Little Richard Penniman - The Best Of Speciality?

Discussion in 'Music Corner' started by Sckott, Nov 8, 2002.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Steve Hoffman

    Steve Hoffman Your host Your Host

    Oh well, that's show-biz.

    I'm glad you see my point though! :)
     
  2. CT Dave

    CT Dave Senior Member

    Location:
    Connecticut
    The Specialty masters are owned by Fantasy. Since Fantasy has been so generous licensing out their masters (CCR,as well as many jazz titles), is it too much of a strech to imagine the day when Steve can remaster Little Richard for SACD?
     
  3. Casino

    Casino Senior Member

    Location:
    BossTown
    Regarding Little Walter, yes, he's done some good work working with tapes in good condition and who-knows-what condition and has made available stuff that no one ever thought would see the light of day. I'm glad he's around.


    Was not too happy with the Fats compilation he mastered for Bear Family, though. I figured good fidelity was a given with anything on that label, but was disappointed in that collection. Fats' voice (and some instruments) on many tracks has a hard, steely quality that's annoying. Typical of that "CD" sound that so many complain about.
     
  4. jligon

    jligon Forum Resident

    Location:
    Peoria, IL
    I think all of the Ace titles are available through Bear Family
     
  5. Dugan

    Dugan Senior Member

    Location:
    Midway,Pa
    That's the one I've got and yes it's a long time ago. :sigh:
     
  6. rontokyo

    rontokyo Senior Member

    Location:
    Tokyo, Japan
    This is just a little off the subject, but what the heck. I've got the Specialty LP box where it's stated on a memo inserted in the box that the LPs were sourced from digital transfers of the original analog tapes. Maybe it's my imagination, but I've always felt that the vinyl does sound a little "edgy" in a digital sort of way. Anyone else get that feeling? Was the Ace LP set also sourced from digital transfers? Sonics aside, the pictures alone in the box set are worth the price of admission!
     
  7. lukpac

    lukpac Senior Member

    Location:
    Milwaukee, WI
    Perhaps, but to play devil's advocate, why not just remix everything that can be remixed? The fidelity and dynamics on the session tapes are usually much better than on the mono and stereo mixdown tapes, especially with oldies. What's so special about those original mixes, anyway?
     
  8. Steve Hoffman

    Steve Hoffman Your host Your Host

    Mastering not mixing. That's what I was refering to.

    Remixing? Something that was recorded in mono, or bounced, or what? I'm talking about oldies. Not every great record was recorded at Bell Sound or other multi-track studios.

    I was just saying in general, don't compress when mastering.....
     
  9. Sckott

    Sckott Hand Tighten Only. Thread Starter

    Location:
    South Plymouth, Ma
    Does anyone have a URL for the Bear Family? Or heck, even something to direct me to the Little Richard title by Acew in question? TIA!
     
  10. lukpac

    lukpac Senior Member

    Location:
    Milwaukee, WI
    Yes, I know.

    I'm just talking remixing in general.

    The point I was trying to raise is that some improvements in fidelity at the expense of "original sound" seem to be ok (ie, no compression in mastering) while others aren't (remixing). Some things are seen as "restoring the sound" while others are seen as "playing God"...
     
  11. Steve Hoffman

    Steve Hoffman Your host Your Host

    It depends on who is doing the remixing I guess.

    Is the equipment vintage or solid state? Is the echo fake digital crap or the real thing? Are the vocals buried in the new mix following modern tastes where in the original they were at the proper volume, etc.? Is the stereo spread proper or some "mono with one guitar doubled in fake stereo" style? ;)
     
  12. lukpac

    lukpac Senior Member

    Location:
    Milwaukee, WI
    I guess I'd just say that different people have different notions of "acceptable differences". Does the stereo remix of Mr. Tambourine Man sound just like the original mono mix? Nope. But for me, the improvements outweigh the negatives.

    On the other hand, the stereo remix of My Generation really sucks. Etc...
     
  13. Bob Lovely

    Bob Lovely Super Gort In Memoriam

    Friends,

    I believe that you have the "right" Little Richard mastering when the vocals are upfront, dynamic, powerful and the music is more "in the background." Heard this way - you hear the seminal power of Little Richard's voice from the tapes.

    Bob:)
     
  14. Ed Bishop

    Ed Bishop Incredibly, I'm still here

    :rolleyes: Sckott, Amazon is listing it as a used item. It's possible that among those is the 22-track original. Worth E-mailing whoever has a copy to get more details.

    ED:cool:
     
  15. Steve Hoffman

    Steve Hoffman Your host Your Host

    Bob's "Tambourine Man" remix is nice, but the original hit version with the correct echo, tape delay on the voices, etc. is now out of print, probably forever.

    Check back with me in five years when the remix of "My Generation" is the only version available in the world.

