Johnny Thunders - "L.A.M.F." remaster - Nov 2017 + "So Alone" reissue

The original lp sounds better, unless you get a bad pressing, apparently they are out there. Jungle Records ripped a vinyl for their LAMF box set from a few years ago, they felt the same.

 

But Jungle used one of the bad pressings, so I find it strange they thought it sounded better than the cassette.

 

I have the CD set never seen the DVD. I wonder what the differences are between the first edition of Nina Antonia's In Cold Blood which I have and the later edition...
I love that CD's version of Society Makes Me Sad.

 

Said this several times on this forum. I had the original vinyl release and to this day it is THE WORST SOUNDING ALBUM I HAVE EVER HEARD!

 

Yeah it was pretty terrible sounding. I had two different copies myself and they both sounded like mud.

 

It continues the story up to Johnny's final day where the first edition only went up to 1987 (when it was released).
It also came with a CD that had LAMF Outtakes/Alternate Mixes and some solo stuff...

 

I've always been a contrarian about LAMF. It's one of my favorite LPs ever, (see my screen name).
I've owned an original Track pressing since 1979/80, when it came out, and while I never thought it was great sounding, I never ever thought it was as terrible as so many others say, or more accurately, have said over the intervening years.
I really don't recall hearing or reading about the hatred of it's mastering until much later.
YMMV.

 

Oh man again. My original UK Porky cut sounds fine and crankable.
In fact it sounds better than the one copy of Bollocks I have.

 

Are you sure you're not exaggerating?

 

For real, I wish my German "first press" of DAMNED DAMNED DAMNED sounded as good as my Track L.A.M.F.

 

I can vividly remember reading the reviews in the British music press when it was released. The guys just looked cool on the record cover and fitted into the "punk" scene that was massive at that time. Most of the reviews mentioned that the sound was bad but there was some great tunes on it. As a teenager (19) at the time, the sonic quality of records wasn't anything that remotely bothered me. Or so I thought...the first time I played it I was convinced there was something wrong with my record player. I had to take it off and put something else on I was familiar with to check it out. No, nothing wrong. Looked at the (L.A.M.F.) record closely to see if it was faulty in any way and gave it a clean before trying it again. No different, still sounded dull, muddy, muffled etc. I hardly played it again as it was that bad. Forty years later and I still can't forget how bad it sounded.

 

Absolutely not!

 

If that's true, you either haven't heard any lo-fi records or there are multiple Track pressings of L.A.M.F. that differ vastly in quality.

 

There were. But I've heard plenty of worse sounding records than even the bad pressing of LAMF.

 

The cassette mix is the best I've ever heard it sound.

 

Name me some, I may have one or two of them and it would be nice to compare our experiences.

 

I have read several times that the cassette release sounds far better than the vinyl but I can't comment as I haven't heard it.

 

Give it a shot!

 

To avoid any forum unpleasantness let's assume your latter statement to be correct.

 

Ha, I'm just saying, if I put it on, it isn't audiophile but the sound doesn't make people comment on it. Certainly better than albums I have that were recorded on a boom box like The Mountain Goats - All Hail West Texas, although that is obviously an extreme example.

Edit:Just put it on and I will say that some songs definitely sound better than others for some reason.

 

I have one as well, and the only real muddiness is during Jerry Nolan's drum fills, which sound distorted in places.

 

Mostly independent punk and metal from the 80s. Bad Religion's first couple LPs and EPs, Bathory's first few. Some 60s "garage" bands.

But there were two very different sounding original Track pressings. One is extremely muddy and one sounds fine to my ears, with a couple tracks sounding slightly dull. Unfortunately, the Jungle CD used the muddy pressing as the source and subjected it to extreme EQ.

 

Anothe

So.....there is/was a crap sounding record after all?

 

Yes, I've heard needle drops of both. Also, Jungle put out sample clips of their before and after restoration and they clearly used the bad pressing.

I was just saying it's not the worst I've ever heard but yeah, the bad pressing is pretty bad.

 

Do you know what the pressing differences are? Were they both Porkys?