14 Beach Boys albums coming to vinyl/SACD

[sea of tunes]

Interesting comment from Steve Hoffman himself, over at the Hoffman forums:

"I hope they have a really good line producer for these, a real expert. Kevin Gray is a world-class mastering maven but research is not his strong point (nor should it be, he's an engineer). If it's just Chad and Kevin with no producer in the middle, it's going to be very iffy. Why? I'll tell you:

I remember those mono BB tapes are very tricky. Some of the good stuff isn't on the LP reels but reassembled on to various phono single reels, EP reels, Greatest Hits comp tapes, etc. The LP reels have MANY inferior versions of some of the songs, really crappy sounding, phase problems, muffled, just bad replacement dubs to take the place of the correct versions moved to other reels. It will take a really good detective to find all of the correct versions of every song and to reassemble correctly. On the Nat Cole's I worked on it took YEARS to find every correct version of every song.

I hope they have someone who knows their stuff.. "

With Alan Boyd this should all be documented and not a problem. If ever there is a time to be able find the correct tapes and reels, it is now. Hoffman really shows his disdain for Mark's work. He is always gently knocking his work. If you read on, I told him to ask his buddy Kevin about it. He should have done that before posting what he did.

Also, he tried to incite a riot on there by trying to claim that the mono tapes were being remixed due to some wording on the Acoustic Sounds advertisement.

I love and treasure the DCC Pet Sounds, Endless Summer and Spirit Of America but I'm still lucid enough to know that his comments are born out of some sort of odd insecurity.  Not sure how else to characterize it.

When the Acoustic Sounds releases were announced, I got very excited and still very much am.  The idea of having someone of Kevin Gray's ilk capturing (for vinyl/sacd/dsd) these timeless masters is really a dream come true.  

That's no slam on any of the other BB releases in circulation.  I'm a big fan of Mark's work on The Smile Sessions and Made In California, particularly the latter.  I would normally be one of those people that would be inclined to dislike digital mastering on principle.  However, after actually HEARING them and experiencing them first hand, I think he and Boyd did a bang-up job.  I try not to get too nerdy about this stuff but I have a Dynamic Range applet that I use on my Mac and quite a few of the tracks from Made In California are DR10 or better.

The vinyls aren't of much interest to me, primarily because I don't own a turntable and have no plans in the future to own one.  The cramped nature of home life and small children are a toxic mix for a record collection.  And I'm kind of anal retentive.  I would almost need my own personal office space to be completely 100% OCD free and own vinyl.  

[sea of tunes]

Interesting comment from Steve Hoffman himself, over at the Hoffman forums:

"I hope they have a really good line producer for these, a real expert. Kevin Gray is a world-class mastering maven but research is not his strong point (nor should it be, he's an engineer). If it's just Chad and Kevin with no producer in the middle, it's going to be very iffy. Why? I'll tell you:

I remember those mono BB tapes are very tricky. Some of the good stuff isn't on the LP reels but reassembled on to various phono single reels, EP reels, Greatest Hits comp tapes, etc. The LP reels have MANY inferior versions of some of the songs, really crappy sounding, phase problems, muffled, just bad replacement dubs to take the place of the correct versions moved to other reels. It will take a really good detective to find all of the correct versions of every song and to reassemble correctly. On the Nat Cole's I worked on it took YEARS to find every correct version of every song.

I hope they have someone who knows their stuff.. "

With Alan Boyd this should all be documented and not a problem. If ever there is a time to be able find the correct tapes and reels, it is now. Hoffman really shows his disdain for Mark's work. He is always gently knocking his work. If you read on, I told him to ask his buddy Kevin about it. He should have done that before posting what he did.

Also, he tried to incite a riot on there by trying to claim that the mono tapes were being remixed due to some wording on the Acoustic Sounds advertisement.

IMO, He was more  questioning the blurb wording of "mono mixes supervised by Brian Wilson" as opposed to stirring things up. It's a fair question to seek clarity on exactly what sources are being used, and one I had myself on reading the A/S copy.

That particular detail, about which mono mixes will be used is of special interest to me.  Without rehashing everything posted on the Hoffman board, as I have mentioned there, it's dissapointing knowing that some of the "mono" mixes on certain releases of Pet Sounds and more recently other titles (Today and Summer Days, for example) have been partially or completely remixed from multitracks.

There was a video floating around on Vimeo, taken by some advertising company (I think?) filming Kevin Gray actually doing the transfer of the mono Surfer Girl for this project.  It looked as though he was doing a straight transfer and he mentioned some tweaks being down during mastering.  But no mention of remixing was made, which is welcome news.

It's Acoustic Sounds track record and attention to detail that I think will most likely be the selling points here.  I don't think they would go through all of the trouble of doing this and then use mono 'remixes'.  Although, they do mention up front that some of the stereo mixes contain newly created 'remixes'.  Probably the same one's found on more recent Beach Boys releases.

[drbeachboy]

Interesting comment from Steve Hoffman himself, over at the Hoffman forums:

"I hope they have a really good line producer for these, a real expert. Kevin Gray is a world-class mastering maven but research is not his strong point (nor should it be, he's an engineer). If it's just Chad and Kevin with no producer in the middle, it's going to be very iffy. Why? I'll tell you:

I remember those mono BB tapes are very tricky. Some of the good stuff isn't on the LP reels but reassembled on to various phono single reels, EP reels, Greatest Hits comp tapes, etc. The LP reels have MANY inferior versions of some of the songs, really crappy sounding, phase problems, muffled, just bad replacement dubs to take the place of the correct versions moved to other reels. It will take a really good detective to find all of the correct versions of every song and to reassemble correctly. On the Nat Cole's I worked on it took YEARS to find every correct version of every song.

I hope they have someone who knows their stuff.. "

With Alan Boyd this should all be documented and not a problem. If ever there is a time to be able find the correct tapes and reels, it is now. Hoffman really shows his disdain for Mark's work. He is always gently knocking his work. If you read on, I told him to ask his buddy Kevin about it. He should have done that before posting what he did.

Also, he tried to incite a riot on there by trying to claim that the mono tapes were being remixed due to some wording on the Acoustic Sounds advertisement.

IMO, He was more  questioning the blurb wording of "mono mixes supervised by Brian Wilson" as opposed to stirring things up. It's a fair question to seek clarity on exactly what sources are being used, and one I had myself on reading the A/S copy.

