Here's my artwork.






"As we say in England, it can get a bit trainspottery"



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2012-04-05 03:13 by Deltics.

Quote
Mathijs

Quote
kevinkamphuis

Quote
Mathijs

Quote
kowalski

Quote
WeLoveYou

Quote
kowalski

Quote
WeLoveYou
You can't change the dynamics once they're already squashed.

I listened to Captain Acid's Hampton81 "remaster" and there was no change

Because he almost hadn't anything changed. If I remember well he only had the sound lowered and did some slight EQ adjustements.

So what was changed with the GS track you heard?

Well balanced sound, less compressed and with no harshness, guitars that don't sound "metallic", drums that kick and full fat bass sound - not squashed like on the original release, and piano notes! I don't know how Mr. Kamphuis achieved this little miracle but it really sounds good.

? It just sounds exactly the same, only lower in volume. I prefer Clearmountains version by a mile.

Mathijs

Isn't that weird? You said no difference only lower volume, and still preferring a LOUD and Brickwalled version

There are lot's of differences; Drumsound, drums & vocals slightly higher in the mix. Warmer sound. Bass adjustments etc.

Please Check with TT Dynamic Range Meter and you'll see the difference...
Lowering the volume (-3db) don't adjust the dynamic Range

No, it's not weird. I don't find the mastering to be overly compressed and limited, and certainly not 'brickwalled'. It isn't lacking in dynamics or frequency response in my opinion.

I do find though that it is mastered very modern, and you have to get used to this. We've been listening to the 75 tour for 25 years when it still sounded old fashioned, and now it suddenly sounds very modern. I guess te main reason for this is that they didn't want to spend too much time and money on the mixing. To my ears it has a tad too much loudness, it is a bit too hot for my ears. this is easily fixed by adjusting the gain, just as turning up the gain a bit helps with old vinyl records.

When something is mastered very hot, with quite a lot of limiting and compression, there's no way to revert that back. There's tricks you can apply, like taking out the midrange a bit, or a small change in the stereo image, and some less gain, but it doesn't really makes it sound better. You can even concert it to a non lossless format and back, and that will take the compression out...

Mathijs

great post. could care less what the audiophiles say, the bottom line is this blows away the old boots, and i am very very pleased.

sounds freaking amazing - period

THANK YOU DELTICS

-------------------
Keep On Rolling

Quote
Slick

Quote
Mathijs

Quote
kevinkamphuis

Quote
Mathijs

Quote
kowalski

Quote
WeLoveYou

Quote
kowalski

Quote
WeLoveYou
You can't change the dynamics once they're already squashed.

I listened to Captain Acid's Hampton81 "remaster" and there was no change

Because he almost hadn't anything changed. If I remember well he only had the sound lowered and did some slight EQ adjustements.

So what was changed with the GS track you heard?

Well balanced sound, less compressed and with no harshness, guitars that don't sound "metallic", drums that kick and full fat bass sound - not squashed like on the original release, and piano notes! I don't know how Mr. Kamphuis achieved this little miracle but it really sounds good.

? It just sounds exactly the same, only lower in volume. I prefer Clearmountains version by a mile.

Mathijs

Isn't that weird? You said no difference only lower volume, and still preferring a LOUD and Brickwalled version

There are lot's of differences; Drumsound, drums & vocals slightly higher in the mix. Warmer sound. Bass adjustments etc.

Please Check with TT Dynamic Range Meter and you'll see the difference...
Lowering the volume (-3db) don't adjust the dynamic Range

No, it's not weird. I don't find the mastering to be overly compressed and limited, and certainly not 'brickwalled'. It isn't lacking in dynamics or frequency response in my opinion.

I do find though that it is mastered very modern, and you have to get used to this. We've been listening to the 75 tour for 25 years when it still sounded old fashioned, and now it suddenly sounds very modern. I guess te main reason for this is that they didn't want to spend too much time and money on the mixing. To my ears it has a tad too much loudness, it is a bit too hot for my ears. this is easily fixed by adjusting the gain, just as turning up the gain a bit helps with old vinyl records.

When something is mastered very hot, with quite a lot of limiting and compression, there's no way to revert that back. There's tricks you can apply, like taking out the midrange a bit, or a small change in the stereo image, and some less gain, but it doesn't really makes it sound better. You can even concert it to a non lossless format and back, and that will take the compression out...

