gfxgfx
 
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
logo
 
gfx gfx
gfx
680599 Posts in 27601 Topics by 4068 Members - Latest Member: Dae Lims March 29, 2024, 12:35:30 AM
*
gfx*HomeHelpSearchCalendarLoginRegistergfx
gfxgfx
0 Members and 3 Guests are viewing this topic.       « previous next »
Pages: 1 2 [3] Go Down Print
Author Topic: Thoughts on the new Pet Sounds re-masters...  (Read 15189 times)
Daniel S.
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 896



View Profile
« Reply #50 on: September 01, 2006, 06:33:19 PM »

I just dug out my Beach Boys 1993 boxset. I'm listening to the Pet Sounds tracks and they sound A THOUSAND TIMES BETTER than the 2001 mono mix and the 40th anniversary mono mix. So much better to my ears that I tracked down a new factory sealed 1990 Pet Sounds CD, with the three bonus tracks, and just ordered it. The remastered mono Pet Sounds sound so shrill with a good deal of static. The mono tracks on the box set have clarity and depth and are not shrill at all, and at the same time have plenty of punch. I hope these are the same mono mixes on the 1990 cd. It almost seems like the mono remasters are downgrading the sound.

Another thought, usually on these remastered versions, when they hit real high notes it sounds like the cd is clipping out. Like it can't handle that frequency. Sorry, I'm not an audiophile or a musician.
« Last Edit: September 01, 2006, 06:36:15 PM by Melville » Logged

Let us all stay teenage gamblers listening to the radio.
Bicyclerider
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 2132


View Profile
« Reply #51 on: September 03, 2006, 01:35:40 PM »

"The mono tracks on the box set have clarity and depth and are not shrill at all, and at the same time have plenty of punch"

Well you may be disappointed in the 1990 release, as it uses no noise extensively which degrades the highs and causes a "pumping" sound in the background of the music.  Apparently no noise was not used on the box set, nor on the subsequent releases which explains why they have more treble information and more hiss (the shrillness and static you are hearing - which, if you can get past it, should result in more natural and audible highs in the music).
Logged
petsite
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 770



View Profile
« Reply #52 on: September 03, 2006, 01:42:22 PM »

Yeah, the GV boxset was mastered at Capitol and as Mark has stated, they didn't even have NONOISE in their mastering studios. Also, by the time of the GV box, the original master and the digital safety copy taken from it had both gone AWOL so only the NY tape was used for all following releases except the current one which uses the newly re-discovered U1630 digital master.

Bob F.

PS - I know that Mark reads this thread and wanted to say that even with all my complaining, I still bought 2 copies of the 40th Anniversary set and will probably buy more for friends at Christmas!
« Last Edit: September 04, 2006, 08:53:41 PM by petsite » Logged
SMiLEY
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 115

Columnated Ruins Domino


View Profile
« Reply #53 on: September 03, 2006, 06:08:31 PM »

I just dug out my Beach Boys 1993 boxset. I'm listening to the Pet Sounds tracks and they sound A THOUSAND TIMES BETTER than the 2001 mono mix and the 40th anniversary mono mix. So much better to my ears that I tracked down a new factory sealed 1990 Pet Sounds CD, with the three bonus tracks, and just ordered it. The remastered mono Pet Sounds sound so shrill with a good deal of static. The mono tracks on the box set have clarity and depth and are not shrill at all, and at the same time have plenty of punch. I hope these are the same mono mixes on the 1990 cd. It almost seems like the mono remasters are downgrading the sound.

Another thought, usually on these remastered versions, when they hit real high notes it sounds like the cd is clipping out. Like it can't handle that frequency. Sorry, I'm not an audiophile or a musician.

I've been listening to this quite intensely and I don't hear the things you are mentioning. What kind of system are you listening to?
Logged

Look! Listen! Vibrate! SMiLE!
Daniel S.
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 896



View Profile
« Reply #54 on: September 03, 2006, 07:46:25 PM »

I just have a couple of Edirol MA-20D speakers hooked up to my Mac.

That's my system.  LOL


But actually they are very nice speakers. There's more expensive stuff out there, but the quality is amazing.
« Last Edit: September 03, 2006, 07:47:20 PM by Melville » Logged

Let us all stay teenage gamblers listening to the radio.
JRauch
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 386



View Profile
« Reply #55 on: September 09, 2006, 09:18:25 AM »

Ok, so I got my DVD-A of Pet Sounds and finally found some time to check it out. First of all, I have to say that this is my first DVD-A, so I obviously can't compare it to others. Here are some thoughts (if anyone is interested):


The first thing I noticed is that the handling is a pain in the ass. There are two sides withoug explanation on which is which; you need the TV to control it; it doesn't start with the title-menu etc...

The documentary is certainly nice, but contains nothing new or special. I laughed my head off when Mike imitated Macca ("tears in me eyes"  LOL), and Brian is dead on when he says that PS should be heard with headphones in the dark.