He knows both Mark & Kevin and should asked before he posted that. It did get a rise.

[Jesse Reiswig]

I have to say, I am very excited for these releases. It's quite unfortunate that Wild Honey, Friends, and 20/20 aren't included, though I can understand the business sense behind that.

But, given Acoustic Sounds' reputation (I was just reading amazing reviews of their transfer and new release of Duke Ellington's 1951 Masterpieces album, for instance), these hold promise of finally representing these records the way they're supposed to sound. I'll wait to see Stephen Desper's response, but I hope they will manage to capture, for instance, more of the original intended sound of Sunflower .

COMMENT: No one has contacted me. "The original intended sound," as you call it will not be provided in these new releases. You will hear it soon with the release of the next study-video.  As to representing analog recordings by using digital methods still remains an incomplete story. They don't call it sampling for nothing. It is just that. A sample of the complete waveform. IT'S A SNAPSHOT of a slice of time.  It is not complete. The computer makes up (guesses) what goes in between the sampled slices of time. Why bother?  Just listen to the original LP. That has the complete sound story -- no sampled segments -- no computer guessing -- and the original Sunflower LP was Mastered and Approved by Carl Wilson. Why depend on someone who never met or worked with the man himself. Why go backward? You're going in the wrong direction if you want to stay with the original. The wrong direction is to re-do everything. The original mixing and mastering is there for the playing on the LP issue. Any other attempt to "improve" on the original is just so much floobydust.  You are not going to improve over Carl Wilson. Sorry, that's just the way it is. Don't remove Carl from the production. That IS a step backward! If you want original sound, it was issued in 1970 by Brother Records on Warner Brother's Record # RS-6832. It contains complete waveforms, is totally a Beach Boy production, and if you think the LP record comes up short on sound, you are wrong. The LP is quite capable of containing all (ALL) of the sound from any Master Analog Tape. It does not add noise, distortion or limitation to the signal on the master tape. The real listening experience, that is the one that sounds most musical, is the LP. Going back and re-doing what Carl did in Mixing and Mastering is a slap in the face. Nothing has improved in professional audio that much to warrant replacing the original artist and his intentions with a counterfeit rendition. If you are a collector, they've got your number and will keep issuing bogus "original" and so-called "improved" copies. I suppose the fake remakes do have some collector value, but their value is in the eye of the collector, not in the ear of the audiophile. If you really want the real thing, so far the original LP is the pot of gold at the end of the Sunflower rainbow. ~swd

I absolutely hear you. And thank you so much for offering your take on things. It's so great having you here as a presence. The only thing I don't quite agree with is the idea that a company like Analog Productions/Acoustic Sounds is trying to produce "fake remakes." I think their stated goal is to transfer the sound of master tapes (like the one that you and Carl created) as faithfully as possible to vinyl and SACD, and make a good-sounding record available to larger numbers of people than can find copies of the original LP in near-mint condition. And I take them at face value in that stated goal. And yes, they're a business, and so they make occasionally dubious or arguable marketing claims like "the best these recordings have ever sounded." But the main point is they're trying to fill a legitimate need that does music listeners a great amount of good while simultaneously having a sustainable business. I would never claim these reproduce the originals fully. But perhaps they at least get closer and are very excellent in the process.

And I agree with you also in that I wish more vinyl reissues didn't involve any digital links in the chain. I believe Analog Productions does usually use only analog sources when preparing vinyl reissues. Can anyone confirm whether this is true and will be true for these issues?

[Micha]

Interesting comment from Steve Hoffman himself, over at the Hoffman forums: "I remember those mono BB tapes are very tricky. Some of the good stuff isn't on the LP reels but reassembled on to various phono single reels, EP reels, Greatest Hits comp tapes, etc. The LP reels have MANY inferior versions of some of the songs, really crappy sounding, phase problems, muffled, just bad replacement dubs to take the place of the correct versions moved to other reels. It will take a really good detective to find all of the correct versions of every song and to reassemble correctly. On the Nat Cole's I worked on it took YEARS to find every correct version of every song.."

Given the fact there were really good sounding CDs with the mono mixes issued two years ago, I'd think all original mixes were found, unless...

Without rehashing everything posted on the Hoffman board, as I have mentioned there, it's dissapointing knowing that some of the "mono" mixes on certain releases of Pet Sounds and more recently other titles (Today and Summer Days, for example) have been partially or completely remixed from multitracks.

No kidding?!? Which ones?

[Sangheon]

Without rehashing everything posted on the Hoffman board, as I have mentioned there, it's dissapointing knowing that some of the "mono" mixes on certain releases of Pet Sounds and more recently other titles (Today and Summer Days, for example) have been partially or completely remixed from multitracks.

No kidding?!? Which ones?
[/quote]

The intro of Wouldn't it be Nice, You Still Believe in Me, I'm Waiting for the Day on 2012 remastered CD

[sea of tunes]

Interesting comment from Steve Hoffman himself, over at the Hoffman forums: "I remember those mono BB tapes are very tricky. Some of the good stuff isn't on the LP reels but reassembled on to various phono single reels, EP reels, Greatest Hits comp tapes, etc. The LP reels have MANY inferior versions of some of the songs, really crappy sounding, phase problems, muffled, just bad replacement dubs to take the place of the correct versions moved to other reels. It will take a really good detective to find all of the correct versions of every song and to reassemble correctly. On the Nat Cole's I worked on it took YEARS to find every correct version of every song.."

Given the fact there were really good sounding CDs with the mono mixes issued two years ago, I'd think all original mixes were found, unless...

Without rehashing everything posted on the Hoffman board, as I have mentioned there, it's dissapointing knowing that some of the "mono" mixes on certain releases of Pet Sounds and more recently other titles (Today and Summer Days, for example) have been partially or completely remixed from multitracks.

No kidding?!? Which ones?

Listen to the intros of the mono "Wouldn't It Be Nice", "God Only Knows" from the 1990 Capitol Pet Sounds, 2006 40th Anniversary Capitol Pet Sounds & the 2012 Capitol Pet Sounds – all are very clean with almost no tape hiss, etc.  It would appear that the multitracks were used to remix intros to these songs.

