| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| lemonade kid |
Posted - 01/03/2013 : 19:35:24
Alternate Mixes
Sometimes never released, sometimes mistakenly pressed, sometimes released decades later to the delight of hungry fans...no matter how we get it..it's always a treat to hear something new that opens our eyes & ears to something old (classic!) and familiar.
......................................................
NEIL YOUNG-S/T 1968 withdrawn mixes
"Many sources cite that Neil Young was released in January 1969; however, the album was originally released on November 12, 1968 (Young's 23rd birthday). Young was unhappy with the sound quality of the first release, so the album was partially remixed in January 1969 and then re-released.
The "Neil Young" header was added to the album cover; previously the cover art had consisted of only the portrait. Copies of the original 1968 version are now rare and highly sought-after, because legions of Neil Young fans believe that the 1969 mix destroyed much of the beauty of the songs, especially "Here We Are in the Years.""
As you all may know, I will never listen to the "new" 1969 mix---it really does take away from the original beauty of the original mix. The album cover was better first time around, no debate! -lk
................................
What do you all think?
HERE WE ARE IN THE YEARS (withdrawn mix)...turn it up
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=__g4lgcBrL8#!
Remix...the fade out is a crime!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=_8pfGxdFZYI
Forgive me, I know you all likely have only heard the remix, and LOVE it! I didn't hear it until 1995!
................................
"I think the remix is horrible , especially on this song. The original is superior. in every way. The moment when the organ comes in on the original is a beautiful, spine-tingling, touch, which he totally eliminated. Not thrilled with losing the ending, either.
And don't get me started on What Did You Do To My Life, either."
.................
"Whatever the respective merits of the mixes, "Here We Are In the Years" is one of the great stoner-epiphany song titles ever."
-forum members (@stevehoffman)
...more to come! Any alternate mixes you all have to share, to compare?
________________________________________________
Old hippies never die, they just ramble on.
-lk |
| 4 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| lemonade kid |
Posted - 09/03/2013 : 17:55:25
Hey, mb...here is a perfect digital conversion...free to all since it will never be reissued by Neil!
I also had been looking for a nice rip of Neil's first album for years so I could take it with me on the road. I have TWO of the original vinyl. Neil will never allow it to be released (I can't understand why...it is the BEST to my ears).
If you have never heard this original first pressing of Neil's first long player...you MUST do it NOW!
Here is a once in a lifetime offer! A really pristine CSG decoded digital conversion...just brilliant!
............................................
NEIL YOUNG s/t 1968
http://profstoned.blogspot.com/search/label/Neil%20Young
INFO about the digital conversion.
Source: (Side 1: 30 817 RS6317 A -1B / Side 2: 30 818 RS6317 B -1D )
Technics 1210mk2 w/ AT-150 MLX stylus > Yamaha CA-1010 (1979 Solid State Amp)
> RME ADI-2 A/D Interface (conversion to 24 bit, 96kHz) > Click Repair (Cl: 25, Cr: 0) >
Audition 3.0 > SOX Resampler (to 44.1) > Mbit+ Dithering (to 16 bit) > TLH (Flac 8)
(NB: Audition 3.0 was used for adjusting DC bias, editing, (incl. manual removal of clicks
and pops), adding gain and making the cue points).
CueListTool v1.7 & Mediaval CueSplitter were used for generating the .cue's & .m3u's. )
Vinyl Transfer & Restoration by Prof. Stoned
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Prof sez:
I'm proud to present you the rare original version of Neil Young's debut.
This version was withdrawn 9 months after its initial release and contains three
tracks in a different mix and the whole album in an entirely different mastering.
There has been a lot of contradictory information about this subject on the internet,
so I'm going to try to set the record straight here.
The album was recorded in the period from mid-August to late October 1968 at the TTG
studio in Los Angeles, CA, one of the first studio's to have a 16-track facility at the time.
The original US stock version was released on January 22, 1969 and
not November (12) 1968 as various sources have claimed.
Initial sales of the album were dismal; it's estimated that less than 10,000
Reprise 7-Arts label copies sold in 1969 (including initial sales of the revised version).
When Young and his producer/companion David Briggs delivered the album to
Reprise in late '68, they had no idea that their work would fall victim to a new
technology that the record company was about to try:
the Haeco-CSG "Compatible Mono/Stereo" Process.
The idea behind HAECO-CSG was to create stereo records which when played on
monaural equipment would "fold-down" properly to mono,
Predictably, the process also resulted in lessening of sound quality.
Mr. Young was furious when he learned about this practice and demanded the record
to be withdrawn and replaced with a properly mastered version.
Considering that his career at this point was not exactly a success story,
the record company willingness to do so can be called a small miracle.
But it would take no less than nine months before this new version was
completed and released, due to other activities (recording a 2nd album,
joining CSN and playing live).
In the process, Neil also started to have second thoughts about the mixes of
"Here We Are In The Years", "What Did You Do To My
Life" & "If I Could Have Her Tonight"* and decided to re-do them.
