Elton John (Best CD's)

[krabapple]

You're a dick.

[krabapple]

So, regarding Elton John, I was perusing Bobby Owsinki's book on mastering, and saw an interview in there by the guy who did the surround EJ releases. He had some interesting things to say about Gus Dudgeon's remasters series...inforamtion more than opinion, mentioning that GD added reverb to some tracks in addition to changing EQ.

[lukpac]

So, regarding Elton John, I was perusing Bobby Owsinki's book on mastering, and saw an interview in there by the guy who did the surround EJ releases. He had some interesting things to say about Gus Dudgeon's remasters series...inforamtion more than opinion, mentioning that GD added reverb to some tracks in addition to changing EQ.

Dennis Drake strikes again!

[krabapple]

So, regarding Elton John, I was perusing Bobby Owsinki's book on mastering, and saw an interview in there by the guy who did the surround EJ releases. He had some interesting things to say about Gus Dudgeon's remasters series...inforamtion more than opinion, mentioning that GD added reverb to some tracks in addition to changing EQ.

Dennis Drake strikes again!

NB. I made a mistake -- the Owsinski book was on mixing.
(He has two others, on recording and tracking, respectively)

The other comment by Greg Penny regarding the GD remasters that I remember (I really should just order the book, I'm going by what I read standing in the book store) was that Dudgeon saw his remastering as an opportunity to fix old mistakes.

I remember Dudgeon himself writing, either in ICE or in some liner notes, that the EJ masters had 'gone soft' (!?), necessitating some high-frequency help, but I don't recall anything about that in the interview with Penny.

So questions would be, how do the two-channel SACD versions compare to the GD reissues? Are they the same, or new remasters, and if the latter, from the original tapes, or from GD's digital transfers?

I seem to recall that the bonus track 'Philadelphia Freedom' on the GD reissue of Cpt. Fantastic was *WAY* louder than the one on various Billboard/Rhino comp CD...and that it was also WAY loud on the SACD.

[stevef]

NB. I made a mistake -- the Owsinski book was on mixing.
(He has two others, on recording and tracking, respectively)

The other comment by Greg Penny regarding the GD remasters that I remember (I really should just order the book, I'm going by what I read standing in the book store) was that Dudgeon saw his remastering as an opportunity to fix old mistakes.

I remember Dudgeon himself writing, either in ICE or in some liner notes, that the EJ masters had 'gone soft' (!?), necessitating some high-frequency help, but I don't recall anything about that in the interview with Penny.

So questions would be, how do the two-channel SACD versions compare to the GD reissues? Are they the same, or new remasters, and if the latter, from the original tapes, or from GD's digital transfers?

I haven't done a lot of critical listening to the SACDs comparing them with the Rocket remasters. I do not know if they are Dudgeon's current remasters or not... but for the most part, I like the SACDs.

"Dudgeon saw his remastering as an opportunity to fix old mistakes".
This is exactly what I read Dudgeon did on the Rockets... I'd especially point out the mess he made of 11/17/70 where he changed the mix, added reverb, and also resquenced the album totally different from the original album some 30+ years on... his results sound nothing lke the original LP version! I can't speak for all of the other Elton John albums he remastered, as I haven't bothered to pick them up after hearing his screwed-up 11/17/70, which was one of my favorite Elton John albums. But I find the SACDs and MoFis to be better representations of the albums as I remembered growing up and listening to.
I personally would rather hear the albums as they were originally presented.

Steve

[MK]

11/17/70 is a live album, correct? I feel like live albums are often more vulnerable to revisionist history. Expanded reissues or extra tracks to present a more 'complete' concert on CD is one thing, but I'm talking about the sound - everything from remixing to reverb. I dunno, it's like a producer will think twice about messing with a studio album because it was carefully recorded, edited, overdubbed, sequenced, and mixed over and over again, whereas a live album is 'just' a simple live recording and things like reverb are justified because, hey, it sounds more 'live' now and that's what we're going for! (Yeah, I know, even in their first official releases, most live recordings are edited and overdubbed after-the-fact, but still...)

[MK]

BTW, how does the To Be Continued... box set sound? I'm not big on Elton's albums outside of Goodbye Yellow Brick Road and Honky Chateau, but the compilations look nice.

