DCC Archive Unbelievably Bad CD Reissues

This is in general response to the post on "Good" CD remasterings. Naturally, the DCC and MOFI catalog is going to please the listener. But what about the reissues that defy logic and explanation in regards to unforgivably shoddy transfers and poor subjectivity in mastering? Also, what about the CD's that were mastered from worn vinyl--especially when tape copies were surely available? CD's I own that I suspect were mastered from vinyl: Elektra's "Anthology of Bread", Polygram's "Medusa" by Trapese, Roulette's "Hits of the 50's, 60's, etc., "The Best of Peter and Gordon" on EMI-Toshiba, and "Nazz Nazz" on Rhino. Also, some tracks on Time-Life reissues such as "The Rock and Roll Era" are vinyl transfers--with better transfers available elsewhere. Another question: many Warner-Elektra-Asylum CD's do not furnish any mastering information, especially those from the 1980's, yet indicate "CDD pre-mastering by WCI record group". Who is this, and what does it mean? Any info on who originally mastered the CD's of Neil Young, the Eagles, the Cars, etc.?

 

I know you are talking about remastering, but your title said re-issue. I'd like to jump in at the front then with the notion that whoever decided (Dominion, and several other companies) thought the public was so stupid that they would accept "These are new stereo recordings by one or more members of the original artist" as OK needs a smack up side the head. That re-recorded crap makes me mad. Now there are a couple of exceptions like "The Twist" by Chubby Checker where the re-recording was done just a year or two after the original and is the accepted one, but I mean those re-done in just the past few years of 70s songs. The other thing is when they issue a greatest hits CD and intentionally make the "recorded live" hard to read or find so you don't know you've been duped until you get home and open it.
OK. Off my soap box. That's been a pet peeve of mine for years.

 

Pauljones, the reason they rarely gave mastering info on old WEA CDs is because pretty much anyone on staff at the WCI Group did the job. In those days it was the old "crank-em out fast-like and save money" mentality!

Concerning the Dire Straits Greatest: I have not heard the latest GH CD but the reason they chopped off the long intro of "Money For Nothing" is because that's the way the 45 RPM single was. I have the 45. What always bugged me is why WB got politically correct and edited out the "little ****** with the earring and the makeup..." verse from the song on the older best of. Editing it out destroys the whole point of the song.

My vote for the worst sounding CDs? Those "Baby Boomer Classics" CDs from Priority Records that used that gawd-awful "Waring FDS" noise reduction scheme. On those CDs they didn't even bother to use good tapes! The "Art Loboe's" Original Sound CDs are almost as bad.
For the record, I like GH CDs IF they have the single versions not common anywhere else. As I stated elsewhere on this board, I grew up on the 45 RPM single and Tpo 40 radio. I like singles.

[ December 31, 2001: Message edited by: Grant T. ]

 

Grant sez:
For the record, I like GH CDs IF they have the single versions not common anywhere else. As I stated elsewhere on this board, I grew up on the 45 RPM single and Tpo 40 radio. I like singles.


--------------------

DON"T FORGET THE 45 RPM SINGLE!


Thank you for sharing that...I don't think we REALLY understood that you prefer the 45
Single version. Happy New Year Grant and all board members!

 

Acctually, you stand a good chance of getting an utter piece of crap with Mo-Fi as well. I had one I just had to throw away. I couldn't even wait to take it to the second hand shop.

 

Which one was that, Pig?
dave

 

SNF, the soundtrack.

 

One I really disliked was the Japanese HDCD remaster of Fragile by Yes. An expensive mistake. Severe distortion at any sound recorded above moderately loud. The regular US remaster is very good and cheap.

 

The latest round of Bowie re-masters are disgraceful .

The Byrds/Simon & Garfunkel remixes really bug me. I don't mind people remixing whatever they want but don't REPLACE the original mix with it as the standard release! I wonder if we'll ever see the original mixes again .

Same goes for the Beatles back catalogue. I can't believe that we are presented with remixes of Help and Rubber Soul (not so sure about Revolver?) as the standard release. I would love the original mono mixes to be released but at the very least they could give us the original stereo (seeing as they seem to favour the stereo over the mono ).

The Apple Badfinger CDs sound completely lifeless - thank god Steve was able to get his hands on No Dice and Straight Up (any chance of Magic Christian Music and Ass being given the midas touch in 2002?).

[ December 31, 2001: Message edited by: Malc S ]

 

What don't you like about the remixes? I don't have much of a problem with them as long as they are faithful to the originals, which these are.

I do prefer Steve's mastering of My Back Pages to the remix (which sounds almost exactly like the original), but...

 

When a recording artist/group go about creating their finished product, the technology of the time contributes a great deal. From the recording of the multitrack master tape through mixing and mastering the completed work, the equipment used and also the contemporary cultural influences on the people involved are integral to the overall sound that is captured in the original mix. Only the original mix (or mixes) present a true historical representation of the whole process.

Whatever our feelings on the overall quality of a mix - it seems to me a big mistake to replace it with a re-mix. While it may offer an improvement over the fidelity of the original - it will never have the 'feel'.

As an example take Tony Bennet's album 'Who Can I Turn To'. A couple of years ago I bought this on CD (remixed by Vic Anesini) and while I found the music (and of course the singing!) to be fantastic, I felt that something was not quite right. Even though I had never heard this album before, I knew that it did not sound like it had been recorded in the 60's (some people might say that this was a perfect example of why you should remix vintage recordings! Fair enough but let's have the original available for the sake of historical accuracy). I got rid of the CD and when I stumbled upon an original LP I immediately bought it. As soon as I put it on I knew what had been missing on the remixed CD - this sounded like a great vintage 60's CBS recording (this is not down to a vinyl vs CD comparison - it was clearly all in the mix). Maybe the original masters are lost - hence the remix - who knows? All I know is that the original stereo mix sounded INFINITELY better than the remix - it sounded authentic.

I'm not saying that a re-mix has no worth - far from it. But what I am saying is that when Sony decide that the work of two great recording acts like the Byrds and S & G should no longer be available in their original form, I for one am appalled.




[End of rant ]

[ January 02, 2002: Message edited by: Malc S ]

 

You mean "Old Friends"? The same stuff is remixed there (i.e., first 3) as on the remasters.

[ January 02, 2002: Message edited by: Patrick M ]

 

Thanks to all who responded to this topic. I think that it all goes back to artistic integrity. Remixing for "clarity" or "high definition" is quite risky because the final outcome may very well not sound like the original at all. And, isn't the original sound and "flavor" the ethical goal of the quality reissue...and quality remaster?

 

Can I add a point of dissention here?
I love the Tommy and Quadrophenia remixes on MCA (says he, expecting a supernova) I listened to both on Decca/MCA US and Track UK vinyl and they were always crappy - tinny shrieking cymbals, distorted bass dums etc. The remixes sound superb and much better than any vinyl or CD (to me) MFSL CD versions - just as crappy, but they don't have the digital clicks in parts of Tommy.
If the Cream albums could be remixed, I'd buy them in a heartbeat (especially if the remix was monitored by Steve)

 

Have you actually *heard* the S&G and Byrds remixes? In most cases VERY faithful to the originals.

As for the Who remixes - I've come to not like them. Too many things were changed from the originals. For example, with Tommy, there are a number of little fades and pans from the original not on the remix. Not to mention varied stereo positioning, different echo, etc.

I think the 1993 MCA remaster (by Erick Labson) sounds pretty good, along with a DECCA (not MCA) LP. Also, note that the digital clicks are on the remix, not some other CD...