Mathijs

great post. could care less what the audiophiles say, the bottom line is this blows away the old boots, and i am very very pleased.

Blows away my ears as well.

I've been listening to four tracks remastered by Mr. Kamphuis he kindly sent me so far. Sound is warm, well balanced and he brought clarity to instruments. Overall it sounds natural and you feel like listening to it again. This is the way it should have been released from start.

Quote
Mathijs

Quote
Justin

Quote
71Tele

Quote
Justin
I thought the opening chords to "Wild Horses" was very eerie. With the Flanger effect it almost sounded Led Zeppelin-ish to me.

I find this version dirge-like and unbearable to listen to.

Yup, I admit I skipped over it without even listening past the first opening chords. I thought there were many other great moments to move on to.

You should listen to WH -great guitar by Wood, fantastic solo, great wurly by Preston.

Mathijs

Will do.

Quote
steve6884
Is it just me or does it sound like they never rehearsed You Gotta Move and just decided to play it out of the blue?

...Well, if Jagger would have bothered, it might have turned out OK...!? - just like the great classic blues tune this originaly is.

Quote
gimme_shelter
The one song i really dislike on LA 75 and on SF as well, if i might add.

...To each his own. I always loved it, because it always felt like a fantastic, genuine, A-class Rolling Stones' rendition of a great classic blues tune like this one originaly is. (or did I just say that?)

Is this official bootleg release that much better than the VGP 082 "Who Went to Church This Sunday?" Has a comparison been made yet?

Quote
kowalski

Quote
Slick

Quote
Mathijs

Quote
kevinkamphuis

Quote
Mathijs

Quote
kowalski

Quote
WeLoveYou

Quote
kowalski

Quote
WeLoveYou
You can't change the dynamics once they're already squashed.

I listened to Captain Acid's Hampton81 "remaster" and there was no change

Because he almost hadn't anything changed. If I remember well he only had the sound lowered and did some slight EQ adjustements.

So what was changed with the GS track you heard?

Well balanced sound, less compressed and with no harshness, guitars that don't sound "metallic", drums that kick and full fat bass sound - not squashed like on the original release, and piano notes! I don't know how Mr. Kamphuis achieved this little miracle but it really sounds good.

? It just sounds exactly the same, only lower in volume. I prefer Clearmountains version by a mile.

Mathijs

Isn't that weird? You said no difference only lower volume, and still preferring a LOUD and Brickwalled version

There are lot's of differences; Drumsound, drums & vocals slightly higher in the mix. Warmer sound. Bass adjustments etc.

Please Check with TT Dynamic Range Meter and you'll see the difference...
Lowering the volume (-3db) don't adjust the dynamic Range

No, it's not weird. I don't find the mastering to be overly compressed and limited, and certainly not 'brickwalled'. It isn't lacking in dynamics or frequency response in my opinion.

I do find though that it is mastered very modern, and you have to get used to this. We've been listening to the 75 tour for 25 years when it still sounded old fashioned, and now it suddenly sounds very modern. I guess te main reason for this is that they didn't want to spend too much time and money on the mixing. To my ears it has a tad too much loudness, it is a bit too hot for my ears. this is easily fixed by adjusting the gain, just as turning up the gain a bit helps with old vinyl records.

When something is mastered very hot, with quite a lot of limiting and compression, there's no way to revert that back. There's tricks you can apply, like taking out the midrange a bit, or a small change in the stereo image, and some less gain, but it doesn't really makes it sound better. You can even concert it to a non lossless format and back, and that will take the compression out...

Mathijs

great post. could care less what the audiophiles say, the bottom line is this blows away the old boots, and i am very very pleased.

Blows away my ears as well.

I've been listening to four tracks remastered by Mr. Kamphuis he kindly sent me so far. Sound is warm, well balanced and he brought clarity to instruments. Overall it sounds natural and you feel like listening to it again. This is the way it should have been released from start.

sorry, but i have no use for cool cool hand, mickboy, or any other clearmountain wannabe. whats done is done, cant get back what isnt there.

For those that are interested, you can listen to and/or download the documentary that BBC radio made of the tour, narrated by Alexis Korner here: [www.4shared.com]


"As we say in England, it can get a bit trainspottery"

How many times has "To each his own" been used in this thread? "To each his own" has never been the sentiment of this forum...such painfully obvious insincerity.

