Synthesizer Patel Posted May 17, 2010 Share Posted May 17, 2010 they aren't trying to make it sound like the original vinyl, they're trying to make it sound like the original master tape - i'd assume this is closer to that than the older cd's, probably closer than the original vinyl too. they are releasing it on vinyl too - although i think it's a fortune to buy. that'll be the way to compare the remaster in terms of vinyl, but i'd assume that the modern one is better just for the fact that mastering techniques have improved. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
suites Posted May 17, 2010 Share Posted May 17, 2010 I bought the remastered version like 15 years ago on CD...no new tracks. Amazing that they can sell so many of what they already sold.....Is the sound that much better that it is going to make a difference. Jeez: Reel to ReelVinyl8 trackCassetteCDDVDAir how many way to we need to buy the same thing. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Synthesizer Patel Posted May 17, 2010 Share Posted May 17, 2010 I bought the remastered version like 15 years ago on CD...no new tracks. Amazing that they can sell so many of what they already sold.....Is the sound that much better that it is going to make a difference. Jeez: Reel to ReelVinyl8 trackCassetteCDDVDAir how many way to we need to buy the same thing. it was actually out of print on cd for quite a while, so i'd imagine to quite a few people this is a good thing it's come out, and not just a waste of time. i've only heard a v0 version of it, and it sounds a lot better than the one i've got from the 90s. which i don't think is remastered - and i also don't think the album ever has been remastered. they did everything up and including let it bleed in the early part of the century, but nothing else until recently. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Winston Legthigh Posted May 17, 2010 Share Posted May 17, 2010 i've only heard a v0 version of it, and it sounds a lot better than the one i've got from the 90s. which i don't think is remastered - and i also don't think the album ever has been remastered. they did everything up and including let it bleed in the early part of the century, but nothing else until recently.The 1994 re-release was definitely advertised as remastered. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Analogman Posted May 17, 2010 Share Posted May 17, 2010 it was actually out of print on cd for quite a while, so i'd imagine to quite a few people this is a good thing it's come out, and not just a waste of time. i've only heard a v0 version of it, and it sounds a lot better than the one i've got from the 90s. which i don't think is remastered - and i also don't think the album ever has been remastered. they did everything up and including let it bleed in the early part of the century, but nothing else until recently. They were re-mastered once before: Rolling Stones Wikipedia entryAfter Wyman's departure, the Rolling Stones' new distributor/record label, Virgin Records, remastered and repackaged the band's back catalogue from Sticky Fingers to Steel Wheels, except for the three live albums, and issued another hits compilation in 1993 entitled Jump Back (UK 16; US 30). And then again last year - March 2, 2009, New York, NY - Universal Music Group are pleased to announce the reissue of the Rolling Stones re-mastered, post-1971 studio albums into the market throughout 2009 starting in May. I think the next thing with be a Sticky Fingers deluxe release. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
tinnitus photography Posted May 17, 2010 Share Posted May 17, 2010 you know that Mick carefully watched the sales figures of the Beatles' remasters... Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Synthesizer Patel Posted May 17, 2010 Share Posted May 17, 2010 The 1994 re-release was definitely advertised as remastered. yeah, actually i'm looking at the cd and it says Bob Ludwig did it, you're right - using something called UV22 Super CD Encoding, wow space-age! it's not very well done though. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
LouieB Posted May 17, 2010 Share Posted May 17, 2010 they aren't trying to make it sound like the original vinyl, they're trying to make it sound like the original master tape - i'd assume this is closer to that than the older cd's, probably closer than the original vinyl too. they are releasing it on vinyl too - although i think it's a fortune to buy. that'll be the way to compare the remaster in terms of vinyl, but i'd assume that the modern one is better just for the fact that mastering techniques have improved.Considering my LP copy cost me $2.50 I don't see much reason to buy a new vinyl one either.... you know that Mick carefully watched the sales figures of the Beatles' remasters...And we know how much Mick needs the money.... LouieB Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Analogman Posted May 17, 2010 Share Posted May 17, 2010 yeah, actually i'm looking at the cd and it says Bob Ludwig did it, you're right - using something called UV22 Super CD Encoding, wow space-age! it's not very well done though. It's junk, really. At least the ABCKO re-masters sound pretty good, and are at the right speed. Considering my LP copy cost me $2.50 I don't see much reason to buy a new vinyl one either.... And we know how much Mick needs the money.... LouieB I saw a headline a while back somewhere that stated he had lost millions of dollars last year. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Synthesizer Patel Posted May 17, 2010 Share Posted May 17, 2010 Considering my LP copy cost me $2.50 I don't see much reason to buy a new vinyl one either....LouieB yeah, but that was 2 months wages in those days! Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Synthesizer Patel Posted May 17, 2010 Share Posted May 17, 2010 It's junk, really. At least the ABCKO re-masters sound pretty good, and are at the right speed. yeah, i've got those, and i think they're fine - i wouldn't bother getting rid of them, but i've always felt exile needed remastering properly. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
