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. chip-hp

    chip-hp Cool Cat

    Location:
    Dallas, TX
    Did I miss something? ... Little Richard was a Beatle? :)

    BTW, how come the word "Beatle" does not appear in Spell Check on a music site? :)
     
  2. CT Dave

    CT Dave Senior Member

    Location:
    Connecticut
    So did the person who started this thread ever get an answer as to what the best Little Richard compilation is? I have the "Georgia Peach" collection on Specialty, but I think there is room for improvement.
     
  3. BradOlson

    BradOlson Country/Christian Music Maven

    The Ace compilation (Steve answered this)
     
  4. Ed Bishop

    Ed Bishop Incredibly, I'm still here

    Malc, I'd pay real money to hear that destructive mix of "Have You Seen" you think would happen...because it doesn't have to, if you have somebody behind the boards who knows what the hell he's doing and has the proper tapes and equipment to work with. Ever notice that "Paint It, Black" sounds just fine while "Mother's Little Helper" sounds kind of, well, lacking in impact compared to the mono mix? Yet both were mixed to stereo in the same time frame. Andrew Oldham may be responsible for that, but no matter: unless someone brings the multis out of mothballs, we may never find out if "Have You Seen" or "Mother's" can be made better in stereo. Not to mention some good Lp and B-sides, too, that were recorded in stereo if not released that way.

    As for Uncle Phil, I refer you to the stereo version of PRESENTING THE FABULOUS RONETTES FEATURING VERONICA. I also refer you to the mono version. Both are equally valid. Both are equally wonderful, and great.
    And while I agree technical merits alone don't make a great record, history suggests that very good tech merits don't hurt. The notion that Spector's 'tech merits' were inferior is a bad example(try Frank Guida and U.S. Bonds instead). The mono mixes are dynamic enough, while the best of the stereo mixes shimmer, Ronnie on a cloud above with the Wall below. I wouldn't give up either, and I'm glad I lived to hear both. The choice is what some of us really want, even if it takes decades for some remixes to reach our ears.

    ED:cool:
     
  5. Ed Bishop

    Ed Bishop Incredibly, I'm still here

    Again, to be specific, Ace[UK]CDCH 195, 20[originally 22]CLASSIC CUTS. Two tracks("I'll Never Let You Go" and "Can't Believe You Wanna Leave")deleted from the original 1986 comp. GEORGIA PEACH has the 'authentic' sound of the Specialty 45's. For anybody who cares, my advice is to have both in the collection. Kind of like marrying a Republican but sleeping with a Democrat:D The first is the sound before it got to the public, right from the master tapes, while the latter is the sound(well, close)of the Specialty 45's. I haven't even't gotten to burning mix CDR's of the '50s; it's going to be tough deciding LR's sound when I get there.

    ED:cool:
     
  6. lukpac

    lukpac Senior Member

    Location:
    Milwaukee, WI
    What do you mean? The separation is exactly the same as the originals. Obviously some people think it sounds like it was mixed in the '60s, otherwise they wouldn't confuse it with the original mix!

    To get back to the start of this thread, aren't any Little Richard CDs that aren't compressed to death not authentic sounding? Really, anything but an original LP (or 45) on a vintage record player wouldn't be authentic, right? Any modern stereo wouldn't be authentic, would it?

    But in this case, the "overall sound" *SUCKS*! Everything is a muddy mess. Did you know that Charlie put down a killer drum track on that song? You'd never know by hearing the final mix. Keith Richards has said the rhythm section got "lost" in the final mix, and he was right. So much of the "meat" of that song just got buried in the layers of overdubs and reduction mixes. The song is pretty much just midrange, with no real top or bottom.

    I wonder how people would react to certain remixes if they didn't know they were remixes beforehand...
     
  7. lukpac

    lukpac Senior Member

    Location:
    Milwaukee, WI
    Keep in mind Paint It Black was a 4-track recording, while Mother's Little Helper was 3-track, with the entire rhythm track bounced down to one track.

    I'd just like to hear the existing stereo mix of Have You Seen in good sound, period. It's never been officially released, and every bootleg out there has come from a poor copy.
     
  8. Mal

    Mal Phorum Physicist

    Was Phil involved in the stereo mixes (and was he happy about them)?

    The stereo versions of the Righteous Brothers hits demonstrate that the fidelity can be improved on the mono mixes be "re-mixing" from the 3-track master. It is nice to have both mixes, but it is the mono, in this case, that has a special place in my heart :love:.

    You know the track "Paradise"? There is one note played on a 12-string guitar - or, at least, that's what it sounds like. It continues jangling in the murky mush all the way through the track despite a key change for the middle section. As the track resolves back to the original key it creates an incredible effect (it is the diminished 5th for the last chord of the middle section and then the original key 1 semitone down is returned to so that the continuous note is now the perfect 5th).

    Anyway, if that note was any clearer it would totally spoil the subtlety that is achieved in the mono mix (you really have to listen hard to hear the note in the distortion of the track!). This is one example where a modern re-mix would not be able to recreate the magic Spector created!

