DCC Archive Jon Astley.....deaf?

Discussion in 'Music Corner' started by Beagle, Jan 8, 2002.

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

    Beagle Senior Member Thread Starter

    Location:
    Ottawa
    I just purchased two remasters (unknowingly)done by this person: Judas Priest "Hell Bent For Leather" and Tears For Fears "The Seeds Of Love".

    What utter noise. The lows have been EQ boosted and the upper mids/lower highs are digital screech. The ambience/room is sucked out. Truly disappointing. Any other negative Astley remasters I should steer clear of?
     
  2. Matt

    Matt New Member

    Location:
    Illinois
    All Things Must Pass, the deluxe edition of Live at Leeds...

    You look up Jon Astley on the All Music Guide and they say he's responsible for the "sparking" sound of the Who reissues. HA! If anything, he kept them from sounding as good as they could have, and when he finally sat at the controls to do the mastering himself (the deluxe edition of Live at Leeds and Odds & Sods) , they sounded like absolute crap.

    On All Things Must Pass, he squished the life out of it. The fact he used CEDAR processing (it's not pointed out in the liner notes, but he CEDAR gave him an award for using it on All Things Must Pass) on an analogue tape recording from 1970 shows how bad the man is at mastering.

    [ January 08, 2002: Message edited by: Camarillo ]
     
  3. Grant

    Grant Cranky! It'll happen to you too, kids!

    Location:
    United States
    I'll say it again, Jon Astley is HOT in Europe! They believe in monkeying around with the sound over there.

    I got lucky with the ABBA Collection remaster. At least it doesn't sound as if he did any damage to it.

    I suggest that before buying any more remasters by British artists check out who the remastering engineer is first. Astley may have gotten his grubby little CEDAR on them.

    [ January 08, 2002: Message edited by: Grant T. ]
     
  4. Gary

    Gary Nauga Gort! Staff

    Location:
    Toronto
    I also noticed that he did Keith Moon: Both Sides of the Moon. I don't have it. I want it.

    No I don't.

    Yes I do - it's Keith Moon!

    I guess I'll have to pick this up. I've never seen it before on CD.

    Any comments on this CD? Should I be prepared for the worse?
     
  5. Grant

    Grant Cranky! It'll happen to you too, kids!

    Location:
    United States
    That's the spirit! If in doubt, check it out.
     
  6. lukpac

    lukpac Senior Member

    Location:
    Milwaukee, WI
    Probably the only Astley CD I wouldn't say is terrible is the Bluesbreakers one. Last time I listened I actually liked certain things on it over the MoFi.
     
  7. czeskleba

    czeskleba Senior Member

    Location:
    Seattle
    Well, the mastering on Both Sides of the Moon doesn't really matter, since it's the kind of album people buy merely to own more than to actually listen to. I think I've only listened to it twice all the way through, and there was a 10-year gap between listens. A wretched disc.

    Or to put it another way: Keith only drums on two songs, and he sings lead on all of them. It should have been the other way around.
     
  8. Unknown

    Unknown Guest

    Grant, I hope "they" means "mastering engineers", because (being a Europan myself) I'm certainly not interested in European remasters (MAN..Astley work really sucks!).

    Oh...before I forget: they can put Bob Ludwig in the same room with Astley, lock it and throw away the key...haha!
     
  9. Beagle

    Beagle Senior Member Thread Starter

    Location:
    Ottawa
    ?
    Bob Ludwig? You are joking, right?

    This Astley is related to Pete Townshend, no?
    Did they inherit each others loss of hearing?
    :rolleyes:

    I recall my first Steve Hoffman mastering, Dwight Twilley Band "Twilley Don't Mind" and how beautiful it sounded, just like the original TML mastered vinyl, but cleaner. And how nice the Gastwirt HDCD Joni Mitchell re-issues are to listen to. They sound like somehow the mastering engineers were able to get the master tape itself onto a CD.

    These Astley remasters and the Elton John Classic re-issues sound as if the tape was put through a computer program "Remove Soul, Leave Technical Info Intact But Add A Layer Of Ice And Grit". I compared some of the early budget MCA Elton discs to these recent disasters and the MCA ones sound way better. The British LP of the Judas Priest embarrasses this new CD.

    Why is sound getting worse instead of better?

    If they have to put warning labels for offensive lyrics, should they not also have labels warning the public/audiophiles about offensive sound
     
    Dynamic Ranger likes this.
  10. guy incognito

    guy incognito Senior Member

    Location:
    Mee-chigan
    Because the labels have figured out that the average, non-audiophile listener has a vastly different idea of what constitutes "good" sound from that held by most folks here. :rolleyes:
     
  11. Gary

    Gary Nauga Gort! Staff

    Location:
    Toronto
    Beagle, as you know, one simply has to purchase a $799.00 all inclusive system (receiver, CD player, speakers and maybe TT) to appreciate the new remasters. Somehow I can't bring myself to do this... ;)

    It helps if you believe that recording techniques were really primitive and "bad" back in the '70's.... and worse in the '60's, '50's and so on. Then no noising is a necessity. Just NEVER listen to a DCC disc! Or something from Sundazed! Or Classic Records. Or....

    And these guys have a captive audience. If you don't like All Things Must Pass, what are your alternatives?

    *sigh*
     
  12. Beagle

    Beagle Senior Member Thread Starter

    Location:
    Ottawa
    Fair enough, but why is it that one company like Sony will hand over original masters (like Simon and Garfunkel) to someone like Vic Anesini (sp?) for SBM or 20 bit remastering and have a wonderful product returned back to them, and then hand masters over to some deaf boffin with inferior results, then sit still on it?

    Or are the record label people deaf too, and "remaster" is simply a buzzword to get the gullible public to believe it means "NEW! IMPROVED!" and suck them in one more time?

    And if they have it sussed that the average non-audiophile cares not what really good sound is, then why bother re-re-re-mastering at all?

    Maybe there is no answer and this is why we have DCC and a few others we can always trust?
     
  13. Grant

    Grant Cranky! It'll happen to you too, kids!

    Location:
    United States
    You got it! To the suits, that is all remastering is.
     
  14. guy incognito

    guy incognito Senior Member

    Location:
    Mee-chigan
    But of course.

    Because if John Q. Public thinks a new remaster sounds better (whether it actually does or not), he can likely be persuaded to "trade up" and get the new version. And as I said, to his non-audiophile ears, a No-Noised, bass-boosted, EQed CD might actually constitute an "improvement" over an older, flatter transfer.
     
  15. Grant

    Grant Cranky! It'll happen to you too, kids!

    Location:
    United States
    Now hold on! There is some EQing involved in virtually ALL ramasters, even DCC's! Remember what Steve had to do to get the Mamas & the Papas "16 Greatest" to sound good...

    Flatter is NOT always better. Remember, the master tape is ONLY the best material to work with.

    Now, I do agree that Noise reduction is usually bad, or at least used badly.
     
  16. jroyen

    jroyen Forum Resident

    Location:
    New York City
    "Flatter is NOT always better. Remember, the master tape is ONLY the best material to work with."

    Not so much flat frequency response, but one that is linear; a response where all frequencies are represented equally: the input and output signal is always equal, and relative phase is an absolute constant. This is considered the hardware and software ideal in audio reproduction. If not present, less than ideally there are equal amounts of linear distortion (harmonic and intermodulation,) spurious output not present in the original recording or sound.

    Josh

    [ January 10, 2002: Message edited by: Josh Royen ]
     
  17. Pinknik

    Pinknik Senior Member

     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page

molar-endocrine