    I think we will agree that it would have been better to leave it alone in the first place.
     
  16. lukpac

    lukpac Senior Member

    Location:
    Milwaukee, WI
    Actually, I believe Sundazed just used it for their singles set...:D

    Of course, the same argument could be made when the compressed Little Richard stuff goes out of print. "These new CDs sure don't sound like the songs did when they were released!"

    And, of course, some people don't really mind about the correct echo and tape delay on MTM. You can always get an original 45 or LP, right?

    No, I'd say it would have been better to do a proper remix!
     
  17. John B

    John B Once Blue Gort,<br>now just blue.

    Location:
    Toronto, Canada
    Steve,

    If I understand you, your major concern is that the new mix will tend to replace the original.
    In addition to that, is there anything else you don't like about a sensitive re-mix? I see you as being an ideal person to do a re-mix precisely because you don't want to play God. You are sensitive to the original echo etc and you would never commit the travesties (like digital compression, fake doubling, etc.).

    John
     
  18. Steve Hoffman

    Steve Hoffman Your host Your Host

    John,

    Yes, you've got it.

    I've learned over the years how to do an authentic remix if I have to. I don't mind doing it, but there aren't too many folks who WANT an authentic remix. They want a MODERN mix of an old tape. I hate that (think ZZ Top remixes).
     
  19. John B

    John B Once Blue Gort,<br>now just blue.

    Location:
    Toronto, Canada
    Thanks for clarifying that Steve. When will you be leaving for Abbey Road? ;)
     
  20. Mal

    Mal Phorum Physicist

    Luke,

    As I'm sure you will agree, you can't re-create an original mix perfectly.

    Even in the simple case of, say, a 3-track session tape where the only mixing was combinig the 3 channels at nominal level and EQing and compressing/limiting. To re-create the sound of the finished master mix would require that you used the same equipment in every stage of the mix.

    Take Steve's re-mix of "All Summer Long" on Endless Summer. While it is not a bad sounding mix - it is not the same as the originally released version.

    Obviously, in the case of a badly damaged master, a re-mix may be the only option. But there is no reason, that I can see, why we need a remix of, say, the Byrds LPs or the first three S & G LPs.

    In the case of these two sets of remixes, the original mixes were more complex that the 3-track example above making it even harder to emulate the original.

    Why do it?

    You may increase the fidelity by re-mixing, but for me, you loose the very essence of what made those LPs so great in the first place. The mix fixes in time all of the contributory factors that go into the making the artistic creation, from the technical possibilities of the time to the tastes and cultural influences.

    I, personally, want to hear the art as it was created at the time rather than some modern approximation of the art.....


    :)
     
  21. Dugan

    Dugan Senior Member

    Location:
    Midway,Pa
  22. Sckott

    Sckott Hand Tighten Only. Thread Starter

    Location:
    South Plymouth, Ma
    TYVM.
     
  23. mudbone

    mudbone Gort Annaologist

    Location:
    Canada, O!
    One of our members stocks the Bear Family product.

    www.cdwolf.com

    mud-
     
  24. lukpac

    lukpac Senior Member

    Location:
    Milwaukee, WI
    Probably not, no. But, so? Not using compression on those Little Richard tracks would certainly be changing the original intended sound, wouldn't it?

    By the same token, you're really not hearing those original mixes "correctly" unless you are listening in the studio they were mixed, on the equipment they were mixed on.

    I'd submit to you that differences in mastering can often be greater than the differences between a good remix and the original.

    Again - so? Obviously Steve didn't seem to have a problem with doing a remix there, even though it wasn't *exactly* the same as the original.

    Actually, I believe those masters *are* lost and/or damaged.

    Why not do it? They sound great, don't they? Keep in mind even Steve was fooled - he thought Scarborough Fair was the original mix on the new issues, when it is actually a remix, distortion and all...

    Then we should throw that remix of All Summer Long out the window, shouldn't we?
     
  25. Mal

    Mal Phorum Physicist

    Absolutely (no offence Steve :D), now you're getting it!!

    Well, a badly mastered "A Little Less Conversation" would sound much closer to the original single than the (in my opinion badly) remixed JXL version :p.

    Ok, so I'm exagerating a little but there is a point:

    The original mix, however you master it, retains the essence of the originally intended sound, however hidden by compression/EQ/NoNoise etc. A re-mix, however faithful to the original no longer contains that essence - the magic is lost.

    I would rather hear the original mix mastered from a 2nd generation master that a re-mix - to me, the history and the magic reside in the original mix.

    To be clear about it, I am not against you being able to enjoy whichever re-mix you want.

    I just don't see the point of re-mixing "Imagine", for example, when there is an infinitely more profound experience to be had by listening to John Lennon's (via Phil 'We're not worthy' Spector) 'vision' of how it should sound.

    :)
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page

molar-endocrine