"Please Let Me Wonder" from Today! and "California Girls" from Summer Days on the 2012 remasters also have this.  "Please Let Me Wonder" sounds like a complete mono remix, to my ears.  When compared to other releases.

Please understand, I'm not condemning the practice, per se.  I just prefer the original without the revisionism.  I'm not so ardent when it comes to the stereo versions. 

[Micha]

Listen to the intros of the mono "Wouldn't It Be Nice", "God Only Knows" from the 1990 Capitol Pet Sounds, 2006 40th Anniversary Capitol Pet Sounds & the 2012 Capitol Pet Sounds – all are very clean with almost no tape hiss, etc.  It would appear that the multitracks were used to remix intros to these songs.

Umm... I'm not sure I get this right. You're saying even on the 1990 version those intros had already been remixed?

[Jesse Reiswig]

Dear Stephen Desper,

I thought I should tell you that I heard your words and decided to go on ebay and find a good-quality original from a reliable vendor. And I found one quite easily, actually.

I look forward to hearing it. And I look forward to being able to compare the differences between it and the upcoming reissue and thereby learn more. Thank you for steering me in the right direction!

[sea of tunes]

Listen to the intros of the mono "Wouldn't It Be Nice", "God Only Knows" from the 1990 Capitol Pet Sounds, 2006 40th Anniversary Capitol Pet Sounds & the 2012 Capitol Pet Sounds – all are very clean with almost no tape hiss, etc.  It would appear that the multitracks were used to remix intros to these songs.

Umm... I'm not sure I get this right. You're saying even on the 1990 version those intros had already been remixed?

Yep.

[Stephen W. Desper]

I would never claim these reproduce the originals fully. But perhaps they at least get closer and are very excellent in the process.

And I agree with you also in that I wish more vinyl reissues didn't involve any digital links in the chain. I believe Analog Productions does usually use only analog sources when preparing vinyl reissues. Can anyone confirm whether this is true and will be true for these issues?

COMMENT:  As a sound engineer and as an audiophile, I have heard the best of the best representations available from both digital and analog storage means. To my ears analog wins every time. Mostly because of its ability to present a musically satisfying playback.

In this response I am addressing issues with the songs and albums I've mastered.  Everything up to Holland was created in a world of analog with mass distribution being the LP vinyl record. In those days, digital was just a laboratory curiosity.

When each song’s Master Two-Track tape is completed, it joins other mixdown Master tapes, by way of splicing, and becomes the Album Master Tape. Since this tape contains mixdowns that were done over several weeks or months, you can expect the overall sonic signature of each song along with its levels to be mis-matched with respect to the other mixes. There are also changes that are required of the producer to be made “after the fact” or after the final mix is finished. These changes are executed at the time of mastering and represent subtle, but still significant modifications done to the sound of the master tape. In the case of Sunflower there were around fifty modifications to EQ, levels, limiting, and filter application done at the time of mastering. These changes are approved by the producer and usually physically done by the mastering engineer. The changes are noted so that they can be repeated if required. However, if the mastering house used to make the LP goes out-of-business or changes the equipment it used when the notations were made – it all becomes meaningless. I know Artisan is no longer in business so that means the notations are undoubtedly lost. In anticipation of this and for practical reasons a Master LP tape is always made. The Master LP tape is used to make additional mother discs that are used to make stampers. In my collection I have first pressings of the LP. These are made from the first mother disc cut directly from the mastering house console. At the same time a Master LP tape is made. It is one generation removed from the first mother disc. The Master LP tape is used to make additional mother discs and also it is sent (or a copy of this tape is sent) to pressing plants overseas or in New York City. Thus the LP Master tape is actually the final finish of all production.

The LP Master tape is the final sound that is approved by the producer and/or mixing engineer. But remember, this tape is made for the analog LP medium. When the digital CD came into vogue, most record companies preferred to go back before the LP Master tape, which was flavored to sound best over a vinyl record, and re-do the mastering so that it sounded better over a CD. There was so much re-mastering being done that many albums were given little attention to details.

Then complete digital recordings were being made, that is, recorded in digital and released in digital (DDD). When the analog CD’s (AAD) or (ADD) were compared to the all digital offerings, the analog sounded dull. This was not because they lacked top-end, but because the general public developed an appetite for sizzling top-end sound that is a characteristic of digital sonics. That is why digital seems to sound clearer, while at the same time less musical and fatiguing to listen to over a long period. It is also why so many re-issues of analog over CD have added treble and excessive top-end EQ.

Now we come to today and the re-making of the LP. Acoustic Sounds isn’t the only pressing plant to make these records. They were re-pressed by Warner Brothers and by Capitol Records many times using The Master LP tape or a copy thereof. My beef with these re-pressings of today is that they are not made from the Master LP, thus preserving the entire original intensions of the producer – rather they are re-mastered and therefore DO NOT preserve or mimic any of the instructions and guide lines of the producer. In fact the new mastering engineer takes on the roll of producer and just eliminates the original intent of the artist by substituting their own ideas about the production.

Sometimes you hear that albums must be re-mastered because of improved equipment or techniques. In the case of the LP, it’s still the same RIAA specifications we use today that were in force back in 1970. It’s the same vinyl material, sometimes with more weight – which has nothing to do with the sound. The cutting head improvements are very slight. So why not use the original LP Master tape, mastered by the original artist/producer? And don’t tell me they can’t be found. There are professional copies in several places – I even have a copy.

Another issue to address is the actual physical location of the mastering house and pressing plant. These should be close together to prevent unnecessary deterioration of the matrix mother before it is plated. (After about 18 hours it begins to loose groove detail.) In the case of Beach Boy Master analog tapes, these are stored in Los Angeles, CA. I have never known of Capitol or Warners to let their master tapes venture very far from LA. Copies, yes. The original, never. So if you are located in Kansas (like Acoustic Sounds) and you wish to make an LP run, you either get a copy of the analog tape (one generation down) or you get a high resolution digital copy, or you stay in LA and use a pressing plant located there (which I doubt). Now if they used the LP Master tape, which could be sent to Kansas, then there would be no need to re-master, would there?  So since they are re-mastering, they are doing so from a copy of the Master Tape in some form and they are loosing all the changes that Carl wanted.

This is progress?  This is better?  This is an improvement?

