make anyone feel like an idiot. But I don't see the problem with expressing dismay when people talk about how "awesome" this set is. Because it's really not awesome at all, and being that this is/was an audiophile forum, I don't see the problem with pointing out that there are far better alternatives out there. The "idiocy" comes into play when people refuse to acknowledge or seek out these alternatives, and showboat about it too.
     
  7. ssmith3046

    ssmith3046 Forum Resident

    Location:
    Arizona desert
    This is an awesome set :)
     
    Sean, danielbravo, Jack and 9 others like this.
  8. czeskleba

    czeskleba Senior Member

    Location:
    Seattle
    Yeah, I miss the old days when people were interested in sound quality and in finding the very best possible sources for the music they liked.
     
    goodiesguy, bobcat, bluesbro and 7 others like this.
  9. John Fell

    John Fell Forum Survivor

    Location:
    Undisclosed
    The music is awesome (Except for the The Last Time glitch.) but the sound is not.
     
    goodiesguy, bobcat, Sean and 4 others like this.
  10. sethICE

    sethICE Forum Resident

    Location:
    NYC
    I still haven't received mine either - I ordered from the Stones store in October. I am in New York. While some apparently have already received it a week ago, I am a little relieved that I am not the only one still waiting. I may send them an inquiry to see if its been shipped - you can't tell from their website.
     
  11. TonyCzar

    TonyCzar Forum Resident

    Location:
    PhIladelphia, PA
    It's not like this is a cluster-frack along the lines of the last David Bowie box from Parlophone.

    It's already been stated in this thread about "On Air", but bears repeating: just because the bootleggers got certain sources to market first doesn't necessarily mean that the people working on this project went out and torrented a bunch of boots as their sources. (Although, maybe it means someone at ABKCO or BBC or Polydor should have gone about a preservation project a LOT sooner, even if there wasn't an immediate payoff. Listen, majors: the only thing you're PAID TO DO at this point is preserve the legacy of what's been entrusted to you. Now... ugh, I can't print what I'm really thinking in this forum.)

    On the strictly non-audiophile tip:

    * I'm a near lifelong-fan of the Stones, I have a bunch of this stuff already, but in 2017 even I don't want a playlist of 30-40 BBC recordings., which I think is the number in the 2CD set. These performances were doled out 2-3 songs at a time. You had to set your schedules to BBC dictates. They weren't meant to be anthologized. (If they were, they would have been better preserved.) They were mean to be a 12-minute jolt of LISTEN TO ME!

    * I bought the double CD. I think all this music I've heard so far (from Tidal....) is thrilling, but I have not actually put the shiny disc in my dedicated shiny disc player. I (personally!) really really do NOT want to sit and listen to two (let alone six? four? eight?) CDs of this.

    * Given what I stated above, I think I can even go to my grave without having acquired 6CDs worth of stuff. (Although I may have. YMMV! I just happened to reorg my physical Stones boots yesterday, because sturdy carpeted travel cases, and I discovered I may have that quantity. I certainly have "The First Decade" - a revolutionary 4CD monster when it was released (in 1994?) but today? Meh.)

    * Taking that one video example of the demonstration of how they "fixed" 'Satisfaction'. Yeah, seems cheesy, but if you don't do something about the "loss of energy" (Hi, Parlophone!!!!) in that vocal, you really lose the casual customer who will think they're being ripped off. $13 to you and me is not $13 to to them, particularly in the face of a cratering physical market.)

    Tony's summary: yeah, I probably could have unearthed all this stuff from "my archives", but it's on Tidal!
     
    Shaddam IV and superstar19 like this.
  12. oxenholme

    oxenholme Senile member

    Location:
    Knoydart
    And that is precisely what is happening here. But you must not be surprised when people seeking optimum quality have different criteria to your own. By way of example I would think that spatial effects (stereo, multi-channel) are rather more important to me than to many on here.

    I have the Ass Blaster set. I find that I have sources elsewhere that I prefer for some of the tracks therein. And, as it happens, I disagree strongly with the removal of dialogue from BBC recordings - to me it is as important as the music, so from that point of view I prefer the bootleg source for the Camden Theatre tracks.

    The truth will out.
     
    Shaddam IV likes this.
  13. varitone

    varitone Forum Resident

    Location:
    Lincs, UK
    That's a real shame. I think you started the Stones Album-by-Album thread. I really enjoyed your reviews.
     
  14. czeskleba

    czeskleba Senior Member

    Location:
    Seattle
    Well, I am a bit surprised when people on an audiophile forum express a liking for non-audiophile types of processing, such as fake stereo or digital noise reduction.

