David Bowie - Metrobolist (The Man Who Sold The World) 50th anniversary edition

Discussion in 'Music Corner' started by Ben Adams, Sep 4, 2020.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Halloween_Jack

    Halloween_Jack Senior Member

    Location:
    Hampshire, UK
    I'd rather they used a 'fresh' set of ears, so to speak, and nobody that's been too close to the respective albums in terms of their involvement. My vote would be Vic Anesini to do a complete mastering overhaul of his catalogue, even though from Five Years onwards we - at the time - hoped these box set releases might be THE issues we wanted in terms of content and mastering. Even if they did a decent stab at it this time I think I'm close to being burned out on Bowie reissues now... Best to stick to the original vinyl releases for the original sounds.
     
    Mikewest and ShockOfDaylight like this.
  2. Efus

    Efus Senior Member

    Location:
    USA
    I can see why the art was rejected for commercial reasons, but Im curious as to why the original album title got cancelled out as well, especially in the UK.
    Did Bowie roll over on all that to get the record released, or did the record company just do whatever it wanted and told him to take or leave it,
    we'll just stop pressing it if you want?
     
  3. Pali Gap

    Pali Gap Whiskey, mystics and men

    Location:
    Under the bridge
    This of course is just your personal dismissal of something that has been sourced from reputable historical accounts lol.
     
    Curveboy likes this.
  4. Pali Gap

    Pali Gap Whiskey, mystics and men

    Location:
    Under the bridge
    'The truth is...'
    *sigh* Believe it or not, some of us actually appreciate having a copy of the original (U.S.) gatefold concept. It's a part of the album's history whether you accept it or not.
     
  5. walrus

    walrus Staring into nothing

    Location:
    Nashville
    Probably. He'd had one lone hit a year earlier, was about to release a follow-up album with zero hits...I imagine he didn't have a ton of leverage at that time to fight over things like that.
     
    marklungo, Kuffdam and Efus like this.
  6. walrus

    walrus Staring into nothing

    Location:
    Nashville
    Exactly. People talk about this like someone's going to break into their houses and suddenly remove the original from existence.

    The Space Oddity album remix was great, IMO. As time goes on, I feel like there's less to be gained from these kind of things, but i've generally enjoyed them for late 60's/early 70's albums. It's fun to hear things in a new way.
     
    mikmcmee, moops, Natural E and 2 others like this.
  7. tomd

    tomd Senior Member

    Location:
    Brighton,Colorado
    I’m keeping an open mind as forum members are already making up their mind on the entire album based on ONE track.I would like (and will listen to ) the entire 2020 remix before I decide to purchase it.I will be keeping my 2015 cd remaster anyway but MAY purchase the 2020 remix on vinyl.I still can’t understand why they couldn’t at least offer up a Blu Ray Audio version in Hirez since they were going back to the original multi-way to mix from though.
     
  8. Plan9

    Plan9 Mastering Engineer

    Location:
    Toulouse, France
    Rumours have it that Low has been already remixed in 5.1 (and possibly stereo) in the late 2000s by Visconti but never released.
     
    fishyboots likes this.
  9. Vaughan

    Vaughan Forum Resident

    Location:
    Essex, UK
    Not sure how I denied it was part of the history. I was simply pointing out that getting worked up about it is silly. A new print of the cover is not the same as seeking out an original. In fact, printing it now is little better than printing out a copy for yourself. Owning a copy of the original I can understand - but this facsimile? Not for me.
     
  10. healter skealter

    healter skealter Human animal

    The cover is different to the original, and the album's been remixed. Does that constitute a 'facsimile'? Not for me.
     
    Curveboy likes this.
  11. cmcintyre

    cmcintyre Forum Resident

    It's always the case that we all put different emphasis and value in different aspects. Whether it be the colour of the car, its frugality, its comfort or whatever. Viva la difference!

    For me, this release is all about the cover - it's an opportunity to see, to its closest approximation, the cover we all might have had, had US Mercury included the gatefold in 1970. It was that loss of gatefold and interior pics that prompted DB to insist a dress image be used on the UK cover. (quote to be found somewhere)

    Illustrator (& friend of DB) Mike Weller's involvement in this 2020 approximation of the original design (due primarily to the misplacement of original submitted artwork) assures the most 'true-to-original' in that absence.

    On the other hand the remix holds no long term interest for me - I've played the Ziggy remix once (liked it); Lodger and Never Let Me Down are still on the "to listen to" list. I will say, if they were original period alternate mixes my interest would be much greater.
     
