Just wonder, how come "Ladies and gentlemen" is so lousy mixed and sounds so horrible? I can't hear the diffrence between the official or the bootlegs!! It sounds like some kind of bad mono mix with a Dolby button puched in! The Chess recordings from 1964 sounds AMAZING in stereo, but not this from as late as 1972! Why?

Thank god somebody finally brought this up. I saw this thing with a great quadraphonic mix in theaters in the 70s. On my home theater system it lacks presence. The Some Girls DVD is great, and even my bootleg Hampton DVD sounds better.

Yeah thought the same thing when I switched over from the Ft Worth DVD the other day. Ladies and Gentleman sounds very shotty and hollow to my ears.

Cokksucker Blues is more lousy mixed than this.

Quad means 4, so you need a 5.1 channel speaker system I would think but could be wrong.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2012-02-07 20:12 by steel driving hammer.

Quote
steel driving hammer
Cokksucker Blues is more lousy mixed than this.

Quad means 4, so you need a 5.1 channel speaker system I would think but could be wrong.

I have six speakers all together, including a center channel. There's just something muffled about the sound of the LGTRS DVD.

it is also a half step fast which is very annoying if one wishes to play along on guitar or what have you......

We were talking about this a week or two ago. It was a thread somebody was asking about why there was no CD release for Ladies And Gentlemen like there was in Texas '78, and my opinion was that it just sounds bad. To be honest I didn't notice how bad it sounded until I ripped the audio and was just listening to it alone. It doesn't seem so bad as a film, but without the visual entertainment and just focusing on the sound, it really becomes noticeable that the sound isn't THAT great. Still sounds OK, and an awesome movie, but the audio can't stand alone the way the audio from Texas '78 does.

The audio is strange. I usually listen to it on DTS and at times it sounds good, other times, like half way through Tumbling Dice, the sound totally changes and it's frustrating. I've not compared it to boot versions I have yet but none of it compares sound wise to Texas '78.

Just for my info...were both shows recorded with the same setup? 6 years between the two Texas shows...did the equipment improve or were they just able to capture a better show in '78 compared to '72?

It is really incredible how bad the sound of this release is. It's hard to say why it, (after all those years) ended up with this result. I can't imagine it was this poor from the begining. It sounds very compressed but the worst thing is that they've put some kind of chorus effect on top of the master sound on several places. To ad to the worst part, there are also small gaps of silence during some of the songs. This can easily be heard if you select 1.5 and listen through it in stereo. At the end of Dead Flowes one can hear both the gaps and the chorus effect. It's also hard to hear Keiths guitar (listen to BS intro) and the bass drum, and it makes me think that some of the mastertracks(?) might be missing. As mentioned, the film was originally released i quad sound, but to me it sounds like a stereo recording thats been made into 1.5. Did they actually use the quad master? Eagle Rock has muffed the sound even more by adding more volume on the audience. I guess they tryed to cover up for the bad sound. Anyway my guess is that the master had some very bad treatment during the years the film was in other owners hands, and when the Stones finally bought it back, it was too late. Guess they just wasn't up for going back to the master reels, mixing and producing it once more -too bad, because it's a fantastic pice of music, and i'd love to hear it in great sound. Btw. the bonus tracks on the Ya Yas DVD sounds much better

Maybe you should rip a copy to MONO, or just punch the mono button on your receiver, if you have one. Does it help?

So many factors when mixing to multiple channels, I'll have to have a listen to this one and see what everybody's talking about. peace

I have the Blu Ray and the sound is sometimes great and sometimes poor. Is the sound actually mono? If so this would explain why (more often than not) it sounds so "shrill". Midnight Rambler sounds great to my ears with DTS Master Audio 5.1 but Gimme Shelter (for instance) sounds weird.

Charlie's good on it though, in't he?

Quote
ryanpow
Charlie's good on it though, in't he?

Aren't they all...

Though the songs SFM, JJF, GS etc. seem to be played too fast.

I watch/listen on a 7.1 Blu-Ray, and it is awesome!!!

Quote
dewlover
I watch/listen on a 7.1 Blu-Ray, and it is awesome!!!

-No, it isn't.

it was originally released in QUAD and then mashed down to stereo when I saw it in 81 before the stones played in chicago that year..midnight shows on a double bill with Let There be Rock AC/DC....
the songs that are too fast are ALL OF EM since the whole show is sped up. Sometime I will try to move the audio rip I have down to proper pitch but that is a slow and dull process.

Keep in mind it took them 40 years to release it. Its inadequacies have probably been discussed as a reason to hold it back. But finally you have it.

Quote
Munichhilton
Keep in mind it took them 40 years to release it. Its inadequacies have probably been discussed as a reason to hold it back. But finally you have it.

I don't agree. They still have the audio masters (hopefully in perfect condition) and should be able to mix a new and shiny version of it. It shouldn't be that hard, and they could still have the original sound as an option. Maybe the soundtrack with a new mix and production could be released as one of the archive releases...It would be a relief to actually hear what they're playing.

Quote
dadrob
the songs that are too fast are ALL OF EM since the whole show is sped up.