Like the Clearmountain sound or dont like it, you can only alter the sound to your taste. Soundforge PRO10 is incredible software and it cant alter a released download more than the treble and bass knobs on the front of your 8-track player...



Oh..Thanks to Deltics for the art.

Is it insincerity? I think it shows people respect other's opinions,but in terms of the meaning of the expression, I say: "To each his own".

Quote
Munichhilton
"To each his own" has never been the sentiment of this forum...such painfully obvious insincerity.

Like the Clearmountain sound or dont like it, you can only alter the sound to your taste. Soundforge PRO10 is incredible software and it cant alter a released download more than the treble and bass knobs on the front of your 8-track player...



Oh..Thanks to Deltics for the art.

Quote
R
OK, I'm sorry to keep coming back to this but no one seems to be addressing the source tape issue.

How can Bob Clearmountain "remaster" a recording that has never been mastered or released to begin with UNLESS he's doing so with the audience recording that has comprised this beloved bootleg for all of these years?

I have yet to play this on my 'big boy' system but on my after-market car system it seems to lack a bit depth and detail.

I'll leave it to more patient and educated ears than mine to determine if LA FRIDAY is indeed derived from unreleased, multi-track board tapes. Surely there are 'markers' or other indicators spelling out the differences, if there are any.

There are photos on the website that have been posted here that show Ron Nevison's track sheets for the sixteen track recording recording. He recorded the shows using the Record Plant's mobile equipment. This is not an audience tape.

Quote
Slick

Quote
Mathijs

Quote
kevinkamphuis

Quote
Mathijs

Quote
kowalski

Quote
WeLoveYou

Quote
kowalski

Quote
WeLoveYou
You can't change the dynamics once they're already squashed.

I listened to Captain Acid's Hampton81 "remaster" and there was no change

Because he almost hadn't anything changed. If I remember well he only had the sound lowered and did some slight EQ adjustements.

So what was changed with the GS track you heard?

Well balanced sound, less compressed and with no harshness, guitars that don't sound "metallic", drums that kick and full fat bass sound - not squashed like on the original release, and piano notes! I don't know how Mr. Kamphuis achieved this little miracle but it really sounds good.

? It just sounds exactly the same, only lower in volume. I prefer Clearmountains version by a mile.

Mathijs

Isn't that weird? You said no difference only lower volume, and still preferring a LOUD and Brickwalled version

There are lot's of differences; Drumsound, drums & vocals slightly higher in the mix. Warmer sound. Bass adjustments etc.

Please Check with TT Dynamic Range Meter and you'll see the difference...
Lowering the volume (-3db) don't adjust the dynamic Range

No, it's not weird. I don't find the mastering to be overly compressed and limited, and certainly not 'brickwalled'. It isn't lacking in dynamics or frequency response in my opinion.

I do find though that it is mastered very modern, and you have to get used to this. We've been listening to the 75 tour for 25 years when it still sounded old fashioned, and now it suddenly sounds very modern. I guess te main reason for this is that they didn't want to spend too much time and money on the mixing. To my ears it has a tad too much loudness, it is a bit too hot for my ears. this is easily fixed by adjusting the gain, just as turning up the gain a bit helps with old vinyl records.

When something is mastered very hot, with quite a lot of limiting and compression, there's no way to revert that back. There's tricks you can apply, like taking out the midrange a bit, or a small change in the stereo image, and some less gain, but it doesn't really makes it sound better. You can even concert it to a non lossless format and back, and that will take the compression out...

Mathijs

great post. could care less what the audiophiles say, the bottom line is this blows away the old boots, and i am very very pleased.

Well physics says you're both right here. There is a phenomenem in humans listening to Audio at different VOLUMES which sates that at higher volumes (even as much as 3d our ears PERCEIVE more low and low-mid frequencies. That's why they use A and C weighted filters to truly analyze the frequency content of audio files. There is a name for it too, just can't remember it.. peace

Quote
Munichhilton
How many times has "To each his own" been used in this thread? "To each his own" has never been the sentiment of this forum...such painfully obvious insincerity.
.

Whatever floats your boat?... Different strokes for different folks?

Quote
steverogan
Is it insincerity?

It is.

