MOJO Special Spolier

[The Shift]

Then I hope that Mark does NOT read this forum. Because by sheer logic, on can deduce that the box will never see the light of day, what with all us grumpy, complaining, obsessive 'to each his own' types. It's simply never right with us. If push came to shove, we'd be able to get all BBs stuff taken from the market altogether, for 'extended revision for ever'.

Well said Don. Mark's a pro and we should have the confidence in him to do his job without advice from our rabble. Once the release date is known, I'll be setting a couple of weeks aside in my diary for the purposes of pure, listening pleasure.

[The Heartical Don]

Then I hope that Mark does NOT read this forum. Because by sheer logic, on can deduce that the box will never see the light of day, what with all us grumpy, complaining, obsessive 'to each his own' types. It's simply never right with us. If push came to shove, we'd be able to get all BBs stuff taken from the market altogether, for 'extended revision for ever'.

Well said Don. Mark's a pro and we should have the confidence in him to do his job without advice from our rabble. Once the release date is known, I'll be setting a couple of weeks aside in my diary for the purposes of pure, listening pleasure.

That makes two of us then... headphones at the ready, a nice ale or wine on the side, and Brians 1991 autobiography for detailed consultation...

[Mike's Beard]

 

[Mahalo]

No one noticed that the lead, in fact the whole song, is also louder ?  It's a new mastering job, not a mix as is commonly understood. The 1993 box set version sounds lo-fi compared to this.

Do you mean a la H&V's 1st verse from Hawthorne? As to the Box set, everything sounds lo-fi on it....I hope the SSBS has the songs slightly louder without the leads being obnoxious as they drown out the backing tracks.

I cannot pass judgement on the Wonderful's yodelaa-ee-oo bvx but if they are anything close to the way they are on BWPS I will be pleased. Purple Chic and others never had the vox loud enough.

[guitarfool2002]

Like most everyone else I don't know and have no idea what was done in the mastering process of these tracks. What I do know, and what everyone who is even a bit of an audiophile will probably say, is the majority of modern mastering is too damn loud and overcompressed to allow for that. McCartney had a quote about Paperback Writer being the track where they wanted a Beatles single to be as loud and as present as the Motown singles they were hearing - and he and others were saying they were all going for maximum volume at that time so their songs would cut through on the radio and jukeboxes.

More volume also comes with certain frequencies being boosted, and someone hearing a track like Heroes mastered in 2011's standards might feel a different texture or hear certain bands come out more than on, say, a 1991 version of the same track. That's basic audio most of us already know and can demonstrate in our collections. More details and different textures are heard until you push the volume level into distortion, so a "hidden" guitar part might suddenly jump out due to the mastering.

What I want to know is - as someone who has never "mastered" a song professionally but who has hired professionals to master mixes and songs I've been involved with - what is the mindset behind the current mastering of the Smile catalog? Was it going for a 2011 standard of higher volume and more compression to reach that volume (extreme examples being Metallica, Californication, etc...), or was a 1967 sensibility considered for these tracks?

Meaning were these tracks boosted and EQ'ed to sound good on ear buds and iPods and small portable speakers, or were they thought of and was the mastering performed as they would have been mastered for a 1967 release?

I know it's esoteric and wonkish to a point, but at the same time I'd really like to hear what the mindset would be going into a monumental project such as the Smile box set knowing it will be held under a microscope when it does come out. Were the final mixes mastered by Mark Linett as well, or did they send them elsewhere?

[vintagemusic]

I'll be interested to hear what Starr and McCartney say about the SMiLE release in a few
months. I Know McCartney went to BWPS live in London.

Personally I think the Beatles could do more things, with three great writers, and a great
fit with their producer (Martin). However if this SMiLE release, on disc one approximates
a finished (nearly finished) SMiLE album.

I think it would be fair to say, that as great as the Beatles were, in 66-67 Pet Sounds and
SMiLE actually did surpass the Beatles. Tragically Brian Wilson thought he had failed, I think
that is one of the true,tragic ironies of the whole thing. I say that as a dyed in the wool true
Beatle fan, but fair is fair. Pet Sounds and SMiLE may be the best one, two punch in rock
history,At least arguably so.