None of these remixes are an improvement over the originals, especially
the HWAITY remix suffers from its botched-up and shortened ending.
Contrary to popular belief "I've Been Waiting For You' was not remixed.**
When released in October '69, the new version (or RE-1*** as I will call it from now on)
did not only have a different sound but also came with a slightly different sleeve.
Where the original front was covered by the painting, the new sleeve had
"Neil Young" above the painting in black capital letters.
Chances are that if you have a copy with the original sleeve, it may actually
contain the standard version. You can check by looking for the RE-1 inscription
in the deadwax area. If it's not there, you have the original mix.
The revised version has since become the standard version used on vinyl
and the original and the remastered CDs.
The sonic differences between US versions of the original and RE-1 are quite huge.
It has been claimed that this is exclusively the result of the HAECO-CSG process
which made the original record sound dark and muddy but this is not (entirely) true.
CSG basically leaves the sound of the individual channels intact.
It does however shift the phase of the right channel with 90 degrees, so when folding the
two channels together all elements that are mixed in the centre (vocals, drums) aren't
doubled in volume as opposed to anything that isn't panned in the centre.
When played in stereo, it results in a less definable panorama and a volume decrease
of all elements in the centre as opposed to everything that is panned sideways.
I have decoded the HAECO-CSG process by correcting the phase of the right channel
using a nifty VST plugin that allows exact phase shifting.
Then I synced the channels together up to the millisecond.
With these two steps the phase between the left and right channel was restored as
closely as possible (this certainly couldn't have been done in the analogue domain).
Suddenly, the vocal and drums are right there in the middle and right up front.
I also worked on re-balancing the stereo channels (with the RE-1 and my ears as a
reference). That's about all the remastering I did.
It sounds a LOT closer to what Neil and David Briggs first intended.
The reason why the RE-1 sounds brighter is only because it was EQ'd differently
(or vice versa).
Both this version and the RE-1 have their advantages; the latter has a much fuller
soundstage but it lacks something in the mid-range and is a little too bright at times.
This was transferred from an VG++ graded copy.
The record was professionally and carefully cleaned in three steps
using Audio Intelligent’s Enzymantic formula, Super Cleaner Formula, and Ultra pure
water on a VPI 16.5 (using VPI brushes) and Nitty Gritty mini-pro 2.
There is some groove wear hearable during the last 2 minutes of Track 10.
The sound quality of this fragment is somewhat below my usual quality standards but
because this record is such a rarity, I've decided to let it be.
Other than this, there is no hearable groove detoriation going on.
The distortion you hear on the female choir in Tr. 5 & 9 is part of the original recording.
The record is reasonably quiet but after a moderate declick with Click Repair hundreds
of (mostly tiny) clicks and pops were still noticable.
I invested many hours of manual restoration work on this to bring it up to CD standards.
Considering the low level mastering and the less than ideal vinyl quality, I think I've
achieved a stunning result but you still may hear some minor vinyl surface noise on the
very quiet parts of half the tracks.
This is probably the most time consuming torrent I have done so far; I worked on this on
and off for three months.
A lot of information in this note was taken (w/o permission) from sidestreetrecords.com.
The artwork is taken (again without permission) from the DESS version **** and
the official remaster and was slightly modified to my own liking.
Enjoy!
________________________________________________
Old hippies never die, they just ramble on.
-lk |
| mikeb |
Posted - 09/03/2013 : 12:32:18
quote:
Originally posted by lemonade kid
What do you all think?
HERE WE ARE IN THE YEARS (withdrawn mix)...turn it up
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=__g4lgcBrL8#!
Remix...the fade out is a crime!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=_8pfGxdFZYI
The first is much superior, I dug out my vinyl copy and found I have the original album cover and mix but it does sound so much better in digital. There's something not quite right with the overall sound on the vinyl of the first album, sounds a bit unnatural and compressed. Looking at Wikipedia it was both a remix and an elimination of some sound processing, so that stereo could be played on mono players, that was done. Also just checked the record price guide and my original vinyl release is worth more :) Crackling at the start of the track, a sign that it was well played in my teenage years :) |
| lemonade kid |
Posted - 08/03/2013 : 22:33:41
Rose Of Cimarron
Emmylou...oh yeah
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uKxpAKRDOyk
Poco...synched a bit with a live show..such voices
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JF91ul0ZR64
George Grantham is a drummer not mentioned much--love him!
________________________________________________
Old hippies never die, they just ramble on.
-lk |
| lemonade kid |
Posted - 01/03/2013 : 19:41:37
What Did You Do To My Life
No comparison! The original mix is BEAUTIFUL & Neil's remix is ...NOT!!
Original mix
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z8x_KA5UogE
Remix...the reverb and echo...BLAH!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nRdwwGcuKFc
Remember, I had the original LP from the beginning, and never even heard the remix until something like 1995!! So I can be excused for my prejudice!
________________________________________________
Old hippies never die, they just ramble on.
-lk |
|
|
