what are you listening to?

Art Blakey and the Jazz Messengers
"Like Someone In Love"
Blue Note BST 84245 (Stereo) 1967

I love the sound stage on this album, very well engineered.
Puts you front row center in front of Bobby Timmons on piano.
Quintet is:
Lee Morgan – Trumpet
Wayne Shorter – Tenor Sax
Bobby Timmons – Piano
Jymie Merritt – Bass
Art Blakey – Drums
Super enjoyable listening through the WOPL’d 700b Time Machine !
Art Blakey 1967 Blue Note .jpg
 
BlazeES said:
Pink Floyd - Animals Remix
(released last month ... remixed in 2018)

View attachment 70823
Click to expand...
Another remix… hooray…
How many reiterations will there be?
(But I like the cover art better…)

My 2016 release was mastered by Guthrie/Plante/Grundman- how does yours compare to mine?
 
MarkWComer said:
Another remix… hooray…
How many reiterations will there be?
(But I like the cover art better…)

My 2016 release was mastered by Guthrie/Plante/Grundman- how does yours compare to mine?
Click to expand...

A Remix and Remaster are not the same...
This is the first time this album has been remixed.

I'll need to really listen to it in an undistracted way, multiple times before I comment in any comprehensive way.
But the biggest thing I noticed straight away was the keyboard and sound effect details really coming forward and in some respects, moving around in different ways. It sounds different in a remixed way for sure.
 
BlazeES said:
A Remix and Remaster are not the same...
This is the first time this album has been remixed.

I'll need to really listen to it in an undistracted way, multiple times before I comment in any comprehensive way.
But the biggest thing I noticed straight away was the keyboard and sound effect details really coming forward and in some respects, moving around in different ways. It sounds different in a remixed way for sure.
Click to expand...
explain remix...remaster...
i was raised in a cave ... dont get out much..
 
BlazeES said:
A Remix and Remaster are not the same...
This is the first time this album has been remixed.

I'll need to really listen to it in an undistracted way, multiple times before I comment in any comprehensive way.
But the biggest thing I noticed straight away was the keyboard and sound effect details really coming forward and in some respects, moving around in different ways. It sounds different in a remixed way for sure.
Click to expand...
Yes- granted remaster and remix are different- sometimes wildly different. Jethro Tull’s “A Passion Play” remaster had a lot of surprises for me, some things I expected from repeated listening went into different directions, and some things were added.

I’m just tired of buying another version of something I know so well, especially given the price of vinyl LPs.

Curious to hear your final assessment…
 
gene french said:
explain remix...remaster...
i was raised in a cave ... dont get out much..
Click to expand...

Remastering is essentially a process to re-equalize the recordings, sometimes messing with the compression levels and even a touch of noise reduction - without disturbing the layout of the multi-track spacial representation of the recording as originally laid down. Remastering is also common when analog is converted to digital.

Remixing is the process of altering the 'mix' of the tracks, and in general terms, rearranging the sound stage (positioning) along with - in some cases - reintroducing track content that might not have been there (removed) and/or was buried in the final mix-down of the original recording. A real good example of what remixing is all about is the more recent Giles Martin (and team...) remixing of the Beatles catalog. Remember all those 4 track earlier Beatle albums that were like vocals on one side, guitars in the middle or other side and the percussion off to one side too? Sure it was stereo but it was spacially separated in a somewhat clumsy way. That was because 4 track recording limited the process. Now go to Youtube and have a listen at what the just released 'remix' of the Beatles 'Revolver' album sounds like now.

That album was originally recorded on a 4-track machine. Martin & team created a new set of individual tracks using some sort of proprietary EMI technology and then reassembled the entire soundstage in most cases.

Remixing is the deal whereby the artists agree to let a new team of engineers 'recompile' the tracks to achieve a more pleasant and/or more modern feel to the mix. But it also involves some remastering as well. All the later Beatle albums that were remixed have much more pronounced presence ... especially the percussion sections.