    Ben Adams likes this.
  12. Pali Gap

    Pali Gap Whiskey, mystics and men

    Location:
    Under the bridge
    My whole point is that this cover is what Bowie wanted it to be when he presented it to the record company (fact). It has never been released in this gatefold concept before (fact). The 'original' cartoon cover was not even a gatefold, because the record company was too scared to include the 'dress-shoot' pics even on the inside. The cover didn't even include any words in the speech bubble.

    Mainly what irks me is when people say things like 'The truth is..." and finish the sentence with an opinion that they've confused to be fact.
    Personally I would consider a 9Lp version of Wildflowers (zzzzzzz...) more of a 'marketing gimmick' than this Lp at <$20. (Sorry to offend Tom Petty fans, but really?).
     
    mikmcmee, Brewbs, fishyboots and 3 others like this.
  13. Ben Adams

    Ben Adams Forum Resident Thread Starter

    Location:
    Phoenix, AZ, USA
    *wild applause*
     
    Brewbs and fishyboots like this.
  14. Vaughan

    Vaughan Forum Resident

    Location:
    Essex, UK
    I accept that. But in this case, the music inside the cover isn't what Bowie had ever heard. This is how silly this whole thing is - we're taking "what might have been's" and insisting it's how it should be. It wasn't. And yes, that is also a fact. I'm sure Bowie had a million different ideas before arriving at the various songs, artwork, and mixing choices. Are we going to change everything to suit every whim?

    Hey - as I've said before, I don't like the dress cover. I'd much prefer the "Kick" cover. But that's just me. If we're going to take each and every choice made by labels and artists and winding things back, then you're going to own a lot of copies of things. For me this is another sign that music has turned into a collectables market, something I take no pleasure in. But if it pleases you - it's all good.
     
  15. cmcintyre

    cmcintyre Forum Resident

    Maybe they (Parlophone & Bowie estate) could sell just the new cover, without the disc. Preferably with a large poster of the artwork inside. A brilliant idea says I.

    Surely there's a precedent for that - just selling the cardboard cover?

    ;)
     
    stepeanut and CBackley like this.
  16. Mikewest

    Mikewest Forum Resident

    Location:
    London
    Who’s the kid, is it a young Bowie?
     
  17. Purple Jim

    Purple Jim Senior Member

    Location:
    Bretagne
    :shrug:
     
  18. ShockOfDaylight

    ShockOfDaylight Forum Resident

    Location:
    Detroit, MI
    [​IMG]
    A pretty ridiculous review from the new Uncut that mainly talks about the cover art (the real reason anybody is buying this thing) and then dismisses the remix as an unnoticeable remaster (for better or worse, people will definitely notice The remix), but then still gives the release a 9/10.
    Reminded me why I don’t read these things anymore.
     
    Last edited: Oct 30, 2020
    Chris M, whatprogress, andy75 and 9 others like this.
  19. Vaughan

    Vaughan Forum Resident

    Location:
    Essex, UK
    Wow, that's not a review at all, and they give it 9/10 without telling you much of anything about the actual music - they simply don't even attempt to make a case. Awful.
     
  20. healter skealter

    healter skealter Human animal

    Not sure it merits its own thread, but anyone seen the trailer for Stardust?

     
    JediJoker likes this.
  21. ShockOfDaylight

    ShockOfDaylight Forum Resident

    Location:
    Detroit, MI
    Please no separate thread, probably best just to forget this thing got made at all
     
    tin ears, Ludger, RAZORMADE and 4 others like this.
  22. Graham

    Graham Senior Member

    Location:
    Perth, Australia
    The same writer said the same about an unnoticeable remaster in his Uncut review of the Richard & Linda Thompson boxset. I guess for him a remaster means loud and super clean.
     
  23. urasam2

    urasam2 A Famous Potato

    This looks like an incomprehensibly dreadful venture. It would be hard to find anyone less suited to playing Bowie than this guy.
     
  24. mr.datsun

    mr.datsun Incompletist

    Location:
    London
    Ha ha ha. Looks great !
     
    Man at C&A and healter skealter like this.
  25. richard a

    richard a Forum Resident

    Location:
    borley, essex, uk
    Dear god that looks dreadful. He looks and sounds nothing like David Bowie for a start and everything about that trailer is utter s h 1 t. Totally understandable why Duncan refused to let the movie makers use any of his dad’s music!
     
    Ludger, Steve Carroll and Markyp like this.
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page

molar-endocrine