Byrds - Notorious mono SACD

Just what the name says.
User avatar
lukpac
Top Dog and Sellout
Posts: 4589
Joined: Wed Apr 02, 2003 11:51 pm
Location: Madison, WI
Contact:

Byrds - Notorious mono SACD

Postby lukpac » Mon May 01, 2006 1:10 pm

http://www.mofi.com/pc/viewPrd.asp?idca ... 82#details

* PREORDER* They Byrds - Notorious Byrd Brothers Ultradisc UHR™ SACD (Shipping May 23, 2006)

This new Mobile Fidelity reissue features the original 1968 Analog mono mixes (the first time ever on CD!). Featuring the Byrds's trademark guitar jangle and emotionally evocative harmonies, well crafted segues and pioneering electronic effects further anchor this classic rock essential. Stand out tracks including: "Space Odyssey", "Going Back", "Tribal Gathering", "Draft Morning", "Old John Robertson", and the merry Crosby prank "Triad"...

1. Artificial Energy (2:18)
2. Goin’ Back (3:26)
3. Natural Harmony (2:11)
4. Draft Morning (2:42)
5. Wasn’t Born To Follow (2:04)
6. Get To You (2:39)
7. Change Is Now (3:21)
8. Old John Robertson (1:49)
9. Tribal Gathering (2:03)
10. Dolphin’s Smile (2:00)
11. Space Odyssey (3:52)

BONUS TRACKS
12. Moog Raga (3:24) (instrumental)
13. Bound To Fall (2:08) (instrumental)
14. Triad (3:29)
15. Goin’ Back (3:55) (version one)
16. Draft Morning (2:55) (alternate end)
17. Universal Mind Decoder (3:33) (instrumental)

TRACKS 1 - 11 MONO
TRACKS 12 - 17 STEREO
"I know because it is impossible for a tape to hold the compression levels of these treble boosted MFSL's like Something/Anything. The metal particulate on the tape would shatter and all you'd hear is distortion if even that." - VD

User avatar
MK
Posts: 946
Joined: Mon Jul 07, 2003 4:24 pm
Location: North America

Postby MK » Mon May 01, 2006 2:14 pm

Were these dedicated mixes or fold-downs?
"When people speak to you about a preventive war, you tell them to go and fight it. After my experience, I have come to hate war." – Dwight D. Eisenhower

"Neither slave nor tyrant." - Basque motto

Mike Hunte
Senior Troll
Posts: 293
Joined: Wed Apr 09, 2003 4:48 pm
Location: Bed

Re: Byrds - Notorious mono SACD

Postby Mike Hunte » Mon May 01, 2006 3:07 pm

lukpac wrote: Featuring the Byrds's trademark guitar jangle


That's juicy jangle to you...beatch.

User avatar
Xenu
Sellout
Posts: 2209
Joined: Mon Apr 07, 2003 8:15 pm

Postby Xenu » Mon May 01, 2006 4:59 pm

Hah.

Mock MoFi all you want, but I really like this trend. I even sent Coleman Brice a ridiculously effusive letter of praise after the release of the MTM CD, saying "Yes! YES! Do this! Do exclusive stuff! Get mono mixes of shit! I'll buy it!" I got no response, though, so perhaps they were still pissed about my subpar review of the Zappa disc.

(which shouldn't be the way the world works, but...)
-------------
"Fuckin' Koreans" - Reno 911

Mike Hunte
Senior Troll
Posts: 293
Joined: Wed Apr 09, 2003 4:48 pm
Location: Bed

Postby Mike Hunte » Mon May 01, 2006 6:44 pm

Oh, I'll probably buy it at some point. Notorious is my favorite Byrds album, bar none. So I'd at least be curious to hear it.

I have to chuckle though. As I seem to recall, Notorious might have been one of the first albums that used Roy Halee's twin 8-track machine "thing" in places. I believe I read that this was one of the reasons that Gary Usher wanted him.

Which starts to make this whole fascination with mono seem a bit perverse. There's something about the production of this album, for me anyway, that just seems to scream stereo.

Yet, for completist's sake, I'm still interested in hearing the differences...whatever they might be.

"Long live the mono single!"

User avatar
Xenu
Sellout
Posts: 2209
Joined: Mon Apr 07, 2003 8:15 pm

Postby Xenu » Mon May 01, 2006 8:56 pm

I'm curious to see where this is leading. I'd love for MoFi to become the CD repository of some of the weirder shit Sundazed has issued.

(can the Singles disc be in the works?)
-------------

"Fuckin' Koreans" - Reno 911

User avatar
MK
Posts: 946
Joined: Mon Jul 07, 2003 4:24 pm
Location: North America

Postby MK » Tue May 02, 2006 12:33 pm

Yeah, the selling point would be the aesthetic points of the mix (I strongly doubt the stereo mix would have less fidelity or audiophile pixie dust on it).

