Depends on what it is. A jazz standard that the artist tries a new variation on, switches to electric etc? Sure no problem! (Think Herbie Hancock and Watermelon Man for example. I like both the original and the later electric version.) But, if it’s say Chuck Berry re-recording some of his 50s hits and then releasing it in 1967 as a greatest hits comp LP, hell no. I’m still annoyed and feel ripped off. Nobody wants the worse, re-recorded versions, they want the hit original versions! It’s especially scummy when they call is “hits” or don’t specifically say “re-recorded” because who wouldn’t expect the original hit versions? Even if it’s just an artist re-recording their old songs decades later, I’d rather not. Either record something new or don’t bother. I can’t think of a single instance where I actually prefer the re-recorded version of anything.
In pop/rock music it usually has to do with the artist not owning the original recording. They want to stick it to the MAN. That's cool, no one has to buy it. Presumably the goal is licensing to tv and commercials rather than getting fans to buy physical product anyway. There are of course rare cases where the artist feel he/she can do it better now - they are usually completely wrong. For jazz it's wholly different, the performance rather than the composition is the deal.
When it’s an obvious cash grab, usually involving either a label switch or an artist with long fading sales, I’m usually annoyed. When it’s done for genuine creative reasons, it sometimes yields interesting results. As good as the original? Not likely. But if it’s interesting, I’m happy. Gord’s Gold is the exception - new label turning a greatest hits into a double by re-recording the old stuff from the other label? A cash grab, sure, but it works for me. Some other examples: Johnny Cash. Lots of re-recordings. Sometimes he’d reuse an older song for a new concept album. Do I ever listen to Mister Garfield on America? No, but it serves its purpose on that album even if the original is better. But, how about: Walk the Line - a 60s album re-recording Sun stuff for Columbia. He actually ditched the boom chicka boom sound and used a lot of acoustic instrumentation. Nothing definitive, but a nice change up. Classic Cash - re-recordings of Sun and Columbia stuff for Mercury with 80s synthesizers. Does nothing for me. In the American era, though, he re-recorded lots of his old stuff in a very new style - either solo acoustic, or more dramatic with the Heartbreakers. This stuff works and he went for deep cuts. One of my favourite re-recordings was around 1980 when a young Marty Stuart joined the band on violin and fiddle. On stage he would switch to b-bender electric and play some smoking leads on Doin’ My Time. They recorded it for Rockabilly Blues, but left it on the cutting room floor. The Cure: Re-recorded a few songs for their 1990 remix album because they couldn’t find the masters from which to build a remix. Many don’t like them, but I do. They are stylistically different from the originals, so are interesting. A few years later, they released a Greatest Hits album, shortly after releasing their second singles compilation. Cash grab!!! To make fans like me buy it, early pressings included a second disc of acoustic versions. They were boring as anything. That was the end of my Cure fandom. Of course, twenty years later they released that as a stand-alone RSD album! Of course, their far more interesting MTV unplugged session, which was wacky as anything thanks to kazoos and toy pianos, remains largely unreleased. Monk is another matter entirely. Coltrane too. Genius reinterpretations. Some of the examples above show it’s not just nowadays. As I discuss above, not one of my favourites. In fact, I’d take the re-recording of Teenage Queen from the same era over anything on Classic Cash. It’s still just ok, but at least they change it up by making it a duet with Rosanne Cash. (Although, in general, I’d recommend against father-daughter duos choosing love ballads for material!)
New Order rerecorded Temptation and Confusion for Substance 1987. The original Temptation is far superior, Confusion I'm not so sure about. Yes, one song with a better remake is Little Feat's Willin'. Do Peel Sessions count? Because Pink Floyd's 15 minute exploration of Fat Old Sun (1971 BBC version) completely trounces the original on Atom Heart Mother. Same with Billiard Player Song by Shellac. I worked at a used book & record store where the music mix had a bad remake of Don't Call Us, We'll Call You by Sugarloaf. Anyone else heard this?
Never heard of them, but Wikipedia points to a father-son duo singing a bunch of cheating tunes? Yikes. Just cancelled my trip to Branson.
It wasn't a thrill to have Paul Anka and Neil Sedaka (retreading) dominating the top 40 in the mid 70s, that was my youth passing away
Nope. They can do what they want. No one forces me to buy them or listen to them. Sometimes people complain when an artist release yet another "Greatest hits" album with mostly the same songs over and over. And if there's one new song, people complain even more. If an artist release a "greatest hits" album with re-recorded songs, some people still complain.
I remember a brother-in-law being heated when he bought The Best Of Kansas on CD and found some of the tracks were heavily re-mixed.
Bob Wills and Tommy Duncan recorded their output in stereo for Liberty in the early 1960's. Our Host used the tapes for a silver DCC (2-lps on one disc). So, yes, happy they did them in stereo, (same for Nat King Cole)
Is it still credited to Sugarloaf? There's no mention of them rerecording it in their Wikipedia bio. Maybe it was a lawsuit thing.
It annoys me when a remake of a favorite song—say, Sleepwalk by Santo and Johnny—turns up with a horrible budget-funeral-home organ added in. I’ll still take the original, baked-in distortion and all.