The high-resolution-surround-mix sounds very good, even if my system isn't exactly HighEnd. I guess, you can impress some friends with it, who only listen to mp3. But I have to say that I find surround too distracting from the music itself. I guess, more than anything else, it's a matter of taste. I prefer good old stereo, and most of the time I listen with headphones. That's were we come the interesting stuff (at least to me):

I did some serious comparing between the DVD-A stereo and the HDCD-stereo from the 2001-CD. The first thing I noticed is that the DVD-A is way louder. I'm not talking about loudness, the volume is just higher. Once I got the volumes on the same level, I noticed that there actually isn't much of a difference. The DVD-A is slightly ahead in terms of the bass (it's louder in the mix, "fuller"), but any other difference is almost unnoticeable on my system (and ears).


In the end, I'm gonna keep the DVD-A. The documentary and the bonus-tracks are nice additions, the 5.1-mix is an interesting alternative listen and the stereo-version is a little bit better.
Logged

Dance as if no one's looking. Wrestle things out to bring moment to your own sense of discovery, and make the world a better place. This is no time for whiners.  –  Van Dyke Parks
JRauch
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 386



View Profile
« Reply #56 on: September 09, 2006, 09:37:01 AM »

P.S. after all that I listened a little bit to the "Sgt. Pepper"-CD. We all can't thank Mark Linett enough for what he has done with the BB-records.  Grin
Logged

Dance as if no one's looking. Wrestle things out to bring moment to your own sense of discovery, and make the world a better place. This is no time for whiners.  –  Van Dyke Parks
petsite
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 770



View Profile
« Reply #57 on: September 09, 2006, 11:59:38 AM »

P.S. after all that I listened a little bit to the "Sgt. Pepper"-CD. We all can't thank Mark Linett enough for what he has done with the BB-records.  Grin

AMEN! Smiley
Logged
SMiLEY
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 115

Columnated Ruins Domino


View Profile
« Reply #58 on: September 10, 2006, 12:55:19 PM »

Seconded!!!  Grin
Logged

Look! Listen! Vibrate! SMiLE!
Joshilyn Hoisington
Honored Guest
******
Online Online

Gender: Female
Posts: 3307


Aeijtzsche


View Profile
« Reply #59 on: September 10, 2006, 02:53:19 PM »

Yep.

I certainly have taken for granted what wonderful riches we have as Beach Boys fans, compared to other "catalog" fans.  What other fanbase of a group has been lucky enough to get:

Such a diverse smattering of completely unreleased tracks
The relatively unusual presentation of so many track or vocals only versions of songs
Such great, balanced stereo remixes

And more.

And speaking of the Beatles, How can it be that Sgt. Pepper hasn't got the Box Set treatment? 
Logged
Rocker
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Online Online

Gender: Male
Posts: 10622


"Too dumb for New York City, too ugly for L.A."


View Profile WWW
« Reply #60 on: September 10, 2006, 03:03:56 PM »

Yeah, a Sgt. Pepper-Box would be very interesting.
Has the original mono-mix been released on CD yet? I think I got it somewhere on vinyl, but my record-player isn't working the way it should.... Roll Eyes
Logged

a diseased bunch of mo'fos if there ever was one… their beauty is so awesome that listening to them at their best is like being in some vast dream cathedral decorated with a thousand gleaming American pop culture icons.

- Lester Bangs on The Beach Boys


PRO SHOT BEACH BOYS CONCERTS - LIST


To sum it up, they blew it, they blew it consistently, they continue to blow it, it is tragic and this pathological problem caused The Beach Boys' greatest music to be so underrated by the general public.

- Jack Rieley
Andrew G. Doe
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 17767


The triumph of The Hickey Script !


View Profile WWW
« Reply #61 on: September 10, 2006, 08:55:58 PM »

Yep.
And speaking of the Beatles, How can it be that Sgt. Pepper hasn't got the Box Set treatment? 

I may be off base on this, but I recall hearing that The Beatles had a clause inserted in their EMI contract when re-negotiated that their records would only be released in their original form. Hence no mono/stereo 2fers, no bonus tracks. I think they got around the 5.1 problem because it uses the original multitrack.

Plus, given how they raped the Pepper sessions on Anthology 2 to concoct 'new' mixes, I'd say that's a good idea.
Logged

The four sweetest words in my vocabulary: "This poster is ignored".
HeyJude
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 10030



View Profile WWW
« Reply #62 on: September 10, 2006, 11:00:58 PM »

Yep.
And speaking of the Beatles, How can it be that Sgt. Pepper hasn't got the Box Set treatment? 

I may be off base on this, but I recall hearing that The Beatles had a clause inserted in their EMI contract when re-negotiated that their records would only be released in their original form. Hence no mono/stereo 2fers, no bonus tracks. I think they got around the 5.1 problem because it uses the original multitrack.

Plus, given how they raped the Pepper sessions on Anthology 2 to concoct 'new' mixes, I'd say that's a good idea.