What it is, is business – the music business. If there’s money to be made through re-issues, re-packaging, re-arranging titles, or re-mastering – it will be done. Doesn’t matter if it is true to the original, or steps all over the artist, as long as there is a market out there and a market place to sell the product, the whole idea is to make a buck. Myself and I’m certain you too have no problem with people making money, I just hate to see original art replaced with different art and sold as some sort of improved art.

~swd 

[Stephen W. Desper]

Dear Stephen Desper,

I thought I should tell you that I heard your words and decided to go on ebay and find a good-quality original from a reliable vendor. And I found one quite easily, actually.

I look forward to hearing it. And I look forward to being able to compare the differences between it and the upcoming reissue and thereby learn more. Thank you for steering me in the right direction!

COMMENT:  Good Move. When you get your LP, look within the lead-out grooves and see if the Artisan logo is visible. It's a circle with an "A" combined. If you see that logo, then you have an original pressing from the original mastering house. If you don't see the Artisan logo, then you have a pressing made sometime after the original offering, or a re-issued or second pressing, or third pressing. Should be the same as the original, just a generation down. If you have a VIP or similar record cleaning machine, you can bring the LP back to its initial finish and reduce or eliminate most pop and crack that a used LP will have accumulated.

Good Listening, ~Stephen W. Desper

[sea of tunes]

[size]
Another issue to address is the actual physical location of the mastering house and pressing plant. These should be close together to prevent unnecessary deterioration of the matrix mother before it is plated. (After about 18 hours it begins to loose groove detail.) In the case of Beach Boy Master analog tapes, these are stored in Los Angeles, CA. I have never known of Capitol or Warners to let their master tapes venture very far from LA. Copies, yes. The original, never. So if you are located in Kansas (like Acoustic Sounds) and you wish to make an LP run, you either get a copy of the analog tape (one generation down) or you get a high resolution digital copy, or you stay in LA and use a pressing plant located there (which I doubt). Now if they used the LP Master tape, which could be sent to Kansas, then there would be no need to re-master, would there?  So since they are re-mastering, they are doing so from a copy of the Master Tape in some form and they are loosing all the changes that Carl wanted.
[/size]
~swd 

To be fair though, these were mastered by Kevin Gray at Cohearent Audio, in Los Angeles.

http://www.cohearent.com/

The listings on the AcousticSounds site has the following tag: "Mastered by Kevin Gray at Cohearent Audio, most from the original master tapes or best sources available", FWIW.

By the way – your "alternate mix" of "'Til I Die" is one of the highlights of the entire catalog, in this man's opinion.

[Micha]

By the way – your "alternate mix" of "'Til I Die" is one of the highlights of the entire catalog, in this man's opinion.

Mr. Despers "alternate mix" is the one that really made me appreciate that recording. There's so much more emotion in that mix than in the mix on the Surf's Up album.

[Jesse Reiswig]

I would never claim these reproduce the originals fully. But perhaps they at least get closer and are very excellent in the process.

And I agree with you also in that I wish more vinyl reissues didn't involve any digital links in the chain. I believe Analog Productions does usually use only analog sources when preparing vinyl reissues. Can anyone confirm whether this is true and will be true for these issues?

COMMENT:  As a sound engineer and as an audiophile, I have heard the best of the best representations available from both digital and analog storage means. To my ears analog wins every time. Mostly because of its ability to present a musically satisfying playback.

In this response I am addressing issues with the songs and albums I've mastered.  Everything up to Holland was created in a world of analog with mass distribution being the LP vinyl record. In those days, digital was just a laboratory curiosity.

When each song’s Master Two-Track tape is completed, it joins other mixdown Master tapes, by way of splicing, and becomes the Album Master Tape. Since this tape contains mixdowns that were done over several weeks or months, you can expect the overall sonic signature of each song along with its levels to be mis-matched with respect to the other mixes. There are also changes that are required of the producer to be made “after the fact” or after the final mix is finished. These changes are executed at the time of mastering and represent subtle, but still significant modifications done to the sound of the master tape. In the case of Sunflower there were around fifty modifications to EQ, levels, limiting, and filter application done at the time of mastering. These changes are approved by the producer and usually physically done by the mastering engineer. The changes are noted so that they can be repeated if required. However, if the mastering house used to make the LP goes out-of-business or changes the equipment it used when the notations were made – it all becomes meaningless. I know Artisan is no longer in business so that means the notations are undoubtedly lost. In anticipation of this and for practical reasons a Master LP tape is always made. The Master LP tape is used to make additional mother discs that are used to make stampers. In my collection I have first pressings of the LP. These are made from the first mother disc cut directly from the mastering house console. At the same time a Master LP tape is made. It is one generation removed from the first mother disc. The Master LP tape is used to make additional mother discs and also it is sent (or a copy of this tape is sent) to pressing plants overseas or in New York City. Thus the LP Master tape is actually the final finish of all production.

The LP Master tape is the final sound that is approved by the producer and/or mixing engineer. But remember, this tape is made for the analog LP medium. When the digital CD came into vogue, most record companies preferred to go back before the LP Master tape, which was flavored to sound best over a vinyl record, and re-do the mastering so that it sounded better over a CD. There was so much re-mastering being done that many albums were given little attention to details.

Then complete digital recordings were being made, that is, recorded in digital and released in digital (DDD). When the analog CD’s (AAD) or (ADD) were compared to the all digital offerings, the analog sounded dull. This was not because they lacked top-end, but because the general public developed an appetite for sizzling top-end sound that is a characteristic of digital sonics. That is why digital seems to sound clearer, while at the same time less musical and fatiguing to listen to over a long period. It is also why so many re-issues of analog over CD have added treble and excessive top-end EQ.

Now we come to today and the re-making of the LP. Acoustic Sounds isn’t the only pressing plant to make these records. They were re-pressed by Warner Brothers and by Capitol Records many times using The Master LP tape or a copy thereof. My beef with these re-pressings of today is that they are not made from the Master LP, thus preserving the entire original intensions of the producer – rather they are re-mastered and therefore DO NOT preserve or mimic any of the instructions and guide lines of the producer. In fact the new mastering engineer takes on the roll of producer and just eliminates the original intent of the artist by substituting their own ideas about the production.

