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

Discussion in 'Music Corner' started by Steve Hoffman, Aug 14, 2004.

  1. lukpac

    lukpac Senior Member

    Location:
    Milwaukee, WI
    Not that I'm aware of, but I'm not an expert. Roger would be the person to ask.
     
    millbend likes this.
  2. fysyf

    fysyf Forum Resident

    Location:
    Nice, France
    I finally got hold of the 80's European CD and can confirm it matches lukpac' descriptions of the original US CD (remix) for all titles analysed in his various posts (Watchtower, Dear Landlord and I'll be your baby tonight, including centered drums and slightly faster speed for the latter) so, for those interested, it definitely is the same version.
    (And it sounds pretty fantastic, much better anyway than the only other version I could listen to, the one available on Spotify.)
     
    kiddo4 and lukpac like this.
  3. Leviathan

    Leviathan Forum Resident

    Location:
    461 Ocean Blvd.
    So the OP is incorrect in saying it was a neutral transfer of the tape if it was a remix?
     
  4. lukpac

    lukpac Senior Member

    Location:
    Milwaukee, WI
    I won't touch on whether such a description is "incorrect" or not, but it's definitely a remix.
     
    czeskleba and Leviathan like this.
  5. fysyf

    fysyf Forum Resident

    Location:
    Nice, France
    I've just re-read the opening post by Mr Hoffman and the way I understand it as a whole is that the sound on this CD is so clean that you feel close to the actual recording, so much that when paying attention you can tell differences in mic EQ from track to track.

    I've done the test myself with tracks 1 and 2 and the difference is clear (even if I would never have noticed it by myself), and much clearer on the CD than on the Spotify version. I would add that the most striking difference is the bass and drums sound, however. On Spotify, the bass sounds muffled, almost like a tuba, it's very weird. On the CD it's a much more natural bass-guitar sounding, and the drums are clearer too.

    We now know thanks to lukpac's work that the master for this CD was actually a new mix, but anyway the resulting CD is a neutral transfer of this mix. Whether Mr Hoffman knew it was a different mix or not at the time is not really relevant in my opinion : his post is focused on the faithfulness to the actual sound of the recording, and as he says it, this sound was not "futzed with".

    It is true however that for someone who is familiar with the original mix, this CD can be annoying, because it's not what he is used to . But it's not my case, and I think it's far superior to the current mainstream version.
     
  6. djwkyoto

    djwkyoto Forum Resident

    Location:
    Berlin
    Sure, the work done by lukpac (and others) is remarkable, but it actually was another member who first pointed out that it is indeed a remix.
    I pulled out my old Columbia CD of Dylan's JOHN WESLEY HARDING just to be sure....

    I'm not sure if this is what you wanted to point out, but I gotta add one thing to this: almost nobody on this earth (probably a handful of people) knows how the mixdowns of these remixes sounded before they were mastered... It's impossible to say the CD mastering was a neutral transfer, because we simply can't tell what type of EQ had been done in recording, in mixing and in mastering respectively. Nor does anybody here know how the "actual sound of the recording" was for that matter. Maybe you want to say that it does SOUND neutral, but that's a whole different thing.
    Don't want to step on your toe, I just generally feel the assumption that something is mastered or transferred "neutrally" is a little overused now and then. Because an assumption it is most of the time.

    That said, I wholeheartedly agree that this is a fantastic sounding CD and a good example how remarkably well early digital CAN sound. One of my favourite CDs from my collection, and also one of my most-beloved records. And this thread is golden! Thanks everybody who contributed to it.
     
    fysyf likes this.
  7. fysyf

    fysyf Forum Resident

    Location:
    Nice, France
    Thanks a lot for reminding this, I had been focusing mostly on lukpac's comparison of Watchtower, Dear Landlord and I'll be your baby tonight and had forgotten that Laservampire had first mentioned the fact that the CD was a remix.

    And thanks again for clarifying, yes indeed that's what I had in mind, or more precisely that was my interpretation of what Mr Hoffman was saying in the first post when kindly giving us the advice to grab this old CD.
     
    djwkyoto likes this.
  8. David del Toro

    David del Toro Forum Resident

    Man I have no intention of ever becoming a music engineer but it's still all so fascinating to me, so JWH's stereo mix was made live each take as Dylan and his band played? Then the mix was immediately dubbed to two-track right? So is the old Columbia CD just a digital two-track transfer of of those mixes before it was dubbed to a cutting master? Speaking of mixing live I think Frank Black And The Catholics record all their albums this way. Live to two-track with no mixing or something like that.
     
  9. Michael

    Michael I LOVE WIDE S-T-E-R-E-O!

    this CD will never be bested...and I've heard a bunch of different versions.
     
    maui jim and rednax like this.
  10. lukpac

    lukpac Senior Member

    Location:
    Milwaukee, WI
    No. Recorded to 8-track.

    No. Digitally remixed from 8-track.
     