    Larry Levine is a fine engineer and I appreciate that the technical side of the Spector recordings is well under control, but Phil broke the rules in terms of the generally accepted way of implementing recording/mixing tecniques. This is what I really meant earlier.

    :)
     
  9. Mal

    Mal Phorum Physicist

    I have the ACE CD titled "Little Richard - His Greatest Recordings" (cat # CDCH 109) which sounds pretty good to my ears.
     
  10. Mal

    Mal Phorum Physicist

    By separation, I mean how easy it is to separate the instruments in your head as you are listening to the music - what do you mean by separation?

    The Bass is clearer and less distorted on the re-mixes for a start, the echo on the acoustic guitar on Scarborough fair/Canticle no longer returns on the right channel in the way it did on the original, The Glockenspiel is better defined on the re-mix etc etc......

    These differences make it easy to hear the individual instruments on the re-mix, i.e. the separation is greater......


    By authentic, I mean that it sounds like it is a mix made in the same era as the original recordings. I am talking about the sound on the mix tapes not the medium it was issued on.

    As we have already ascertained, you like to hear recordings in their best possible fidelity with a flexible view on historical accuracy. I, on the other hand prefer to hear the recordings as they were originally issued, warts and all.

    It's all a matter of taste. If it wasn't for our different preferences the world would be a very dull place.


    Without the original mix it may not be easy to tell, without a good playback system and time to listen closely, whether you are dealing with a re-mix or not. However, I think it is usually fairly obvious if you have a keen ear and an insatiable appetite for vintage recordings.....



    :)
     
  11. Ed Bishop

    Ed Bishop Incredibly, I'm still here

    On the first point: "You've Lost That Lovin' Feelin'": nothing on earth could beat that original mono mix. But the Righteous Bros. Spector stereo mixes IMHO, don't hold a candle to the Ronettes mixes. Regardless of who actually did the remix on Spector's stereo, it was released on his label, wasn't it? So who is ultimately responsible? Same with the CHRISTMAS GIFT FOR YOU Lp. Spector supposedly has complete control over his masters; then how did the Warner/Spector(US), PSI(UK; Europe), and later US album(on Passport) and a few singles turn up in true stereo? Because Spector had no control? For a control freak in his time, then, he must be awfully lazy if he had Abkco put out a box set in full mono, separate artist CDs in full mono, yet so much stereo out for certain things on vinyl--again and again--over the years.

    And yes, Phil did break the rules; one the reasons we love him. He had Larry Levine, one of the best, and great studio musicians. What I really wish is that the Big Guy here could get hold of some of those tapes and make them right.

    ED
    :cool:
     
  12. Steve Hoffman

    Steve Hoffman Your host Your Host

    I would remix them to mono, Ed, and you'd hate that!

    The "wall of sound" is only on one damn track; it's gotta be in the middle.
     
  13. lukpac

    lukpac Senior Member

    Location:
    Milwaukee, WI
    But why draw a line? Either way what you're hearing is different from how it sounded originally. Why is the mix sacred but not the mastering, the playback medium, the playback equipment, etc?
     
  14. Angel

    Angel New Member

    Location:
    Hollywood, Ca.
    Well, the mix should be in stone, and UN-changing.

    Our stereo systems are being changed or updated all the time. The mix should stay the same so it can improve with our upgrades.

    I do not mind a good remix, but I like the murkiness or vintage sound of some original mixes, even though they show less individual instrumental detail. The better the playback system, the better the old mixes sometimes sound to me.

    The stereo mix of some of the Phil Spector songs really takes the magic out of the music, reducing the famous wall of sound to a little group off to the side somewhere, with a too-loud lead singer with too much treble on her voice being annoying in the center, and some strings or background voices on the right. The mono mix on the other hand, has everyone in a mono sauce, simmered to perfection. At least that how it seems to me.
     
  15. rontokyo

    rontokyo Senior Member

    Location:
    Tokyo, Japan
    I'll go you one further. My first listening experience of 60s garage stuff was on comp LPs like Pebbles and Boulders [with lotsa distortion and noise]. For me, those "mixes" were authentic as I never had the opportunity to hear clean 45s, let alone the master tapes. Several years pass and lo and behold . . . master tapes of some of these classics have been found and reissued on CD. And guess what? As sourced from the masters, these songs many times sound empty, soul-less and completely devoid of charm. The distortion and noise actually behaved as additional "instruments," if you will, and added to the grungy power.

    My point? Generally speaking, Luke, I agree with the points you've made on this thread. Sure, why not remix and listen to the songs in improved fidelity. But some things just flat out sound better in ****ty fidelity. As regards Little Richard, remove the distortion and compression and I'd be afraid that those songs might sound a little too po-lite and no longer be what both Richard and Art Rupe had in mind.
     
  16. Bob J

    Bob J Forum Resident

    Which Little Richard compilation has "Keep a Knockin'" WITH the tape drag on the first sax solo?
    The only comps I have ("Georgia Peach" & "Shag on Down...") have the single track with the tape drag
    corrected (Peach) and an alternate "Gin" version on "Shag...". Since the Ace comp has gotten such good
    publicity here, I hope that has the tape drag version. Can anybody help? Thanks.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page

molar-endocrine