Sometimes you hear that albums must be re-mastered because of improved equipment or techniques. In the case of the LP, it’s still the same RIAA specifications we use today that were in force back in 1970. It’s the same vinyl material, sometimes with more weight – which has nothing to do with the sound. The cutting head improvements are very slight. So why not use the original LP Master tape, mastered by the original artist/producer? And don’t tell me they can’t be found. There are professional copies in several places – I even have a copy.

Another issue to address is the actual physical location of the mastering house and pressing plant. These should be close together to prevent unnecessary deterioration of the matrix mother before it is plated. (After about 18 hours it begins to loose groove detail.) In the case of Beach Boy Master analog tapes, these are stored in Los Angeles, CA. I have never known of Capitol or Warners to let their master tapes venture very far from LA. Copies, yes. The original, never. So if you are located in Kansas (like Acoustic Sounds) and you wish to make an LP run, you either get a copy of the analog tape (one generation down) or you get a high resolution digital copy, or you stay in LA and use a pressing plant located there (which I doubt). Now if they used the LP Master tape, which could be sent to Kansas, then there would be no need to re-master, would there?  So since they are re-mastering, they are doing so from a copy of the Master Tape in some form and they are loosing all the changes that Carl wanted.

This is progress?  This is better?  This is an improvement?

What it is, is business – the music business. If there’s money to be made through re-issues, re-packaging, re-arranging titles, or re-mastering – it will be done. Doesn’t matter if it is true to the original, or steps all over the artist, as long as there is a market out there and a market place to sell the product, the whole idea is to make a buck. Myself and I’m certain you too have no problem with people making money, I just hate to see original art replaced with different art and sold as some sort of improved art.

~swd 

Thank you so much for this analysis and the contribution of your knowledge. I am grateful to have more information and improve my understanding of how this works. There was one listing that specifically mentioned Artisan, but I don't think it was the one I bought, and now I can't find it anymore! Darn. There's also a DJ promo version being sold. Would that be a worthwhile purchase?

[Stephen W. Desper]

[size]
Another issue to address is the actual physical location of the mastering house and pressing plant. These should be close together to prevent unnecessary deterioration of the matrix mother before it is plated. (After about 18 hours it begins to loose groove detail.) In the case of Beach Boy Master analog tapes, these are stored in Los Angeles, CA. I have never known of Capitol or Warners to let their master tapes venture very far from LA. Copies, yes. The original, never. So if you are located in Kansas (like Acoustic Sounds) and you wish to make an LP run, you either get a copy of the analog tape (one generation down) or you get a high resolution digital copy, or you stay in LA and use a pressing plant located there (which I doubt). Now if they used the LP Master tape, which could be sent to Kansas, then there would be no need to re-master, would there?  So since they are re-mastering, they are doing so from a copy of the Master Tape in some form and they are loosing all the changes that Carl wanted.
[/size]
~swd  

To be fair though, these were mastered by Kevin Gray at Cohearent Audio, in Los Angeles.

http://www.cohearent.com/

The listings on the AcousticSounds site has the following tag: "Mastered by Kevin Gray at Cohearent Audio, most from the original master tapes or best sources available", FWIW.

By the way – your "alternate mix" of "'Til I Die" is one of the highlights of the entire catalog, in this man's opinion.

COMMENT:  Thanks on TID.  AcousticSounds uses the same analog equipment that was originally used. A Studer:Neumann mix. The pressing plant is undoubtedly somewhere nearby in the city. For some of the songs and albums he's re-issuing, some may have LP tapes. Whether they elect to go with the original or not is Engineer Gray's decision. He becomes the producer at this point. If I recall, Gray was just starting at Artisan when we were mastering there with Bob McCloud. Obviously AcousticSounds feels there is a market out there for product if done with the care and perfection to which Kevin will give it. I tend to agree with them, but too bad to not, once again, explore the matrix.  ~swd

[Stephen W. Desper]

 

 There was one listing that specifically mentioned Artisan, but I don't think it was the one I bought, and now I can't find it anymore! Darn. There's also a DJ promo version being sold. Would that be a worthwhile purchase?

COMMENT:  There were several runs of Sunflower done over the years. After the Artisan versions came pressings from Capitol Pressing Plant (under Warner contract) being one generation down.  DJ promos are usually end runs or pressings near the limit of the stamper's life that may not be considered for sale. Not good enough for the public, but good enough for a sample to a DJ. The envelope or jacket will have a hole punched into the corner.

~swd

 

[Jesse Reiswig]

 

 There was one listing that specifically mentioned Artisan, but I don't think it was the one I bought, and now I can't find it anymore! Darn. There's also a DJ promo version being sold. Would that be a worthwhile purchase?

COMMENT:  There were several runs of Sunflower done over the years. After the Artisan versions came pressings from Capitol Pressing Plant (under Warner contract) being one generation down.  DJ promos are usually end runs or pressings near the limit of the stamper's life that may not be considered for sale. Not good enough for the public, but good enough for a sample to a DJ. The envelope or jacket will have a hole punched into the corner.

~swd

Thank you!

[lee]

Thank you for all of your input Mr. Desper. I checked out my copy of Sunflower and it is indeed an Artisan copy. It's not in mint shape but it does sound fantastic.

[Bicyclerider]

I appreciate all of Stephen's comments, and there is certainly validity to urging everyone to hear Sunflower or Surf's Up as Carl intended, mastered for LP.  However, LP's, although gaining in popularity in recent years, are very much a niche market, unlike in the 60s and 70s.  Digital is how most people buy and hear music.  Shouldn't these people get a chance to hear and appreciate the music of the Beach Boys?

So let's say it's perfectly OK, for the legacy of the Beach Boys and the musical enjoyment of music fans who only listen to digital, to master these LP's for CD.  The LP masters are as Stephen has pointed out made for the analogue LP medium and so the original master tape has to have modifications made to it to fit that medium.  Dynamic range has to be limited, and bass response limited so as to prevent the needle from jumping off the record.  As Stephen said, many other modifications  - sound levels of the tracks changed so as to have some consistency of sound, etc. - may be made.  But many of these changes such as DR and bass response are unnecessary in the digital medium.  They are compromises in the sound necessary for analogue but not digital reproduction.