  11. David del Toro

    David del Toro Forum Resident

    Ohhhhhh alright. I understand now. So the remix was the result of the original mix not showing the full potential of the original session tapes, not 'cuz of worn out tapes like Blonde On Blonde. So the MFSL Stereo CD has the original LP mix? And the JWH tracks Steve mastered were from the digital remixes from the OG CD remix? Wonder why he didn't just do a new mix himself. I'm the idea of remixes are a little icky to me but I'll probably go for the mono anyways
     
  12. lukpac

    lukpac Senior Member

    Location:
    Milwaukee, WI
    Not sure why it was remixed. But the remasters of the 3 original mixes on Biograph and GHII sound great.

    MFSL is the original mix. AF GHII uses the remixes.
     
    mikeyt and David del Toro like this.
  13. Steve Hoffman

    Steve Hoffman Your host Your Host Thread Starter

    The CD I like is a direct version of the four-track original. Without the nasty limiting/compression that was added at the time during mixing..
     
  14. lukpac

    lukpac Senior Member

    Location:
    Milwaukee, WI
    JWH was 8-track, Steve. And the limiting/compression wasn’t added during mixing, there was apparently an additional dub to create the LP masters. The tracks that came out in the late ‘90s have the fidelity of the remixes but are the original mixes.
     
    drift likes this.
  15. lukpac

    lukpac Senior Member

    Location:
    Milwaukee, WI
    Samples. Beginning of the vocal and the end of the song. Roughly level adjusted:

    I'll Be Your Baby Tonight [2003 SACD]

    I'll Be Your Baby Tonight [original CD]

    I'll Be Your Baby Tonight [Biograph recalled]

    I'll Be Your Baby Tonight [MFSL]

    It's unfortunate that we only have those 3 tracks from the 1997 Biograph/1999 GHII source, as it's arguably the best all around.
     
  16. A Local Bloke

    A Local Bloke Forum President

    Location:
    canada-na-na-na-na
    @lukpac have you ever compared the 2010 mono CD and the mono MFSL? What did you think of them?
     
  17. lukpac

    lukpac Senior Member

    Location:
    Milwaukee, WI
    I have not.
     
    A Local Bloke likes this.
  18. lukpac

    lukpac Senior Member

    Location:
    Milwaukee, WI
    Just stumbled across this. October 1997 ICE, bolding mine:

    "As for the longer ending to "I'll Be Your Baby Tonight," that was not a mistake. It was actually the result of Legacy accessing the true original master tape to John Wesley Harding for the first time in 30 years. "At first, a conscious decision was made to let it go to a cold end," Irwin says. "That decision was subsequently re-thought, and while we were making the other adjustments, we decided to put the fade back on.""

    Odd that it hasn't been used since then.
     
  19. Merrick

    Merrick The return of the Thin White Duke

    Location:
    Portland
    So does that indicate the 1987 CD was not remixed from the original tapes, or does that indicate that the 1997 release was the first time in thirty years the 2-channel master had been used?
     
  20. lukpac

    lukpac Senior Member

    Location:
    Milwaukee, WI
    The ICE quote is about the stereo mixdown masters. The 80s CD was remixed from the multitracks.
     
    Flaming Torch and Merrick like this.
  21. Merrick

    Merrick The return of the Thin White Duke

    Location:
    Portland
    Thanks for confirming! Based on this thread I grabbed a copy of the old CD and will be giving it a listen tonight.
     
    mikeyt likes this.
  22. Merrick

    Merrick The return of the Thin White Duke

    Location:
    Portland
    Wow, that 1987 CD completely transforms the stereo mix of JWH in the best possible way. Sounds natural, organic, like you're right there listening to Dylan and his accompanying players, without the shrillness of the harmonica or any popping P's. Up to this point I had always preferred the mono mix, and I do still appreciate the tighter focus that mix has, but this is endlessly charming and might become my default digital version of the album.
     
    mikeyt likes this.
  23. mikeyt

    mikeyt Forum Resident

    Location:
    Los Angeles, CA
    Do you have the MFSL stereo CD to compare?
     
  24. Merrick

    Merrick The return of the Thin White Duke

    Location:
    Portland
    I had it in the past (got rid of it when I got the mono SACD, my preferred mix up to that point), and going off audio memory, to me it's not close. The MoFi must be the sound of the original 1967 mix, but that's the mix I don't like! Shrill harmonica and the stereo spread always made it sound kind of diffuse. Interestingly the 1987 might have more separation between players but the overall presentation is more up front because of the increased clarity.
     
    kt66brooklyn and mikeyt like this.
  25. lukpac

    lukpac Senior Member

    Location:
    Milwaukee, WI
    Have you heard the tracks on the 1997 Biograph and 1999 Greatest Hits II? Because arguably those have the clarity and separation of the remix but with the vibe of the original mix.

    Unfortunately the rest of the album isn't available that way to my knowledge. Why the SACD and MFSL didn't use those tapes is kind of baffling.
     

Share This Page

molar-endocrine