Intentionally sped up like the Let's Spend The Night Together film?

It sounds like crap. No bottom end, not punch at all. And it is dramatic how bad it sounds when you compare it to Some Girls Live in Texas! That DVD sounds amazing, and the picture is incredible. LAG is just a poorly made film in many ways, the camera work, the sound and the editing. But they are smokin' on the 72 tour, so You Can't Always Get What You Want...

Will agree that it doesn't sound great. I ripped it to a cd that I regularly play at home, and did the same with the Some girls in texas dvd. The sound of the 72 recording is vastly inferior. Seems a bit muddy, not as clear as the 78 recording. Maybe just due to older technology in 72?

What's really weird also is the difference between the 78 cd and the 78 dvd. After having played my own ripped copy for a while I picked up the bluray+cd combo of some girls live in texas. I still prefer my own audio rip of the dvd though, the incredible bass of Bill seems to be more prominent in that mix. I think they did something to the audio for the CD. It's slightly different from what's on the DVD.

Unrelated to this is that after a few listens I think YCAGWYW on Hampton is not the one from the boot. On the boot you don't hear him say "I'm so scared, take me down", which you do hear on the official release.

Opinions anyone, on these matters of life and death?

It is weird, indeed, because the bootleg "Ladies And Gentlemen" has awesome sound.

Quote
S.T.P

Quote
Munichhilton
Keep in mind it took them 40 years to release it. Its inadequacies have probably been discussed as a reason to hold it back. But finally you have it.

I don't agree. They still have the audio masters (hopefully in perfect condition) and should be able to mix a new and shiny version of it. It shouldn't be that hard, and they could still have the original sound as an option. Maybe the soundtrack with a new mix and production could be released as one of the archive releases...It would be a relief to actually hear what they're playing.

Then why didn't they do a new mix off these audio masters? All magnetic tape degrades over time - I very much doubt if the audio tapes are in perfect condition. I believe you've got the best mix they could achieve on the L&G soundtrack, given the limitations of the source.

Quote
Whale


What's really weird also is the difference between the 78 cd and the 78 dvd. After having played my own ripped copy for a while I picked up the bluray+cd combo of some girls live in texas. I still prefer my own audio rip of the dvd though, the incredible bass of Bill seems to be more prominent in that mix. I think they did something to the audio for the CD. It's slightly different from what's on the DVD.

The CD has a more compressed and brickwalled mastering than the DVD audio track. That may explain why your audio rip from DVD sounds better than the official CD.

Well STP, maybe you need a new system...???

Quote
Father Ted

Quote
S.T.P

Quote
Munichhilton
Keep in mind it took them 40 years to release it. Its inadequacies have probably been discussed as a reason to hold it back. But finally you have it.

I don't agree. They still have the audio masters (hopefully in perfect condition) and should be able to mix a new and shiny version of it. It shouldn't be that hard, and they could still have the original sound as an option. Maybe the soundtrack with a new mix and production could be released as one of the archive releases...It would be a relief to actually hear what they're playing.

Then why didn't they do a new mix off these audio masters? All magnetic tape degrades over time - I very much doubt if the audio tapes are in perfect condition. I believe you've got the best mix they could achieve on the L&G soundtrack, given the limitations of the source.

Agree. It claims its 'restored and remastered' from master tapes. If the multi-track masters were worth a darn wouldn't it be 'Restored, Remastered, and Remixed".

Source tape limitations are most likely to blame on this one as we would have long ago had a better sounding boot were there one. Like Ft Worth... Great tapes of that one have surfaced for years and years.

I was always complaining about that too, such a great performance, but I hate this muddy mix, no real stereo imo, Mick Jaggers voice is burried deep down in the middle of nowhere, high notes are completely missing! I doubt they had no chance to remix the sound, I suspect this was the way it should sound, from an "artistic" angle!

If some had an effort to mix a better version I would .....

ryanpow, I got it. Clever comment!

Quote
DandelionPowderman
It is weird, indeed, because the bootleg "Ladies And Gentlemen" has awesome sound.

I would definitely disagree with you there, Dandelion. LADIES AND GENTLEMEN has never sounded awesome in bootleg form in my opinion. The muffled sound on the official LADIES AND GENTLEMEN release, is also present on those bootleg versions, only some of the bootlegs do actually sound a little 'brighter', in addition to the audio running a little faster (too fast). The difference between the sound (and also THE visual) between LADIES AND GENTLEMEN and TEXAS 78, is really very striking. TEXAS 78 is just as sharp and crisp as LADIES AND GENTLEMEN is muffled. That's the reason why in my opinion, perhaps, TEXAS 78 is the definitive Stones live DVD release at the present time. LADIES AND GENTLEMEN will forever be my favoured performance between the two, but there is a marked contrast to how those shows translate to the small screen. I think TEXAS 78 may more successfully attract new Stones converts, than LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, despite the latter presenting the Stones at a larger almighty peak. Yes, though, i do agree that the LADIES AND GENTLEMEN DVD release should have sounded much better.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2012-02-08 20:25 by Edward Twining.