That is why digital mastering engineers want to go to the original master, not the LP source tape.  They can remove or avoid some of those compromises that were made, and get closer to the original master which is ultimately what most artists have heard as the end result of their labor in the studio and approved.  If there are engineering/mastering notes still in existence, the digital engineer can reproduce the modifications of the original producer that were made for artistic reasons rather than just the limitations of the LP medium.  Without them, they are left to make their own decisions, hopefully guided by the original LP pressing of the album, as Steve Hoffman and I'm sure most good engineers would do.

This is why the mastering engineer is so important in determining the sound of all the digital releases and rereleases of the classic albums from the 60s and the 70s.  Do they add additional compression to make the digital files sound more lively and attention grabbing in mp3 form or on your ipod or phone, both with very poor D/A converters?  Do they boost the treble to give it more excitement, but which tortures your ears after five minutes of listening?  Do they boost the bass to a ridiculous level for those into beat boxing and Dr. Dre Beats headphones?  All of these obviously would change the sound from the original LP for the worse!  But other engineers would avoid all those mistakes and try to keep the sound true to the master tape and to the LP.  Kevin Gray and Steve Hoffman are two of the "good guys" who are concerned with the sound of the final product both sounding good and also sounding faithful to the orignal source tapes.

[Alan Smith]

Kevin Gray might be, but I think the Hoff tends towards projects that are to the greater benefit of his Hoffness; imo

Anyway, again a fascinating discussion about Sunflower, thanks to all who chipped in, more great info was revealed - if only I had one of those darn adaptor devices that Desper had on offer in days of old! Nuts.

[Stephen W. Desper]

I appreciate all of Stephen's comments, and there is certainly validity to urging everyone to hear Sunflower or Surf's Up as Carl intended, mastered for LP.  However, LP's, although gaining in popularity in recent years, are very much a niche market, unlike in the 60s and 70s.  Digital is how most people buy and hear music.  Shouldn't these people get a chance to hear and appreciate the music of the Beach Boys?

So let's say it's perfectly OK, for the legacy of the Beach Boys and the musical enjoyment of music fans who only listen to digital, to master these LP's for CD.  The LP masters are as Stephen has pointed out made for the analogue LP medium and so the original master tape has to have modifications made to it to fit that medium.  Dynamic range has to be limited, and bass response limited so as to prevent the needle from jumping off the record.  As Stephen said, many other modifications  - sound levels of the tracks changed so as to have some consistency of sound, etc. - may be made.  But many of these changes such as DR and bass response are unnecessary in the digital medium.  They are compromises in the sound necessary for analogue but not digital reproduction.

That is why digital mastering engineers want to go to the original master, not the LP source tape.  They can remove or avoid some of those compromises that were made, and get closer to the original master which is ultimately what most artists have heard as the end result of their labor in the studio and approved.  If there are engineering/mastering notes still in existence, the digital engineer can reproduce the modifications of the original producer that were made for artistic reasons rather than just the limitations of the LP medium.  Without them, they are left to make their own decisions, hopefully guided by the original LP pressing of the album, as Steve Hoffman and I'm sure most good engineers would do.

This is why the mastering engineer is so important in determining the sound of all the digital releases and rereleases of the classic albums from the 60s and the 70s.  Do they add additional compression to make the digital files sound more lively and attention grabbing in mp3 form or on your ipod or phone, both with very poor D/A converters?  Do they boost the treble to give it more excitement, but which tortures your ears after five minutes of listening?  Do they boost the bass to a ridiculous level for those into beat boxing and Dr. Dre Beats headphones?  All of these obviously would change the sound from the original LP for the worse!  But other engineers would avoid all those mistakes and try to keep the sound true to the master tape and to the LP.  Kevin Gray and Steve Hoffman are two of the "good guys" who are concerned with the sound of the final product both sounding good and also sounding faithful to the orignal source tapes.

COMMENT

Thank you Bicyclerider for your observation.

However, LP's, although gaining in popularity in recent years, are very much a niche market, unlike in the 60s and 70s.  Digital is how most people buy and hear music. We certainly live in a digital world so the point you make that music of the analog era must be made available through the digital medium to the masses, is quite true. LPs are enjoying a resurgence in popularity (vinyl records are the fastest growing medium of music storage today) and a reemergence as the best musical sounding medium of music storage yet invented. That re-discovery of sonic purity comes as a relief from the digital sampling we have listened to for over two decades now. Of course digital is here to stay. It’s convenient, sounds good over 98% of the playback devices we all use, and copies do not deteriorate. It can also be edited and manipulated beyond anything that can be done in the analog element. So why the return to analog?

This interest in the LP is mainly from the audiophile market, where the average system cost is over $10,000, which gives the listener a system resolution capable of revealing the most subtle nature of sound. What the audiophile hears is what’s missing from digital and what is provided by analog. You can hear the computer’s idea of what should go into the spaces between samples. And whatever you call that missing data or made-up data does not matter, if you recognize upon hearing the analog, that you have been fooled into believing that digital was better. If you are spending $50,000 on a two-channel playback system you want the best sounding source you can find. Hence these people, these audiophiles, have created a new market for the vinyl LP, only because playback systems are now that good (if you have the money).

You ask,   Shouldn't these people get a chance to hear and appreciate the music of the Beach Boys? You say that as if only the LP was the means to hear the Beach Boys. And of course, most fans today have ONLY heard the Beach Boys via some sort of digital medium. And that’s the point. If everyone is that gung-ho on returning to the days of analog sound, then it will be necessary for them to invest in a sound system that will be good enough to appreciate the wonderful reproduction only available from an analog source. Otherwise, most people will be spinning CD’s and quite happy for them.

The LP masters are as Stephen has pointed out made for the analogue LP medium and so the original master tape has to have modifications made to it to fit that medium. If I gave that impression, let me clarify. The professional master tape running at 15 IPS or 30 IPS has a dynamic range of 70db. An LP’s dynamic range is 75db. A CD’s is 93db. Clearly both the LP and the CD can contain the dynamic range capacity of the profession master tape. The professional tape has a frequency range of 20-50,000 Hz. The LP’s range is from 25-25,000 Hz. The CD goes from 0-20,000 Hz and the DVD extends that another octave. So again, the LP is quite capable of handling all that the master tape can send to it. The idea that the CD has more bass is just left-over propaganda from the days of the CD’s introduction. I have LP’s that go very low. The lowest sound on Surf’s Up is 32 Hz and the highest (as observed through a microscope looking at the V-groove in a typical pressing) is 24,000 Hz. I have a record in my collection that is the recording of an earthquake. It goes down to around 5 Hz. You can watch the stylus move back and forth, it’s so low.

