| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| LeeRob |
Posted - 30/09/2010 : 19:51:05
Many things have happened to me in the past few years, and believe it or not I've just now given a listen to RHINO's Forever Changes Collector's Edition, "Original Album," disk.
Have they re-mastered it? The mix sounds different to me; all the little things which made the various cuts so fine, seem to be pused up front of the mix. Like the guitar on Alone Again Or, and the drums on the same cut; they sound enhanced. In A House Is Not A Motel, the same critique applies.
It could just be that I've listened to the old vynal more; I rather never adjusted to the coldness of cd's.
Has anyone else noticed this?
Sorry if you've already had this discussion; If so pass me the thread please.
It's all the same day. |
| 15 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| The sweet disorder |
Posted - 12/10/2010 : 23:25:11
If you have some mastering software like T-racks you could even make an "alternate mix yourself". A few adjustments to EQ and compression and away you go |
| Joe Morris |
Posted - 11/10/2010 : 20:22:46
I doubt if he saw any money from his songs, sadly; nice to hear his mom is getting some money from them (at last!)
It'd be nice to do a tribute album to the man, hopefully without any Smack Dab on it!
His songwriting credit for Old Man would appear to be missing on the Forever Changes concert and attributed to Arthur Lee (Grass Roots music), curiously (Arthur never changed his publishing since he was in the Grass Roots, apparently!)
I never listened to vinyl. I've always been a cd boy (thankfully Forever Changes has been issued to cd 4-5 times at LEAST 
This isn't including Japanese masters, copies of it given away with British newspapers, and so forth.. |
| rocker |
Posted - 11/10/2010 : 20:04:16
and after looking at my copy of the FC vinyl .I see a "Breadcrust" ? (billing with Maclean on Alone Again Or and Old Man-is that Arthur???) |
| Joe Morris |
Posted - 11/10/2010 : 06:13:36
its been suggested that Michael Stuarts name was left off the back cover of FC on vinyl after he sued Arthur in court (and won)
don't know how much creedence (clearwater revival)
I give to that theory though  |
| lemonade kid |
Posted - 11/10/2010 : 05:48:41
Vinyl is always my preference as I compare all the CD versions of FC...
____________________________________________________________
We need Hippies, now, more than ever...
-LK |
| kdion11 |
Posted - 08/10/2010 : 18:09:39
quote:
Originally posted by rocker
hey kd..let me take the time to shake yer hand for being a fine musician......I guess you're the quiet kind with no book in ya, eh????????.....
KD: Thanks Rocker. Actually I have been working on a book.
Some has to do with music, some not. It definetly will have
a chapter on Noel, and one on Arthur.
go to: www.corsicaband.com to see more on the music, or
search Facebook with my name to see the latest video I've produced
with some pretty talented and well known people. |
| LeeRob |
Posted - 08/10/2010 : 01:22:51
Thanks kd, that makes perfect sense.
It's all the same day. |
| rocker |
Posted - 08/10/2010 : 01:15:57
hey kd..let me take the time to shake yer hand for being a fine musician......I guess you're the quiet kind with no book in ya, eh????????..... |
| kdion11 |
Posted - 08/10/2010 : 00:52:12
quote:
Originally posted by LeeRob
In my case I am confusing terminology because I am confused. I assume an actual "re-mix," cannot be made except through the board with the original creation. Is that correct? The "loudness," spoken of comes from what; a tinkering with a second century copy?
And, the master recording. . .can't a technician boost or otherwise change the sound as the master is re-pressed? I have assumed more than I know about these processes.
It's all the same day.
KD: Hey LeeRob. You would need the full multi tracks to do
an actual "remix". A remaster could be completed by simply
re EQ uing the two track analog master. This would not technically
be a "remix" |
| Joe Morris |
Posted - 07/10/2010 : 17:23:26
put Bruce Botnick on the case, he'll get to the bottom of it!  |
| waxburn |
Posted - 07/10/2010 : 15:55:10
quote:
Originally posted by tedhead
John9: That is the way I first heard Forever Changes. I had it, but one of the discs is damaged.
Waxburn: I know it is not a remix, and I never said it was. That is why I said the mix couldn't be tampered with, please re-read what I said (you did quote me after all). I know it is an alternate mix because that is what the 2 disc set says it is. What I was questioning is how folks here can say certain instruments are pushed up in the original mix because of the mastering job.
I think the best way to look at it is that there are 2 "original mixes", one used and one not. |
| Joe Morris |
Posted - 06/10/2010 : 23:34:31
the Love Story I always saw as a botched job. Why have Forever Changes across 2 discs? why not have the focus on the 1st couple Elektra albums (which were rather hard to find at the time, let alone in MONO!) on disc 1 and then have Forever Changes on disc 2?
And Four Sail wasn't reissued to cd for a LONG time... I think the Red Sox had won the World Series by that point
It DOES have a nice book though! |
| rocker |
Posted - 06/10/2010 : 17:06:26
Maybe some of you are familiar with what the Stones did with their catalogue back in 2002? I think they "re-mastered" some of their early stuff and if I'm correct called it a "hybrid" disc. I have some of them and one in particular stands out..High Tide and Green Grass. When I first heard it I jumped out of my chair beacuse the sound was incredible. I really noticed a BIG difference between the early recording and the new one. Now I'd think that that was because the engineers must've had the original tapes to work with. "London" records sure wasn't so dopey as Elektra to dump or not take care early Stones stuff.... So from that if we want a really good mix, re-master whatever of FC we need the masters. Usually when I play FC I play the cd not my old record which revere. It's gone through the handling and listening wars but i will not part with it. It's a million buckaroos to me!... |
| LeeRob |
Posted - 06/10/2010 : 15:56:18
In my case I am confusing terminology because I am confused. I assume an actual "re-mix," cannot be made except through the board with the original creation. Is that correct? The "loudness," spoken of comes from what; a tinkering with a second century copy?
And, the master recording. . .can't a technician boost or otherwise change the sound as the master is re-pressed? I have assumed more than I know about these processes.
It's all the same day. |
| tedhead |
Posted - 06/10/2010 : 15:31:50
John9: That is the way I first heard Forever Changes. I had it, but one of the discs is damaged.
Waxburn: I know it is not a remix, and I never said it was. That is why I said the mix couldn't be tampered with, please re-read what I said (you did quote me after all). I know it is an alternate mix because that is what the 2 disc set says it is. What I was questioning is how folks here can say certain instruments are pushed up in the original mix because of the mastering job. |