LouieB Posted May 17, 2010 Share Posted May 17, 2010 yeah, but that was 2 months wages in those days! Yea, I guess I should have mentioned it was a used copy.....yea me and the Stones really had it rough back in the 1860s...... As for Mick. What did he lose money on? Alimony? LouieB Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Analogman Posted May 17, 2010 Share Posted May 17, 2010 yeah, i've got those, and i think they're fine - i wouldn't bother getting rid of them, but i've always felt exile needed remastering properly. I think I paid around 15 bucks each for those cds. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Analogman Posted May 19, 2010 Share Posted May 19, 2010 Don Was Revisits 'Exile On Main Street' I am listening to some FLAC files that someone gave me. The tracks are definitely running at a different speed now. Also, you can hear the bass. I'd say my first thought is that there is more depth to the sound, instead of the flatness of past versions. It may be a tad too bright sounding though. It's neat they left some tape hiss in there. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Oil Can Boyd Posted May 20, 2010 Share Posted May 20, 2010 I can't figure out if my ipod is telling me to get this or reminding me that I already have it on CD and vinyl. On my way home from work yesterday both Shine a Light and Happy came up on shuffle. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
MattZ Posted May 20, 2010 Share Posted May 20, 2010 I can't figure out if my ipod is telling me to get this or reminding me that I already have it on CD and vinyl. On my way home from work yesterday both Shine a Light and Happy came up on shuffle. You know, it wouldn't surprise me if Apple had invented some technology that rigs your ipod when you sync it to play music on shuffle that subtley suggests that you buy an album. Man that would be freaky. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
stooka Posted May 20, 2010 Share Posted May 20, 2010 San Francisco Art Exchange Nice pics! Quote Link to post Share on other sites
calvino Posted May 20, 2010 Share Posted May 20, 2010 San Francisco Art Exchange Nice pics! I think a lot of these of pictures are in the book that is part of the Super-Deluxe package (CD,Album, DVD, postcards,and book). I thought very briefly about buying it, but I just settle on the two cd set. I will buy the Exile DVD in June, though. The reissue does good, though I have not compared it to the vinyl or the 94 Virgin release. It is nice on this latest reissue that Wyman is credited on every song, though. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Moss Posted May 25, 2010 Share Posted May 25, 2010 Does this mean Liz Phair has to come out with a deluxe re-issue now? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
calvino Posted May 25, 2010 Share Posted May 25, 2010 Does this mean Liz Phair has to come out with a deluxe re-issue now? She kinda already did back in 2008. She even has the DVD - I don't if she did the vocals/lyrics for the four unreleased songs in 2008 while using the backing tracks from 1993, though. From amazon page: Editorial ReviewsProduct DescriptionTwo CD set archive release of her 1993 album. Liz Phair is a US singer-songwriter and guitarist. Her signature guitar, which she is often seen playing (and is prominent upon the cover of her self-titled fourth album), is a Fender Duo-Sonic II. Her album Exile in Guyville was chosen as one of Rolling Stone's 500 Greatest Albums of All Time. This two disc set includes four previously unreleased audio tracks and a DVD with a documentary about the album's genesis. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Synthesizer Patel Posted May 25, 2010 Share Posted May 25, 2010 I will buy the Exile DVD in June, though. if it's the same thing as i saw on tv the other night, i wouldn't bother. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
LouieB Posted May 25, 2010 Share Posted May 25, 2010 Does this mean Liz Phair has to come out with a deluxe re-issue now?Probably she will do it again. I bet she needs the money. LouieB Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Analogman Posted May 29, 2010 Share Posted May 29, 2010 I keep finding a lot of posts like this out there: My initial thoughts were that this must have been a pretty tough recording to begin with to remaster. There are a lot of instruments and a lot going on in many of the songs. But to me, it sounded very unnatural and lacked all of that analog beauty that has caused me to succumb to the vinyl illness. It's not terrible, but there is no magic there sound-wise. The one thing that struck me almost immediately was the total lack of stereo separation and sound stage. I had to check my amps to see if for some reason I had left them in mono. I can't think of a better analogy other than my parents are getting old, and my dad hung a tennis ball in the garage to know when to stop. I felt like I had that hanging between my speakers and that was the sound stage. Someone in another forum mentioned that good albums make you want to turn it up, but this one made him want to turn it down. I would agree with that. I use horn speakers, so I wouldn't say it was bright. Maybe not even harsh but again, unnatural and an unorganized sense of busy-ness. Acoustic songs and simpler songs with less instruments actually sounded pretty good. I'm glad to have any new copy of this album, I had forgotten how great it is. But the true test is, "How often will I listen to this copy", so unfortunately I would give it a grade of "C". I'm no audiophile but I listened with a Technics SL-1200mkII turntable and a Denon DL-160 cartridge. I have Klipschorns in the front powered by an older solid state amp and Klipsch Chorus' in back powered by a tube amp. Great vinyl sounds nice on this setup, but this album (redo) ain't great. I wonder what the Hoffman folks have to say? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
calvino Posted May 29, 2010 Share Posted May 29, 2010 Well Hoffman is up to 142 pages discussing this release - from what I can gather they are pretty much panning it. But I'm not too sure with all that is going through all the pages. Anyway I think it (the CD) sounds fine it - is definitely louder and they seem to have brought the vocal more to forefront, I can actually make out of what Jagger is singing. I still not have done any comparison to the Virgin or the vinyl I have. Has far as the bonus disc, they only one that I am not particularly fond of is Following the River, that sounds too new and the addition of strings is ridiculous. The rest of it is okay and I will be listening to again. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Analogman Posted May 29, 2010 Share Posted May 29, 2010 Do you think the speed has changed? To me, it sounds slower. I have an original pressing. I have not heard it in a long time though. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.