Dynamic range has to be limited, and bass response limited so as to prevent the needle from jumping off the record. Dynamic range does not have to be limited as a function of some limit of the LP record. It is limited for mixing reasons which I’ll go into later. As for the stylus jumping out of the groove, that only happens if something is at an extremely high level and must be out-of-phase. Otherwise remember that the phase is shifted 180 degrees in the cutting head to prevent excessive vertical motion. This shift causes in-phase bass sounds to modulate in the lateral plane (side-to-side). That will not throw the stylus out of the grove or vertically, it only moves it laterally. So again, the reason for limiting is not to “prevent the needle from jumping off the record.” For it to do that you have to exceed the RIAA spec. by 200%.

But many of these changes such as DR and bass response are unnecessary in the digital medium.  They are compromises in the sound necessary for analogue but not digital reproduction. This is not what I said, or wanted to say if I said it wrong. First dynamic range is not limited by the LP. In fact it’s the other way around. Second, the record will go lower than tape, so that is also NOT a consideration. Compromise of dynamic range and frequency response is better for the LP than for the tape. It is the Master tape that is the limiting factor here, not the CD. So confining dynamics or response for the LP or the CD is not why this is done.

Why are dynamics limited?  They are not limited because of the master tape, LP, or CD as a means of recording. They are limited because of reproduction problems or playback habits. As any mixer soon finds out, voices and instruments or multiple voices can each be heard better in the overall mix if each is limited to a narrower dynamic range where they do not compete with each other for dominance. One voice may be softer at some point while another voice may be louder, so the louder voice is heard. But in the mix you want both voices heard, so you limit both voices so that each one remains about as loud as the other, making both audible for the entire song. Overall limiting is also applied to most commercial recordings so that in playback the song can be heard in a normal listening environment where there is some background noise. Yes the dynamic range can be heard unlimited if the background noise is as quiet as a control room or country house’s living room, but the general population lives in a din of noise, so the softer sounds must be “lifted” to be heard. If you don’t use some limiting, you may loose income from sales since some of your audience just can’t hear what you are mixing. This is now gone overboard with today’s typical over-compressed CD, but still limiting is not required because of the medium’s limitations, it’s because of our listening habits.

As Stephen said, many other modifications  - sound levels of the tracks changed so as to have some consistency of sound, etc. - may be made. That is true, but it is true for the LP, the CD, and the DVD. Anytime you master anything, part of the job is to marry the end of one song to the beginning of the next. Typically the end and the beginning are miles apart in levels, so some manipulation is required, or at least used because it makes for a more enjoyable overall listening experience. But these changes made between songs or while the song is moving from verse to chorus to bridge, are done, again not because of the medium but because the artist notices small changes that he or she wishes made to better the performance or mix. It is a function of “mastering” and not a function of moving from one medium to another. I’ll make an exception for the 45. But again, here is an example of how increasing the density of a recording medium actually requires more limiting. Why?  Because the 45, although having greater dynamic range than the 33 1/3 record, is designed to be played on a small-speaker portable record player marketed for the youth – for teenage boys and girls who could care less about dynamic range, thus the dynamic range was flattened to a few dB, then lifted in level to the maximum possible. Thus the 45 had a loud sound even after being thrown around, handled, and never cleaned. But I degress.

In our discussion, I have concluded that you take the more typical role of the mastering house in the scheme of things. That is, the group mixes, and hands the Master Tape over to a mastering house for conversion to whatever mass distribution system is used.

But in the case of the times I worked with them, they were involved in mastering. One, two or three and myself attended mastering sessions. MUSICAL changes were made in some songs during the mastering mix. The Beach Boys as producers, acted like producers and saw that every aspect of their creation(s) was overseen or monitored in some way. This included mastering. It did not include inspecting the pressings. I did that.

So if you backup into the Mixdown Master and redo the Mastering Mix, discarding the Beach Boy influence, then you are changing the music or the music production from “by The Beach Boys®” to music production “by Acoustic Sounds.” It’s not the original.

One the other hand, if you use the LP Master or Mastering Mix tape, play it on their Studer recorder, Use the Neumann Lath with the “77 Cutter, that would about equal the same thing we were doing in the 70’s.      

  If there are engineering/mastering notes still in existence, the digital engineer can reproduce the modifications of the original producer that were made for artistic reasons rather than just the limitations of the LP medium. I would say that in the case of The Beach Boys, all changes are for artistic reasons. The LP as a medium has no limitations with respect to the tape itself. The constraint is the playback, the “playback” experienced by millions of listeners. Playback conditions vary from excellent to crappy. There must be a certain robustness to any mass-media distribution scheme. 78’s shattered so the softer vinyl replaced the spinning disc. Optical has its 3-tear coding for robustness. So for example, the LP dynamic range may be 75 dB, but to experience that kind of dynamic you would need to be listening in a Christian Science Reading Room or an acoustic noise rating of RT-30. The upper limit of dynamic is set by our ears. It’s about 105 dB for only a few minutes. So if you listen at 100 dB, (that’s loud) using a dynamic range of 75 dB means you will need to have a room quite enough to hear 25 dB. That is the noise level in a small concert hall or church in the country. So you see the 75 dB isn’t the only story in mastering. It’s not the medium that decides; it’s really the environment you envision will be typical for your listener. If you are mastering a classical orchestra number, you might assume the listener is in a quite environment and is paying close attention. Here going for a wide dynamic may be desired. Usually it’s obvious or the mastering engineer makes this decision. However with The Beach Boys, most of the time Carl made that decision, which was for a quite living room. Anything greater than 45 to 50dB of dynamic swing would be ample. Example: Top listening level of a typical stereo system in a family setting is 85 dB – dynamic range 45 dB requires a room noise level of 40 dB, which is average for a bedroom in a house. So if 45 dB is the required dynamic range, then tape, LP, and CD can handle it. There is no need to modify anything because of dynamic limitations of a medium. Not required. Increasing from 16 to 24 bit will give you an additional 48dB of dynamic range. When most pop records have only 12 to 15 dB of dynamic range. Even classical recordings need only double that range, so what do you need the extra 48dB for? It just takes up storage space. As to highs and lows and flatness of response, all the storage mediums exceed most playback systems in use today. That is to say, the playback system will color the sound to a much greater awareness than the LP or CD. So again, you don’t need to change things for the medium because of response. The tape is good to about 25,000 Hz, the LP for 24,000, and the CD has a brick wall filter at 19,500.
Not much to worry with at those extreme top frequencies, unless you’re a bat!  