[Rspaight]

I've got the first issue of the TBC box, and it sounds kind of dull and uninteresting to me. Not exactly bad (and certainly not squashed, since it predated hypercompression), just unmemorable. Inoffensive, I guess you could say. I could throw up a quick MP3 sample if you like.

I don't know if the 1990 version is at all like the later reissue, though.

Ryan

[stevef]

I've got the first issue of the TBC box, and it sounds kind of dull and uninteresting to me. Not exactly bad (and certainly not squashed, since it predated hypercompression), just unmemorable. Inoffensive, I guess you could say. I could throw up a quick MP3 sample if you like.

I don't know if the 1990 version is at all like the later reissue, though.

Ryan

The reissue of the To Be Continued boxset is supposed to be exactly the same as the original issue.

Back briefly on the subject of 11/17/70...
Yes, it is a *live* album but one recorded in a small studio, originally performed for an FM broadcast. The original recording sounds very good; Dudgeon applied heavy use of reverb on the most recent Rocket remaster, and remixed the sound quite drastically from what I can tell. At times, Elton's piano is buried farther back in the mix than the bass and drums... nothing like the original. Dudgeon not only made changes to the album, he made major changes - this is not "tinkering"...he massacred the original recording, which is a real shame. All previous versions on MCA, DJM, or Polydor are the ones to acquire. The orignal track list (even if it is actually *wrong*) works better.

Steve

[lukpac]

Back briefly on the subject of 11/17/70...
Yes, it is a *live* album but one recorded in a small studio, originally performed for an FM broadcast. The original recording sounds very good; Dudgeon applied heavy use of reverb on the most recent Rocket remaster, and remixed the sound quite drastically from what I can tell. At times, Elton's piano is buried farther back in the mix than the bass and drums... nothing like the original. Dudgeon not only made changes to the album, he made major changes - this is not "tinkering"...he massacred the original recording, which is a real shame. All previous versions on MCA, DJM, or Polydor are the ones to acquire. The orignal track list (even if it is actually *wrong*) works better.

Didn't the US and UK releases originally feature different mixes?

At the moment I can't remember which versions I have and haven't heard, but I do know that side 2 of the original US Uni pressing has a pretty strange mix. Side 1 sounds pretty good, but side 2 left something to be desired.

[Phil Elliott]

Here's the interview with GD in Sound On Sound magazine. He mentions the Elton CDs in the boxout at the bottom of the page. His opinon of the original CD's was less than complimentery.

http://www.soundonsound.com/sos/jul01/a ... udgeon.asp

[lukpac]

"At the point on the CD where they crossfaded trying to go from side one to side two, the whole thing goes completely out of phase, so the audience goes all strangled and horrible and it sounds like it's coming down a phone. The person who did this obviously couldn't give a tuppeny f**k."

Last I knew that was an issue with the mix itself...

[MK]

I've got the first issue of the TBC box, and it sounds kind of dull and uninteresting to me. Not exactly bad (and certainly not squashed, since it predated hypercompression), just unmemorable. Inoffensive, I guess you could say. I could throw up a quick MP3 sample if you like.

I don't know if the 1990 version is at all like the later reissue, though.

Ryan

No, that's okay. I don't feel compelled to hunt down old, OOP pressings of Elton John CD's, so I'll probably get the box set. I think MFSL and DCC probably cover most of the Elton John songs/albums I like to hear, and the box set would probably cover the rest.

[MK]

If anyone cares, the MFSL Tumbleweed is on Pedro's. Same with MFSL's gold CD of Clapton's 461 Ocean Blvd.

BTW, what's going on with Pedro's? Is that kid still sending info to the authorities?

[Jeff T.]

That's what I have. All the Elton MFSL's, toss in a superior Sound of EJ, and 1/2 Speed Super-Disc of GBYBR, and original UK DJM Vinyl LPs of Madman and S/T, and I pretty much have enough. I just need some SACDs or the SS mixes is about it.

Oh, I have a Nautilus Greatest Hits test pressing for fun.

A friend gave me a copy of the remastered Capt. Fantastic CD, and it was impossible to sit through. It's like the Stones Undercover, or The Who's Face Dances, that album that signals the decline of a great artist. A decline that let's you know that while there may be great songs coming later, there will never be another Quadrophenia, Exile, or Don't Shoot Me.

Elton was quoted today in the newspaper as saying he knows his day in the sun is over so far as radio is concerned, and he and Bernie are fine with it. They can get on with writing good songs still.