DCC Archive Eagles-The Ted Jensen Remasters

Having already purchased the DCC versions of Grt Hits and Hotel Calif. I was amazed at what Steve did with those. Made my old Asylum vinyl obsolete--did Asylum use recycled vinyl cause I NEVER got a quiet pressing in the old days? "Desperado" with no noise. I waited patiently for the remasters of the rest of the catalog. Then these Ted Jensen remasters began to appear with little to no fanfare. What's everone's opinion on these? I only purchased the "Long Run" and kept my other CD originals on all the others.

 

The sound is very compressed, in my opinion. It makes Steve's work on the 2 DCC discs sound that much better. Looking at the signals on the computer, there seems to be almost no dynamic range at all on the Jensen remasters.

 

Exactly, Chris. There's a difference in making the sound come alive, and whooping it's ass with limiting and re-defining the signal, so that quiet passages get amped. Puts all that hard work in the studio to waste and I'm real suprised artists aren't lighting fires under some lawyers about it. Sad.

 

I still own my (this makes me feel old to say it) "vintage" vinyl of Hotel California. The Eagles were never one of my "must have" artists, but it is hard not to note their influnce and talent. That said:

Even to this day - that lp sounds great. The first press vinyl is vibrant and rich (and I am not a "vinyl junkie"). I have yet to find a reason to upgrade this title.

Way back on the old board I made this comment - and I make it here again: If the DCC version is significantly better than the standard issue CD (or the remaster), the fault lies in the mass production mindset of the major labels more than in the quality of the original production. This was an lp that I used to "show off" my system to friends in the 70's. That orginal vinyl still impresses to this day.

[ October 24, 2001: Message edited by: Uncle Al ]

 

I do like the sound of the live reunion CD "Hell Freezes Over", and I enjoy the versions of the songs they play. Pretty realistic audience/applause and a nice bottom end.

Much better sound than the new remastering of "Hotel California" which I bought a few weeks ago. I haven't listened to my DCC "Greatest Hits" yet to compare with "Hell Freezes Over", and I'm still looking for the DCC "Hotel California".

Regards,
Metralla

 

The tight and compressed sound of Jensen's can also be found on his Cat Stevens remasters. I was listening to "Mona Bone Jakon" today and it's compressed to the point of bass boominess and etched hyper-detail...no breathing room! The fact that Cat's voice is limited and distorted to hell on certain cuts, for effects sake, doesn't help much...ditto for "Tea For the Tillerman".

 

Uh, Metralla, there will be no comparison between "Hell Freezes Over" and "Greatest Hits" because they are different recordings. One is live, one is studio.

Now, there is no contest between the Ted Jensen and DCC CD's because DCC still beats them in every way!

 

How can you tell if you have a first pressing etc.?

 

If your ears only bleed a little. I think the DCC LP version of "Hotel" kills my Asylum LP in every way.....

Just my opinion of course

 

Guys,
Let's be honest. Just about anything Steve has remastered is the reference recording on the planet. You show me a better recording of 98% of the S.H. gold or aluminum DCC's and I'll buy it!

 

I have the DCC "Hotel", and it is one of the warmest, most analog-sounding CDs I've ever heard.

And, last night, at Border's, I scored a copy of "Greatest Hits". Life is good.

 

I know where Metralla is coming from with this. I just picked up a copy of "Hell Freezes Over" this summer, and went to make MP3s of the songs that had good-sounding live versions. I was suprised to find that I wound up grabbing 6 of the songs for MP3s, almost unheard of for me for a live album. The audience is so quiet, the sound so good, and the vocals and instrumentation so faithful, that the live versions are almost preferable to the original studio versions, even on DCC; I even A/B compared them, mostly to be amazed at how their voices still seem to be on the money 20 years later.

It's almost on par with Blue Oyster Cult's re-recordings on "Cult Classic"; the new versions actually sound more like the originals *should* have, at least to me. That's pretty rare, though; many live albums and most remakes don't hold a candle to the original studio versions.

 

I'll give you 98%, but there *is* that 2%...:

- Doobie Brothers GH - just doesn't sound right to me in places. Steve's China Grove on Rock Of The 70s Vol 2 sounds a lot better to me - more open, clear, and "there"... Listen To The Music has some *nasty* tape problems.
- Meaty Beaty Big & Bouncy - some (I Can't Explain) is great, some (Happy Jack) is terrible. Not really a "mastering" job, but...
- Who's Missing - most of this does sound great, but there's a cut or two where things just sound too damn mushy for me. I think one is When I Was A Boy. The Rarities version sounds a bit more open to me...

