Rolling Stones London / Bowie RCA

[Xenu]

Dr. Mountain and I had a brief email exchange once about Hunky Dory. IIRC, I told him about the issue with the Virgin disc, he expressed interest, and then...nothing!

-D

[Andreas]

Rolling Stones: Beggars Banquet (London)
David Bowie: Hunky Dory (RCA)

Am I alone in thinking that these CD's suck ENORMOUS HORSE COCK compared subsequent versions?

There are a ton of wackos on SHtv who think these versions are the best-ever digital versions, and I just can't understand this kind of logic.

On that thread on SH.tv, there are exactly 2 posters who prefer the London CD of Beggars Banquet. And those 2 explained why they prefer the older one (eq choices and speed matching the LP). I count at least 8 posters who prefer the SCAD. What's the problem?

Since I post much more on SH.tv than you, I feel offended by that "wacko" term. And for the record, I like the RCA Hunky Dory and the London Let It Bleed.

Still looking forward to doing and sharing more Who comparisons with you, but these comments were a bit over the top.

[JWB]

Sorry if I offended you. I was not talking about any person or thread in particular, but lots of people who've had that opinion in the past. I can't help it if I think they're wacko.

Anwyay, I'm gonna have the "Who Collection" any day now and I'll be able to post all my choices for the UK singles up to 1973. I have faith in your opinion obviously, since I searched for and bought "Collection". I would have ignored that set completely otherwise.

My obsession with making a Who comp comes from having purchased an original "Instant Party" boot right when it came out, stupidly assuming that top quality artwork meant top quality audio. Wrong. It was a piece of garbage. One of the biggest rip offs ever.

Also unlike the boot, the comp I'm making is 100% Jon Astely free.

Which reminds me, this comp will beat the shit out of that joke of a "singles box".

[Andreas]

Okay, no problem.

Still, there were only two posters who wrote something favorable about the London Beggars Banquet, while all others recommended the SACDs. One poster even trashed the London Aftermath... The impression you wanted to give is simply not true.

I find this general undertone "us who are so intelligent versus those who are wackos" a bit.....retarded. The SH forum has a few thousand members. A few of them have strange (or let's say, incomprehensible) opinions and preferences, and are very vocal about them. That doesn't mean that they speak for everyone.

You should also note that Steve, in a few but interesting cases, disagreed with Dave. Dave is not speaking for Steve, or the forum.

Are older CDs better than newer CDs? Not universally, but as a trend, I have to agree. Beach Boys, Who, Kinks, Genesis, Steely Dan.

[Rob P]

Andreas, the Steely Dan old CDs are better than the new ones? Actually, I should break it down into three periods rather than "old" and "new". First period, sucky inferior masters; second period, better; third period, more or less best. Genesis, old CD's suck, 90's remasters better but not great. Who CDs are about even to me. Beach Boys and Kinks, I don't know about those.

<sarcasm on> And yes, you are a wacko for posting on SHtv. Haven't you learned anything from hanging out over here? <sarcasm off>

[Andreas]

Andreas, the Steely Dan old CDs are better than the new ones?

In my opinion, yes!

Actually, I should break it down into three periods rather than "old" and "new". First period, sucky inferior masters; second period, better; third period, more or less best.

Are you still talking about Steely Dan? What makes you believe that the original CDs are not from the masters? They were done by Roger Nichols, after all (or Steve Hoffman, in at least one case.)

Genesis, old CD's suck, 90's remasters better but not great.

The good Genesis CDs are the Virgin/Charisma CDs from the 1980s, released in Europe. The remasters have noise reduction, especially Trespass and Selling England By The Pound.

Who CDs are about even to me.

I don't want to turn this into another Who thread....so let me just say that I disagree with you.

[Rob P]

Andreas, the Steely Dan old CDs are better than the new ones?

In my opinion, yes!

Actually, I should break it down into three periods rather than "old" and "new". First period, sucky inferior masters; second period, better; third period, more or less best.

Are you still talking about Steely Dan? What makes you believe that the original CDs are not from the masters? They were done by Roger Nichols, after all (or Steve Hoffman, in at least one case.)

Genesis, old CD's suck, 90's remasters better but not great.

The good Genesis CDs are the Virgin/Charisma CDs from the 1980s, released in Europe. The remasters have noise reduction, especially Trespass and Selling England By The Pound.

In the US, the original Genesis Atlantic CDs sounded really bad. I haven't heard the Virgin/Charisma ones from Europe. In my case, the remasters were better, but I don't consider them great.