I'm not sure I've ever heard of those specific terms as part of an agreement with EMI. What I have heard and what has been widely reported is that one of the parts of the settlement the Beatles and EMI made in the late 80's was that the Beatles (via Apple) were given the right to sign off on *any* release of Beatles music, whether it was reissuing an old album, compiling hits, or issuing previously unreleased material. EMI retains ownership of all of the Beatles albums and session recordings made under contract to EMI. But unlike the Beach Boys, where Capitol/EMI can to this day still issue any permutation/compilation of previously issued material without approval from the Beach Boys, the Beatles have to sign off on any release. This is why EMI/Capitol no longer attempts to issue things like the compilations they did in the 70's and early 80's like "Rock and Roll Music", "Love Songs", "Reel Music", etc. Apple even vetoed the CD issue of the "red" and "blue" albums; they were only released after Apple signed off on it in 1993.

If Apple agreed to it, EMI could do mono/stereo two-fers, bonus tracks, etc. EMI/Capitol's "Capitol Albums" boxed sets include both mono and stereo mixes of the albums. Neil Aspinall recently commented that they are currently remastering the Beatles catalog and are still considering whether to issue mono/stereo mixes on one CD or release them seperately, etc. So there is no indication that there is any ban specifically on mono/stereo mixes on one CD, or bonus tracks, etc. There simply seems to be a general rule that Apple signs off on anything EMI does with their music.

I predict one of three things happening with the Beatles catalog on CD:

1. Remastered mono/stereo two-fers, no bonus tracks
2. Remastered albums, with seperate mono and stereo releases
3. Remastered albums, no offering of both mono and stereo (whether this means stereo for everything, or mono for the first four, etc., I don't know.)

Apple recognizes the interest in mono/stereo two-fers as demonstrated by the "Capitol Albums" boxed sets. It's just a question of whether they will try to milk the fans by making them buy all the albums twice seperately. Remember, a two-fer of the White Album would require four CD's, and I really don't picture them keeping the standard, stock version that everybody can buy of the album as a 4-CD set. I also don't see Apple wanting to spur so much confusion by issuing mono and stereo versions seperately and have them all appear on the shelves at the same time. So what we may see is single CD's with only one mix (basically remastered versions of what's out there now), and then some sort of boxed set for alternate album mixes.

I don't see any bonus tracks being included, because there wouldn't be much room left on the two-fers anyway, and they do seem to want to keep the outtakes seperate from the albums (according to older comments from Paul McCartney, for instance).
Logged

THE BEACH BOYS OPINION PAGE IS ON FACEBOOK!!! http://www.facebook.com/beachboysopinion - Check out the original "BEACH BOYS OPINION PAGE" Blog - http://beachboysopinion.blogspot.com/
absinthe_boy
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 604


View Profile
« Reply #63 on: September 11, 2006, 05:10:10 AM »



The first thing I noticed is that the handling is a pain in the ass. There are two sides withoug explanation on which is which; you need the TV to control it; it doesn't start with the title-menu etc...

On my DVD-A, near the centre, it is printed which side is which. Obviously you cannot print on the disc surface as one does with a one sided disc. Its just like the old "flipper" two-sided DVD videos we used to get before they developed dual layer discs.

I find the pukka DVD-A side to be distinctly superior. Of course you need a machine capable of playing DVD-A discs...a regular DVD player will not play the super high resolution recording.
Logged
Howdy Doody
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 56


View Profile
« Reply #64 on: September 14, 2006, 11:21:50 AM »

How many  times will they mess with Pet Sounds before the masters burst in flames..hehe
Logged
Daniel S.
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 896



View Profile
« Reply #65 on: September 14, 2006, 02:49:34 PM »

I want a Sunflower boxset and a Surf's Up boxset. Please.
Logged

Let us all stay teenage gamblers listening to the radio.
JRauch
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 386



View Profile
« Reply #66 on: September 15, 2006, 03:35:30 AM »

Quote
On my DVD-A, near the centre, it is printed which side is which.
Yeah, I discovered that by now. Thanks!

Quote
I find the pukka DVD-A side to be distinctly superior. Of course you need a machine capable of playing DVD-A discs...a regular DVD player will not play the super high resolution recording.
Huh Sorry, but what does "pukka" mean? And btw, I have a DVD-A player.
Logged

Dance as if no one's looking. Wrestle things out to bring moment to your own sense of discovery, and make the world a better place. This is no time for whiners.  –  Van Dyke Parks
Zander
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 374



View Profile WWW
« Reply #67 on: September 15, 2006, 03:55:46 AM »

[
Quote
I find the pukka DVD-A side to be distinctly superior. Of course you need a machine capable of playing DVD-A discs...a regular DVD player will not play the super high resolution recording.
Huh Sorry, but what does "pukka" mean? And btw, I have a DVD-A player.
Quote

Defined on Google as - absolutely first class and genuine; "pukka sahib"; "pukka quarters with a swarm of servants", well worn British phrase annoyingly said by Jamie Oliver
Logged

They say I got brains but they ain't doing me no good, I wish they could...
absinthe_boy
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 604


View Profile
« Reply #68 on: September 15, 2006, 04:13:57 AM »

It existed before Jamie Oliver.....and seemed appropriate in this instance.

Still waiting for amazon to deliver my Pet Sounds 2LP Sad
Logged
gfx
Pages: 1 2 [3] Go Up Print 
gfx
Jump to:  
gfx
Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines Page created in 9.117 seconds with 21 queries.
Helios Multi design by Bloc
gfx
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!