I can't really think of too much else, though. Steve's version is *almost always* the best version out there, but not always...

 

Luke,

I have both versions of China Grove and the DCC Gold version is far better than the Rock Of The 1970's version you speak of. What speakers are you listening on, anyway?

Listen To The Music sounds fine to me. The tape damage is almost inaudible. Should Steve have left that one off the package? Are you listening with earphones or something?

The Who stuff, well, I give Steve an A for effort. Imagine getting anything released back in true mono or stereo, without bad engineering advice from the amazing one eared Pete. An amazing feat IMO.

Luke, when you eat dinner at someone else's house, do you bitch about the food served if its not to your taste? It just makes it sound like you are claiming to be a better cook. If that's true, let's taste something already....

 

The ROT70's version has a bit more hiss and isn't as wide as the gold version, but something about the gold version just doesn't sit right with me. Everything just seems to breathe more on the ROT70's disc - the gold version seems cramped to me. The guitars on the gold version have a bit too much of an "AM radio" sound to them for me - not enough high end and too much midrange. The ROT70's version feels much more alive to me.

Certain parts of the song are fine, others are not. The main problem is the high frequencies in the left channel constantly fade in and out. The right channel is fine.

What do I think Steve should have done? If one existed, found an un-EQ'd safety and used that. Then put a note on the disc saying "Listen To The Music" came from an un-EQ'd safety copy due to a damaged master. Even Steve has said that the most people (himself included) probably couldn't tell the difference between a master and a safety most of the time. Note that I'm NOT talking about EQ'd production tapes, but rather safety backup tapes.

Yes, I'm listening with headphones.

It's great that Steve took some effort to find decent tapes. However, Steve himself has said that he did the disc itself in two hours and didn't really do any mastering. And it shows. Like I've said, the version of I Can't Explain on there can't be beat. Substitute or Happy Jack, on the other hand - they suck.

As for "advice from Pete" - I'm pretty sure that Pete had little, if anything, to do with the initial batch of CD issues, both on MCA and Polydor. It was up to the record companies and guys like Steve...

What's wrong with a little criticism? Steve knows I love most of what he touches - just not everything. In case you've been missing something, a good majority of this board is people bitching about one CD or another. It just happens that people rarely bitch about stuff Steve does. Why should it be ok to bitch about other stuff but not Steve's work (in cases where bitching is applicable)?

 

But they are different recordings with different performances in different spaces with different technology. Of course "Hell..." is going to sound better!

But they just weren't the original hits.

 

After much silence at this and on other boards - I feel the neccesity to speak up here. If this is inappropriate - the moderators may delete. I open my trap now only because I always felt the level of discussion was a little more ... er.. "sophisticated?" than on the some other boards.

We are all opinionated bastards. We do not need to be childish and state "IMO" before every sentence we type. Disagreement is inevitable, and I have often disagreed with many "regulars" here. I never felt it was neccesary to relate their opinions on music to how they would handle a dinner at a friends house.

Jeez, is THIS what gets you bent out of shape? Leave personal snide remarks for the ICE chat board.

 

There's that question again!

 

...or BSN!

 

Luke, i'm not criticizing your listening habits but it's my observation that most people who are crazy about stereo separation use headphones for listening with. That could partly explain the fascination with stereo. Listening to stereo music on cans exaggerates the effect. Listening to mono on cans is frankly, uninteresting.

FWIW, I listen to speakers in the sweet spot for critical listening. I only use headphones for detail work when remastering.

 

Umm, perhaps you missed something - the version of China Grove I like better has *LESS* stereo separation.

 

I guess I did. My equipment (and ears)tell me that there is *LESS* separation on the DCC version, and it sounds more full. In other words, there is more space around the instruments.

I don't listen with cans.

 

You see what I mean Angel???

We're about 6 inches away from a stereo/mono debate!

Oh, and if anyone questions my intentions....

 

Huh? They are *both* DCC versions. Steve mastered both of them.

As far as separation goes - listen again. On the gold version, the guitar in the intro is HARD right. Just a tiny bit of echo in the left channel. On the ROT70's CD it's brought in slightly towards center.

For pure sonics, the gold version of the song wins - less hiss, wider separation, etc. However, to me the EQ on the ROT70's version just makes things a bit more lifelike. When switching between the two, the sound of the gold version makes it feel like I've got my hands cupped over my ears. Putting on the other version makes it feel like I'm taking my hands away...

 

On average my ROT70's and RTF CDs tend to have a little more detailed treble, than the gold discs which seem to balance out mid-range warmth a bit.

I wonder what equipment was used on the mixed CDs?

[ October 27, 2001: Message edited by: pigmode ]