Donald Fagen talked about how bad the 80s CD's sounded, and in the book Reelin' in the Years a story was mentioned about how Stevie Wonder called Fagen to tell him the sound quality was poor on The Nightfly and other Steely Dan CDs. It's documented that they used later generation masters for those original 80's CD's, MCA used whatever was lying around to make them. A fight ensued between MCA and Steely Dan, in particular, Walter Becker, to correct this problem. The early 90's releases improved things quite a bit, those are the ones with the sticker "Newly Remastered by the Artist".

[Rspaight]

I'll be a heretic and say that the Trespass remaster is far more pleasant to listen to than the 80s Charisma disc (I assume you're referring to the ones with the chopped-up cover art). I thought the 80s disc was a murky, noisy mess. IMHO, FWIW and YMMV.

Ryan

[krabapple]

Genesis

Wacko.

[dudelsack]

I'm with Andreas on the 80's Steely Dan CDs. I even like AJA better on the early 80's disc than the MoFi gold, which I found to be unpleasant listening. It was clearer, almost digitally-recorded sounding. Does that mean that they used better tapes and didn't EQ? Maybe. In that case, I'd rather have a few generations back with better EQ (the red vinyl Canadian LP gets spun a LOT around here, it sounds fantastic).

I've got one Genesis Charisma CD, Selling England By The Pound. Not my favorite album by any means, but the sound is okay (without having compared it to anything).

[Beatlesfan03]

The good Genesis CDs are the Virgin/Charisma CDs from the 1980s, released in Europe. The remasters have noise reduction, especially Trespass and Selling England By The Pound.

I'll second this, I am not a big fan of the Genesis remasters. The early Virgin/Charisma with the cropped covers are the ones to get.

There's a few decent original US discs out there, but the UK discs are the best out there IMHO.

What I don't understand is that while noise reduction seems to be a real sticking point with a lot of folks over sh.tv, the overall consensus seems to approve the Genesis remasters noise reduction and all over the original discs. Sure they might not be as smothered in NR such as Beatles "1" or "Let It Be Naked," but it seemed to me that discussion about anything with NR was evil and should be avoided at all costs.

[krabapple]

Which is silly.

Btw, has anyone actually ever digitally compared British vs. US editions of the first Genesis CDs? Were they different masterings? Because my incredulity is based on the US editions, which ranged from good (Trick, Selling England) to bad (the first three, Wind & Wuthering).
The remasters were all AT LEAST as good sounding, to my ears, and in some cases quite better (e.g., the Lamb, where going back a tape generation or two removed a background buzz; Foxtrot, where a longstanding speed anomaly was corrected).

[MK]

Are there any bad old "Aja" CD's? It's not my favorite album in the world, so I'm not looking for the absolute, greatest, ultra-rare pressing. I want to avoid the 1993 and 1998/9 remaster, those are easy to spot, but what about the older CD's with the 'blocky' MCA logo on the spine? Are there just two kinds - Nichols and Hoffman - or are there some that were done poorly, like the crappy Steely Dan CD's with that grid pattern on the tray card, the same general pattern MCA used on most old CD's?

[dudelsack]

or are there some that were done poorly, like the crappy Steely Dan CD's with that grid pattern on the tray card, the same general pattern MCA used on most old CD's?

As far as I know, Aja was never released in the Compact Disc/Compact Price series...

[Beatlesfan03]

Which is silly.

Btw, has anyone actually ever digitally compared British vs. US editions of the first Genesis CDs? Were they different masterings? Because my incredulity is based on the US editions, which ranged from good (Trick, Selling England) to bad (the first three, Wind & Wuthering).
The remasters were all AT LEAST as good sounding, to my ears, and in some cases quite better (e.g., the Lamb, where going back a tape generation or two removed a background buzz; Foxtrot, where a longstanding speed anomaly was corrected).

Back in the dark days of the internet, I used to be on a digest that did a shootout of the British and US discs and in most cases, the British discs were chosen to be superior over the US discs. I remember getting the British Wind and Wuthering after having the anomaly known as the US version and was amazed by how much better the British disc sounded.

Last year I snagged a copy of Foxtrot on Charisma and once again was surprised at the sound quality. IIRC, the digest chose the US Foxtrot as the better sounding though I don't have that disc anymore. I think Duke was the other title where the US version excelled over the UK version.

I'll admit that the Lamb is far better in its remastered incarnation. That buzz was pretty annoying (although I don't seem to recall disc 2 having the problem). I also liked Wind & Wuthering as well as Seconds Out. The others that I did hear (and I have not heard all of them) came across as somewhat dull to me (NR?).

Didn't mean to turn this into a Genesis discussion.