Quadrophenia / Love Reign O'er Me mix question

[Tom Stroud]

Just listened to Quadrophenia properly for the first time. Yeah, I know. The film didn't really do it for me and I had the obvious tracks from it on comps. I'm just getting my head around this part of their career - never really got too deep in anything post Who's Next.

I'm listening to the remixed CD. Love Reign O'er Me gets near to the end - at 4.59 the big "loooove" / drums roll etc etc. It's like it's a semitone off or something? An edit to an earlier mix that runs a bit slower? Either way it sounds flat (ie musically flat rather than flat EQ). A bit like how the piano enters flat on Abbey Road / The End after the orchestral bit.

The mix on The Who Collection (I'm presuming it's the original) sounds fine.

Is the remix of Quadrophenia a waste of time? General consensus seems to be that it's better fidelity than the original with a bit less "character".

Sorry if this is an obvious question and it's all been discussed years ago but I just heard this and thought WTF...?

[lukpac]

Don't know about the bit at the end of LROM. I'd have to compare.

Is the remix of Quadrophenia a waste of time? General consensus seems to be that it's better fidelity than the original with a bit less "character".

The original mix has always sounded kind of funky to me. Splashy yet dull. I used to think the remix fixed that, but it seems like maybe it just made things really bright. I think maybe the remix gives the initial impression of better sound quality, but as you listen you realize it is just funky in different ways. Plus there are a number of differences. I guess at this point I find it something interesting to study, but I've gone back to listening to the original mix more or less exclusively.

[JWB]

It's original mixes all the way for me, except the song Rael, for obvious reasons.

[Jeff T.]

The original mix has better guitar sound particularly the acoustic guitars. Listen to "Sea and Sand" and how beautiful and rich those acoustic guitars sound here. Then the remix which imo ruins that sound and also lowers them in the mix which gives the vocals a boost in the process. Louder vocals is not always a bad thing, but this album I think was fine in original form. The drums also were panned out nicely on the original.

I grab the MFSL CD set for most listens. The original UK Track pressing I had picked up inner groove distortion quickly. Loud sections were cut with small grooves near the end of some sides, making them prone to wear. The MFSL CD is the best bet for those loud cuts at end of sides, and consistancy.

[krabapple]

Daltrey always complained that his vocals were too low in the mix. So the remix attempted to address that, I guess. I presume it's Townshend-approved.

[MK]

Daltrey always complained that his vocals were too low in the mix. So the remix attempted to address that, I guess. I presume it's Townshend-approved.

Yeah, the remix addresses that. From a sound quality perspective, the original mix is better and best heard on the MFSL gold discs. The remix doesn't breathe like the original. More compression and a bit sharper, but by modern standards, a good mix with better vocal levels.

As unbalanced as the original is, I think a person can get used to Roger low in the mix. All the other instruments sound just fine.

[Jeff T.]

Indeed, in rock n' roll there is an unwritten rule that vocals should not be too easy to hear. Lyrics should not jump up and clobber you over the head. They should reveal themselves to the listener over time. Jagger understands this very well.

Daltry forgot about this. Perhaps him not being a writer.....