[vintagemusic]

Oh God I posted this in the wrong thread. it was supposed to be in the John and George thread, can it be moved?

[pixletwin]

You can copy and paste it. 

[groganb]

Someone finally posted "Cabin Essence" from the single on youtube so us mere mortals can hear it (ahem).
http://youtu.be/8KntylDaudk
Boy, except for the surface noise—I think the infatuation with vinyl is anti-music myself—I've never heard this song sound more powerful. Great, great mix. In mono, this sounds like what I think BW had in mind all along: tender, spooky, ageless, and deep. It's also more complete-sounding as an arrangement than I've ever heard it before. I think they got the balances just right.
It's not the left side of the stereo mix. What a goofy idea, sorry. And If ya can't trust Mark and Alan, I just dunno what to say.

[groganb]

Someone finally posted "Cabin Essence" from the single on youtube so us mere mortals can hear it (ahem).
http://youtu.be/8KntylDaudk
Boy, except for the surface noise—I think the infatuation with vinyl is anti-music myself—I've never heard this song sound more powerful. Great, great mix. In mono, this sounds like what I think BW had in mind all along: tender, spooky, ageless, and deep. It's also more complete-sounding as an arrangement than I've ever heard it before. I think they got the balances just right.
It's not the left side of the stereo mix. What a goofy idea, sorry. If ya can't trust Mark and Alan, I just dunno what to say.

[?]

I think the infatuation with vinyl is anti-music myself

Ridiculous.

[runnersdialzero]

I think the infatuation with vinyl is anti-music myself

Ridiculous.

Vinyl infatuation? Naw. Vinyl snobbery? Yes.

imo.

[Andrew G. Doe]

It's not the left side of the stereo mix. What a goofy idea, sorry.

 

[monicker]

I think the infatuation with vinyl is anti-music myself

I agree. I've never understood how hi-fi enthusiasts justify surface noise (and sometimes low end rumble as is clearly heard in the two sides of this 45). I'd gladly sacrifice a little robustness in the low end and general "warmth" any day in favor of having no loud, distracting, unpleasant noise that was not in the original recording and not supposed to be there. And if you listen to mostly non pop stuff with much greater dynamic range (as i do) vinyl murders music recordings.

[homeontherange]

I haven't recieved my copy yet, and they haven't hit the magazine stores here in Sweden unfortunately.
Can anyone post a pic of the single? A large pic, preferably.

[The Heartical Don]

Since we're at it: the loudness mania is one of the most vile, evil, and misguided obsessions that I ever encountered in recorded music.

Why?

Let me take Bruce Springsteen as an example. In 1975, I purchased 'Born To Run' on LP. The sound was pretty muddy. A couple of tracks seemed to be in simple mono. Distortion here and there. I did not mind, because the basics for enjoying music were there, and perhaps the vinyl itself helped to make it sound good enough for me.

In 1978, I bought 'Darkness On The Edge Of Town'. A revolution seemed to have taken place at the Dutch CBS pressing plant. Up to that point, the prominent Dutch retailers always ran a special section of US pressings, because they tended to sound better (although they were on much thinner vinyl). But 'Darkness' sounded superb - perfect stereo, right channel separation, good low and top end, sibilants to die for.

Fast forward to 2009/10. I bought 'Magic'. I played it once. Can't listen to it. It's compressed, and mastered to maximum impact (for cheap listening devices, I guess). On a decent set, it sounds awful, unlistenable. What in God's name did producer Brendan O'Brien have in mind?

Unfortunately, TLOS by Brian Wilson has the same disadvantages, at least on the Euro pressing. I pray that the Smile Sessions won't have the same characteristics (and something tells me that they won't).

[JMZ]

I didn't buy the yellow vinyl cause me too I think that "the infatuation with vinyl is anti-music" .


But I heard what's on the youtube link and it sounds like a remix, not a mere "remastering". Less reverb on vocals in the begining, clearer "choir" vocals on choruses, more reverb on "over and over ..." at the end.

However, this is difficult to tell exaclty because the bad sound quality of the vinyl rip.