    You may like the way the new CD sounds, but it's also true that a lot of people praising it here are professing not to care about how it sounds, or not to care if there are less processed, earlier generation, and/or possibly better sounding sources available. Or not to care if at least some of the tracks digitally sync with old bootlegs. And there are also people expressing objection to any sort of criticism of the sound quality of this release. Those are the sort of things that did not happen on this forum back in the old days.
     
    goodiesguy, Shawn, lukpac and 5 others like this.
  15. ash1

    ash1 Forum Resident

    Location:
    bristol uk
    Felix Aeppli has just pointed out to me that (yet) another track is mis-labelled. I Just Wanna Make Love To You is listed as from Saturday Club but the screams indicate it is actually from The Joe Loss Show. He is correct.
    I think that's 4 of the tracks that are credited to the wrong shows now (Ain't That Loving You Baby / Hi Heel Sneakers / Walking The Dog and I Just Wanna Make Love To You).
    Given how little the Stones recorded for the BBC (compared to say the Fab4 or Hollies) it's hard to see why they should get this wrong. It's not like they're dealing with 10 versions of the same song and the Saturday Club and Joe Loss shows are easily differentiated by the presence of an audience, a very rare occurrence on Saturday Club throughout it's history. Certainly the Stones never had a live audience on their Saturday Club appearances.
    Unfortunately this adds fuel to those who consider this set fairly shoddy in terms of tape / source / programme research.
    I think ultimately, if you're not familiar with these recordings or their history at the BBC this is an enjoyable set with some undoubted highlights. Is it possible to have too many versions of I'm Moving On ? I don't think so ! Come On (despite the dubious tape source used) is way way better than the version released as a single.
    If you were already immersed in the early Stones then it's fair to be wondering how on earth the compilers have been operating on this project because it has not been handled at all well.
    They'd have been better off releasing the March 64 Radio Luxembourg session acetate (or sourcing James Karnbach's tape of it) for two reasons -
    1. It's my Stones holy grail ! Hey, that's a brilliant reason.
    2. As we have nothing to compare it to source-wise a lot of the debate here would have been absent and hard-core fans and the general public would have been gifted an entirely new Stones album satisfying both parties.

    I wonder if they even considered auditioning that session for this release. If it was really crap (unlikely), scratched beyond belief or the guitars are hopelessly out of tune I'd have hoped they'd give the set a mention and state that as a reason for a key piece of early Stones not getting released on what would have been the perfect set for it. Even if they sourced Bill's acetate you'd imagine that it was higher generational quality than pretty much everything on On Air and available evidence suggests Luxy sessions were well-recorded even if they were murky or worse on radio reception. Low(er) gen recordings of Billy Fury and the Tornados and Cliff and The Shadows confirm this. The sessions were often recorded by Alan Bailey who was a good engineer. Can those laser record players work on acetates obtaining a better transfer signal ? Anyone familiar with those ?
    It is "On Air" so not necessarily restricted to BBC sessions. Unless the band go for an Anthology type set I despair of ever getting to hear the Radio Luxembourg set.
    I am still very interested to know which tracks were actually sourced from new transfers from BBC tapes/transcription discs for this project. Yes, many of these are by necessity from bootleg sources but what about the tracks for which the BBC do have tapes or transcription discs ? I remain to be convinced that anything like this was actually used. Do any of my fellow moaners hear anything that sounds like a generational shift from bootlegs/previous releases on any of the tracks the BBC are believed to hold ?
     
  16. privit1

    privit1 Senior Member

    I cant believe just how bad this sounds played back to back with their contemporary's today that little known band the Beatles night and day in terms of sound quality.

    This just sucks and is so incomplete
     
    bobcat likes this.
  17. sethICE

    sethICE Forum Resident

    Location:
    NYC
    Non-update: I sent an inquiry to the Stones store about 24 hours ago and still have received nothing and heard nothing. I know some people have been criticizing this set, but I paid good money for it - WHERE IS IT?
     
  18. Tommyboy

    Tommyboy Senior Member

    Location:
    New York
    In all fairness, the Stones didn’t have their own show on the BBC and the available source material is limited compared to the Beatles BBC recordings. More transcription discs of the Beatles shows survived, plus there was the home taper who provided the mother load of material that appeared on bootlegs in the late 1980s and the Great Dane box set. Some of those recordings were officially issued by Apple.

    Bottom line, this isn’t an apples to apples match/comparison.
     
    Chemguy and Shaddam IV like this.
  19. HoundsOBurkittsville

    HoundsOBurkittsville Deep Wine List Sonic Equivalency

    Location:
    Columbus, Ohio
    I beg to differ.


    The live "From the Vault" CD releases by the band haven't exactly been brickwalled, sonically speaking.....they've been stonewalled. :)
     
    Last edited: Dec 12, 2017
    Chemguy likes this.
  20. Laservampire

    Laservampire Down with this sort of thing

    In terms of the good quality stuff:

    - the 1963 tracks are sourced from the Got Satisfaction If You Want It bootleg
    - 2120 Michigan Ave seems to be sourced from the bootleg too
    - the 1964 live tracks are a different transfer than the boot
    - the transcription disc tracks are all different transfers to the boot (complete with stereo crackles!!)
     
    goodiesguy, Sean, lukpac and 3 others like this.
  21. aphexj

    aphexj Sound mind & body

    Well played! :cheers:
     
  22. Schoolmaster Bones

    Schoolmaster Bones Poe's Lawyer

    Location:
    ‎The Midwest
    Lemme guess: WonkyWilly?
     
    Sean, nibor, aoxomoxoa and 1 other person like this.
  23. oxenholme

    oxenholme Senile member

    Location:
    Knoydart
    Camden Theatre? Transfer from what?
     
  24. oxenholme

    oxenholme Senile member

    Location:
    Knoydart
    My brain hurts.
     
  25. JP Christian

    JP Christian Forum Resident

    I emailed a couple of days ago and I am still waiting for a response - I know there can be delays at Christmas but 12 days for something to arrive within the UK is a bit poor...
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page

molar-endocrine