I pulled out my old Columbia CD of Dylan's JOHN WESLEY HARDING just to be sure....

I had to do some digging to find my non-AF copy of GHII, but luckily it is a 1999. Immediately on trying "I'll Be Your Baby Tonight", I hear what you are talking about. This has the balance of the 1967 mix with the sound quality and clarity of the 1987 remix. It also has a little bit of added warmth that is not on the 1987 mix. "All Along The Watchtower" sounds closer to the 1967 mix to me, but the clarity on Dylan's vocals are excellent.

I bought my copy of Biograph used many years ago and didn't realize there were multiple releases, but mine appears to be a 1997 corrected (it has the fade at the end of "I'll Be Your Baby Tonight"). This version of "Dear Landlord" is exceptional. again, the balance of the 1967 mix and the clarity of the 1987. This really does beg the question of why no other release has utilized these tapes since 1999?

One thought is that Sony digitized the lower fidelity tape to DSD as their reference master, and so when the teams for the 2003 SACD and the MFSL requested the master, that is what they got?

 

This is a tangent that has nothing to do with JWH, but has anybody noticed that the live Manchester ‘66 version of “It’s All Over Now, Baby Blue” tha first appeared in 1985 on Biograph seems to have appeared in a different mix when Biograph was reissued in remastered form in 1997? The differences seem far more than just different mastering to my ears. I’m wondering if they replaced the original 1985 mix (which suffered from a bad vocal balance) with either the mix from the “Guitars Kissing” boot or the remix that would appear on Live 1966 a year later.

I haven’t done a head-to-head comparison with those other mixes yet, but the differences between the 1985 and 1997 versions of Biograph on a few other tracks have been well known. I haven’t seen any mention of this particular mix difference though.

 

I believe Live 1966 used the Nagra tapes instead of the CBS/Pye tapes for the acoustic set. Hence the difference.

 

I didn’t remember the provenance of those mixes, just that they were different. It seems likely that Columbia would have pulled one of those mixes to replace the ‘85 “Baby Blue” mix when they remastered the Biograph box in 1997. I’ll do some more investigating and comparing. This literally just hit me last night when I was comparing the sound of my original Biograph with the 1997 remaster track by track and I checked the normal online Dylan sites and didn’t see any mention of this apparent mix difference.

 

See p47-48 of the Live 1966 booklet.

 

I shall! Thanks!

 

I have so many different versions of this album, including the original cd, that it becomes dizzying at times. I still haven't heard the SACD version.

 

Which SACD? I have three different SACDs.

 

Well, they all seem pretty, pretty, pretty good. After all, he was never known to hurt an honest man.....

 

Any SACD. What is the difference among any of the SACDs whether they were manufactured in Europe, America, or Japan unless there is also a SHM layer as well?

 

Completely different mastering on the Sony and MFSL SACDs.

 

^^^^

Exactly.

FWIW, I enjoy the MFSL mono SACD the most out of any of my JWH discs.

 

The monitor speakers of the era, used at Columbia Nashville (the old Bradley Quonset Hut). Altec Lansing Voice Of The Theater Speakers, were in use. Steve, you therefore know why.

 

A note, the originals I find in East TN are hand scribed deadwax, looks like NW masterings. I recently saw a German orange label original. It had USA stampers, machine stamped deadwax. I suspect the German is a NYC cutting. Many San Francisco Columbia cuttings were also hand scribed deadwax I have seen from this era.

 

So is it confirmed that JWH original Columbia cd is a remix?

 

Yes.

 

Not by anyone at Sony, as far as I know, but audible differences make the conclusion inescapable.

 

We do have this:

 

That’s the way I feel about many reissues. I have to say that most cd releases are/were pretty bad sonically in the infancy of the format however.

 

Interesting that the John Wesley Harding remix is out of print now, yet the 1999 Blonde on Blonde remix is the go to mix. Maybe Bob Dylan tried listening to the John Wesley Harding remix CD and preferred the compression of the original stereo mix. I prefer the remix, but who's to say what is correct if Dylan likes the original mix?

 

The original mix isn’t that compressed, but the production masters are.

 

Where is the tape?

 

At Sony.

 

Even if someone does a flat transfer with no added compression, the bass might still be too loud.

 

The bass sounds great to me on the remastered Biograph and GHII