Problem is, mono can be hit or miss, so how do you get people to spring $20 on an album that may or may not have a more interesting mono mix?

BTW, they could've fit the stereo AND mono mixes of Mr. Tambourine Man AND the newly mixed (stereo only) bonus tracks on a single disc, both redbook and SACD. Royalties would certainly fuck up the price, but I'm just sayin'....
"When people speak to you about a preventive war, you tell them to go and fight it. After my experience, I have come to hate war." – Dwight D. Eisenhower



"Neither slave nor tyrant." - Basque motto

User avatar
Xenu
Sellout
Posts: 2209
Joined: Mon Apr 07, 2003 8:15 pm

Postby Xenu » Tue May 02, 2006 1:36 pm

Fuck up the price? You think $29.99 is decided based on royalties?;-)
-------------

"Fuckin' Koreans" - Reno 911

Ess Ay Cee Dee
Posts: 1458
Joined: Wed Sep 08, 2004 1:35 pm
Contact:

Postby Ess Ay Cee Dee » Tue May 02, 2006 2:23 pm

No, of course not. You're paying for the awesome mind-fuck DSD experience, pal. Ask any audio expert (like LeeS) and he'll tell you that Sack Dee is the best way to hear those pristine 40-year-old mono mixes. It's 64 times better than redbook.

czeskleba
Posts: 235
Joined: Sat Feb 14, 2004 12:02 am

Postby czeskleba » Tue May 02, 2006 5:14 pm

MK wrote:BTW, they could've fit the stereo AND mono mixes of Mr. Tambourine Man AND the newly mixed (stereo only) bonus tracks on a single disc, both redbook and SACD. Royalties would certainly fuck up the price


I thought royalties were only paid once per song per album in the US (ie, if a song appears more than once on the same album, the royalty is only paid once). At least that's the impression I got from an article in ICE years ago about the Beach Boys box set. It said something to the effect of how they were able to have a relatively low list price for a five-disc set because all the songs on disc five were alternate versions of songs that had already appeared elsewhere on the box, and hence disc five did not create any additional royalty expenses, or something like that.

User avatar
lukpac
Top Dog and Sellout
Posts: 4589
Joined: Wed Apr 02, 2003 11:51 pm
Location: Madison, WI
Contact:

Postby lukpac » Tue May 02, 2006 5:29 pm

czeskleba wrote:I thought royalties were only paid once per song per album in the US (ie, if a song appears more than once on the same album, the royalty is only paid once). At least that's the impression I got from an article in ICE years ago about the Beach Boys box set. It said something to the effect of how they were able to have a relatively low list price for a five-disc set because all the songs on disc five were alternate versions of songs that had already appeared elsewhere on the box, and hence disc five did not create any additional royalty expenses, or something like that.


Hmm. I was always under the impression that it was per version, hence the rumblings about having to pay multiple times for SACD.

On a tangental note, I believe in the UK it's per disc, rather than per song. That's how (somehow) we got extra tracks on the UK Who BBC disc.
"I know because it is impossible for a tape to hold the compression levels of these treble boosted MFSL's like Something/Anything. The metal particulate on the tape would shatter and all you'd hear is distortion if even that." - VD

User avatar
Xenu
Sellout
Posts: 2209
Joined: Mon Apr 07, 2003 8:15 pm

Postby Xenu » Tue May 02, 2006 9:55 pm

Yeah, something to that effect. Note the different reissue philosophies of Repertoire (tangentially related? Throw it on as a bonus track!) versus Sundazed (Let Me Be shows up on the second album, so we'll delete it from the first to save money).

-D
-------------

"Fuckin' Koreans" - Reno 911

czeskleba
Posts: 235
Joined: Sat Feb 14, 2004 12:02 am

Postby czeskleba » Tue May 02, 2006 10:18 pm

lukpac wrote:On a tangental note, I believe in the UK it's per disc, rather than per song. That's how (somehow) we got extra tracks on the UK Who BBC disc.


Yep, that's true. In Europe a flat amount of the per disc price is set aside for royalties, so the more songs per album the less each songwriter gets. The label pays the same regardless of whether there's 25 songs or 9. In the US there is a flat per song rate, so the more songs on an album the more royalty $ the label has to pay out.

In the case of the Who BBC album, the label negotiated a special reduced US royalty rate with the publishers of the songs included, because there were so many songs. The publisher of "Man with the Money" was not willing to accept the reduced rate, so the song was axed from US pressings. Don't know if they even bothered with the publisher of Spoonful or just figured it was cheaper to cut it.