Quote
ryanpow

Quote
Munichhilton
How many times has "To each his own" been used in this thread? "To each his own" has never been the sentiment of this forum...such painfully obvious insincerity.
.

Whatever floats your boat?... Different strokes for different folks?

Better.

I need something that is clearly apathetic.....still searching

Sincerely?

Quote
Munichhilton

Quote
steverogan
Is it insincerity?

It is.

Quote
dcba

Quote
RobertJohnson
Hear it just now first time, what an incredible energy and power ...

I could name 8 shows from 75 that are hotter than this one but hey it's time for rejoicing not bitching.

Still... >< the nice SB shows what the great Millard recording hinted at : this July 13 show was a up-and-down affair.
Some songs were superbly performed others not so much. The "bad" songs verge on "boring" (imo). "Its Only Rock N Roll" or "Dice" clearly lack spark.

With the family out of the house this evening, I finally got around to downloading this show. For $4.95, I got the mp3 version which still sounds absolutely killer on my stereo system. A couple comments about this show. I have always been sentimental to it as it was probably the first boot I ever bought. To hear it in this soundboard quality after having the audience version in my collection for well over 30 years is just awesome! It's like an old friend re-born. Now comes the yes/ but scenario. Thus far, it appears that the bootleg series is touching on the well known and established live concert shows that we as collectors have coveted for many years now. While I am "grateful" and wholeheartedly endorse these archive releases, I am hoping that beyond the 6 initial releases, that the Stones will tap deeper into the well. Yes, LA '75- due to its long established popularity, was probably a good choice to release in this stellar quality. IMHO, as I've stated in other threads, performance wise (depending on how many other shows were recorded), I think they could have released some earlier gigs that showcased the band (& in particular Jagger) in a better light. That's just my two cents.

wish they'd included fanfare for the common man - to hear how the energy builds during that is thrilling - perhaps a licensing issue

Quote
hbwriter
wish they'd included fanfare for the common man - to hear how the energy builds during that is thrilling - perhaps a licensing issue

I think Clearmountain changed that in the mix. In the new version, the crowd roars then kind of dies down before Keith starts HTW. It wasn't that way. I was there. When the house lights went down, the audience was going completely nuts while the lotus unfolded and Keith started those opening chords.

Quote
Munichhilton
I need something that is clearly apathetic.....still searching

"oh who cares what you think" without even a question mark works for me

it still sounds great on my system - including the Mi's vo'aaas
he's rhythmically right there, and that's what makes it for me

Quote
ryanpow

Whatever floats your boat?... Different strokes for different folks?

I absolutely felt the need to do this...




[thepowergoats.com]

Quote
CousinC
As I said before, - since first hearing them on vinyl I especially liked these 75 versions of Wild Horses and Gimme Shelter.

I'm no expert for guitars and amps. But to my knowledge never before of after they played them that way.
Apart from electric guitar (W.Horses) and use of Flange what makes them so different? Did they use special/unusual guitars or was it just a mix of much flang and the way of playing them here?

It is a phaser, not a flanger??

Quote
DandelionPowderman

Quote
CousinC
As I said before, - since first hearing them on vinyl I especially liked these 75 versions of Wild Horses and Gimme Shelter.

I'm no expert for guitars and amps. But to my knowledge never before of after they played them that way.
Apart from electric guitar (W.Horses) and use of Flange what makes them so different? Did they use special/unusual guitars or was it just a mix of much flang and the way of playing them here?

It is a phaser, not a flanger??

Richards uses a MXR Phase 100, Wood a Leslie cabinet.

Mathijs

Listened to it yesterday evening. @#$%& me. Woody cán play.

Quote
Alef
Listened to it yesterday evening. @#$%& me. Woody cán play.

That was already quite obvious on Love You Live, a.o. - an album that I prefer far, far above this 'boot' release.
But hey: to each his own - sincerely.

My all time favourite version of Sympathy for the devil (Ya yas) has just been completely surpassed by the version on LA friday....

I've had it on repeat since I downloaded it!

Fantastic!

Am I the only one who thinks MR sucks and goes nowhere...?

Quote
hbwriter
wish they'd included fanfare for the common man - to hear how the energy builds during that is thrilling - perhaps a licensing issue

definetly, like hampton81.
they sell it cheap, so they even try to save some money this way to rise the gain.