Why put limits on frequency response? Sometimes it makes the instrument clearer. In mastering, one voice or one instrument can be raised or lowered, even after the mix, by frequency balance through applied equalization. It may be for only a few bars, but it could make up for a deficiency in the final mix. Those are musical decisions, not based on medium limits or differences. That is why I say, it’s no longer “Produced by The Beach Boys.”

When we were mastering Sunflower and Surf’s Up , Gary was, I think, just starting out at Artisan. I worked with Bob McCloud. So Gary had a good teacher. I believe he uses Studer playback and Neumann Lathe with the same cutter head used at Artisan. Who knows? Maybe it’s the same damn Lathe. The console is, for the most part going to sound about the same – clean as a whistle. So if an LP Master or Mastering Master tape is used and fed straight through, it should be the same as back in 1970. Otherwise Gary becomes the producer.        

That is why digital mastering engineers want to go to the original master, not the LP source tape. I use to think this too, but I’ve since changed my thinking. Consider that these albums were conceived on all levels to be analog. Not just analog, but analog on the LP record. That was the original sound. Not before on the mix tape. That sound is from a well-designed control room with a stone-quiet to 120dB sound system of dynamic range and fidelity. Mastering takes it from the pristine listening environment to a more average listing setting. For The Beach Boys the commercial product was in the creative loop; it’s part of the their production. It may sound strange, but the target for the sound was the LP, so we know the CD will not limit the LP, so put the LP sound on the CD, as it was intended. Don’t extend the bottom, then add highs to balance and wonder where your listening tolerance went. And keep all the limiting in place. Sometimes it’s used for musical balance and not to keep needles from jumping out of groves.

A piece from my book Recording The Beach Boys comes to mind, which I will paraphrase here.

Restorers decided that Leonardo da Vinci’s Mona Lisa should be updated. It was created using old technology. Newer paints, such as acrylic oil, would bring more vivid colors and greater depth of contrast to the original idea of Leonardo’s (we are now on a first name bases). So following the brush strokes of Leonardo we embellished the old oil paints with the new acrylic types. These added stunning color and deep black contrasts that could only be appreciated in a completely darkened and black room. Mona Lisa’s smile seemed to jump from the canvas and embrace the viewer with a virtual kiss on the lips! What an improvement to this old master. We keep getting reports that people are discarding there old Mona Lisa prints in favor of the new “cartoon-y” looking Mona Lisa. Thank goodness that we can rescue these old originals and remake them in our modern image.        

I’ve said a lot here. I look forward to your feed back.  ~swd

[mikeddonn]

You have indeed said a lot Stephen!  But as always, a fascinating read! . Particularly for someone like myself who wants to know as much as possible about the recordings and the processes involved in capturing the sound, and the best way to be able to appreciate it.

Thank you for taking the time to post.  The records you made with the Beach Boys have stood the test of time sound wise, that's for sure.  I don't think people give you all enough credit for the innovative approaches you were taking back then.

[kookadams]

This digital malarkey is bogus. Any and every REAL music consumer still sticks to vinyl, and the 14 essential BBs albums is:: surfin usa, surfer girl, lil deuce coupe, shut down vol2, all summer long, today, summer days, pet sounds, smiley smile, wild honey, 20/20, sunflower, surfs up, holland...right?

[Custom Machine]

COMMENT:  Good Move. When you get your LP, look within the lead-out grooves and see if the Artisan logo is visible. It's a circle with an "A" combined. If you see that logo, then you have an original pressing from the original mastering house. If you don't see the Artisan logo, then you have a pressing made sometime after the original offering, or a re-issued or second pressing, or third pressing. Should be the same as the original, just a generation down. 

Good Listening, ~Stephen W. Desper

This is a fascinating discussion and I have enjoyed reading Stephen Desper's comments, insights, and opinions.

Perhaps I'm obsessive in regard to Sunflower, since I own 14 vinyl copies of the album (as well as a number of CDs).  Eight of those copies are on the US Brother/Reprise label, including the original i bought on August 21, 1970.  Five of my US copies were purchased new during the years 1970 - 1980, and three were purchased used in the eighties and nineties - a Capitol Record Club pressing and two Reprise Records Radio Station Service copies. 

In the past, having looked the matrix numbers in the lead out grooves, I'd seen the Artisan logo that Stephen describes, but never knew what it represented, so it's really cool to now have that knowledge.  Since there are discernible EQ differences found between many of my vinyl copies of Sunflower (and the CD copies as well), a few years ago I made notes detailing those differences. 

What is interesting, in checking my notes and comparing my listening conclusions to the Artisan mastered LPs, is that the LPs I had found to sound identical to my original 1970 album purchase were all mastered by Artisan, and with one exception those that sounded different do not have the Artisan logo.  To be specific, I have US copies of Sunflower purchased new in 1970, 74, and 78, as well as the two Reprise Radio Station promo copies from 1970 that were all mastered by Artisan and sound identical.  The Capitol Records Club version, which would have been pressed early on, in 1970 or 71, lacks the Artisan logo, but also sounds essentially similar to the original.  But two US copies I purchased new in 1978 and 1980 do not have the Artisan logo and sound significantly worse than the others, with noticeably less bass and overly boosted treble.  (My foreign copies of Sunflower, as well as the US 2009 Capitol LP, also have EQ differences compared to the original.  The US 2009 Capitol LP is unique in this respect in that not only is the overall EQ different from the original US release, but the EQ also varies between various songs in ways not found on the original release.)

Stephen, would it be correct to assume that for some reason the mastering engineer for the poorer sounding Brother/Reprise copies I purchased in 1978 and 1980 was working from an LP master tape which was a copy of the mastering you and Carl did, but for some reason that engineer reduced the bass and boosted the treble when cutting a new LP lacquer?  Or could he have received a tape copy where someone had made those EQ changes?