[buddhahat]

Then I hope that Mark does NOT read this forum. Because by sheer logic, on can deduce that the box will never see the light of day, what with all us grumpy, complaining, obsessive 'to each his own' types. It's simply never right with us. If push came to shove, we'd be able to get all BBs stuff taken from the market altogether, for 'extended revision for ever'.

Well said Don. Mark's a pro and we should have the confidence in him to do his job without advice from our rabble. Once the release date is known, I'll be setting a couple of weeks aside in my diary for the purposes of pure, listening pleasure.

I'm fortunate enough to lack the expertise to recognise all but the most glaringly obvious mistakes in the editing/mixing process. I think there's a lot to be said for not peeking behind the curtain at how these tracks are put together and just enjoying them at face value. Fair enough if that's your thing, and if it's your profession, then noticing editing/mixing mistakes is probably unavoidable.

For me, ignorance is bliss, and to maintain a high level of ignorance, when this is finally released, I'm seriously contemplating setting aside a couple of weeks to avoid all Smile related discussion boards where I know The Smile Sessions will be pinned out like a miserable lab frog!

[The Heartical Don]

Then I hope that Mark does NOT read this forum. Because by sheer logic, on can deduce that the box will never see the light of day, what with all us grumpy, complaining, obsessive 'to each his own' types. It's simply never right with us. If push came to shove, we'd be able to get all BBs stuff taken from the market altogether, for 'extended revision for ever'.

Well said Don. Mark's a pro and we should have the confidence in him to do his job without advice from our rabble. Once the release date is known, I'll be setting a couple of weeks aside in my diary for the purposes of pure, listening pleasure.

I'm fortunate enough to lack the expertise to recognise all but the most glaringly obvious mistakes in the editing/mixing process. I think there's a lot to be said for not peeking behind the curtain at how these tracks are put together and just enjoying them at face value. Fair enough if that's your thing, and if it's your profession, then noticing editing/mixing mistakes is probably unavoidable.

For me, ignorance is bliss, and to maintain a high level of ignorance, when this is finally released, I'm seriously contemplating setting aside a couple of weeks to avoid all Smile related discussion boards where I know The Smile Sessions will be pinned out like a miserable lab frog!

Agree. Before you know, you're a Hoffmanite...

[JMZ]

For me, ignorance is bliss, and to maintain a high level of ignorance, when this is finally released, I'm seriously contemplating setting aside a couple of weeks to avoid all Smile related discussion boards where I know The Smile Sessions will be pinned out like a miserable lab frog!

Some previous edits and mixes was kinda "crude" (especially on "Do You Like Worms", the "Heroes and Villains" single) because -as Mark Linett said in his interview- some things weren't possible then. But nowadays technology is exactly what needed for this kind of project and I bet edits will be smooth and seemless, and overall sound quality will be better than on the 93 versions.

[Andrew G. Doe]

In 1975, I purchased 'Born To Run' on LP. The sound was pretty muddy. A couple of tracks seemed to be in simple mono.

They are: "She's The One" is a mono track with truckloads of reverb, as is at least one other.

[The Heartical Don]

In 1975, I purchased 'Born To Run' on LP. The sound was pretty muddy. A couple of tracks seemed to be in simple mono.

They are: "She's The One" is a mono track with truckloads of reverb, as is at least one other.

I bet it's 'Night'. And/or 'Backstreets'.

[homeontherange]

I haven't recieved my copy yet, and they haven't hit the magazine stores here in Sweden unfortunately.
Can anyone post a pic of the single? A large pic, preferably.

No one? 

I've only seen small pics, and it looks incredible. Pretty much what I imagine when I listen to Cabinessence. A cabin in the beautiful mountains of California.

[Andrew G. Doe]

Here y'go:



Errr... shoulda took the 45 out first, right ?  

BTW, it's not a poor scan - the mountains are that blurry on the original sleeve.

Here's the original painting:

Log Cabin Retreat

[The Heartical Don]

Here y'go:



Errr... shoulda took the 45 out first, right ?  

BTW, it's not a poor scan - the mountains are that blurry on the original.

It's lovely - true to the spirit of Smile. Thank you AGD!

(should I purchase it, after some reconsidering?)