Steve Wilson did a real nice job remixing the first several Yes albums.
I have differing opinions about the Beatle albums that were remixed.
But I will say that The White Album is now my favorite, where it never ranked high for me before... ever.
In my mind, they brought that album back to life. Helter Skelter peels paint!

And with this 'Animals' release, being my all-time favorite Floyd album ... I'm just not sure yet. It almost feels sacreligious in a strange way.
But it's too early to say... I just got it today.
 
Last edited:
BlazeES said:
Remastering is essentially a process to re-equalize the recordings, sometimes messing with the compression levels and even a touch of noise reduction - without disturbing the layout of the multi-track spacial representation of the recording as originally laid down. Remastering is also common when analog is converted to digital.

Remixing is the process of altering the 'mix' of the tracks, and in general terms, rearranging the sound stage (positioning) along with - in some cases - reintroducing track content that might not have been there (removed) and/or was buried in the final mix-down of the original recording. A real good example of what remixing is all about is the more recent Giles Martin (and team...) remixing of the Beatles catalog. Remember all those 4 track earlier Beatle albums that were like vocals on one side, guitars in the middle or other side and the percussion off to one side too? Sure it was stereo but it was spacially separated in a somewhat clumsy way. No go to Youtube and have a listen at what the just released 'remix' of the Beatles 'Revolver' album sounds like now.

That album was recorded on a 4-track machine.

Remixing is the deal whereby the artists agree to let a new team of engineers 'recompile' the tracks to achieve a more pleasant and/or more modern feel to the mix.
Click to expand...
Yes! Quite often the final prodict of a remix is outrageously different from the original release.

But sometimes it isn’t worth buying…
 
Oh ... and I forgot to mention. When they do a serious remix ... it typically involves the creation of a multi-channel release.
I'm not really interested in surround sound treatments myself ...
 
I'll have to look at The Beatles remixes. The White Album in its original form is likely my favorite Beatles album. Now I'm still pissed about Rubber Soul, the engineering on that one is terrible. Hard panned vocals, goopy euphonics, bad eq, distortion. The raw alternate takes off of Anthology II are much better IMO.
 
mr_rye89 said:
I'll have to look at The Beatles remixes. The White Album in its original form is likely my favorite Beatles album. Now I'm still pissed about Rubber Soul, the engineering on that one is terrible. Hard panned vocals, goopy euphonics, bad eq, distortion. The raw alternate takes off of Anthology II are much better IMO.
Click to expand...

When they remix 'Rubber Soul' ... and if they approach it like 'Revolver' ... I think you will be pleased.

Since we've branched out to the Beatle remixes - here's my take on all that have been done so far:

Sgt Peppers? Take it or leave it. If you can EQ to your own taste within your system, I'm not convinced the remix yielded much.a The box set had a lot of cool outtake/demo material tho.

White Album? Everything sounds fuller to me with a real significant 'punch & presence' to the bass & drum playing. Birthday, Helter Skelter, Yer Blues, I'm So Tired really kick ass now. Not that they sucked before ... but the power factor is just more in-your-face. All the less hard rocking tracks sound like a veil lifted too. I personally think this album remix shows the most effort. But these things are highly subjective.

Abbey Road? Take it or leave it. I always thought it was already the best sounding Beatles album due to the state of the art at the time. To me, the original UK pressing is the best classic representation. The remix sort of a has a veil lifted too... where it sounds more like a modern day recording. 'I Want You' and 'Come Together' really peel paint now.

Let It Be? They de-Phil Spector'd it in a lot of ways and I think it's noticably more listenable. But it was never much high on my list anyway.

All Things Must Pass? (Harrison solo) This album sounds amazing. Much like The White Album, it's the closest thing to a complete transformation.
And George's vocals are haunting.

Revolver? Sounds richer & fuller. Taxman peels paint like never before. The elimination of the panning hard left & right stuff is the real win on this one.

*

The one thing I will say about all of the remixes so far, in terms of the common denominators, is the benefit of pumped up percussion tracks, the more forward vocals and certain tracks having more perceivable space between the elements... 'air' I think they call it.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top