Tell Me :  Talk
Talk about your favorite band. 

Previous page Next page First page IORR home

For information about how to use this forum please check out forum help and policies.

Goto Page: 12Next
Current Page: 1 of 2
GRRR tracks comparison ?
Posted by: Doc ()
Date: November 15, 2012 10:44

The GRRR! tracks are not the regular album versions in some cases like She's A Rainbow for instance.

Has someone made the complete comparison yet ?
The 2 CD version for instance is featuring shorter versions of songs than the Super Deluxe but I do not own it so I can't figure out precisely...

[doctorstonesblog.blogspot.com]



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2012-11-15 10:56 by Doc.

Re: GRRR tracks comparison ?
Posted by: Glam Descendant ()
Date: November 15, 2012 11:39

What's different about "She's A Rainbow"?

(I haven't heard GRRR! yet so I really don't know.)

Re: GRRR tracks comparison ?
Posted by: Doc ()
Date: November 15, 2012 11:44

4:35 on TSMR
4:13 on GRRR! 3CD version ==> probably same version than 40 Licks

[doctorstonesblog.blogspot.com]



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2012-11-15 11:50 by Doc.

Re: GRRR tracks comparison ?
Posted by: KeithNacho ()
Date: November 15, 2012 14:42

Editing old songs should be prosecuted.................

Re: GRRR tracks comparison ?
Posted by: Deltics ()
Date: November 15, 2012 15:06

Quote
Doc
4:35 on TSMR
4:13 on GRRR! 3CD version ==> probably same version than 40 Licks

Single edit?



[www.45cat.com]


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



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2012-11-15 15:07 by Deltics.

Re: GRRR tracks comparison ?
Posted by: kowalski ()
Date: November 15, 2012 16:21

On Disc 2 YCAGWYW, She's A Rainbow and Fool To Cry are the well-known single edits while IORR is the same edited version as on Forty Licks.

On Disc 3 Miss You, Beast Of Burden, Mixed Emotions, Highwire, Anybody Seen My Baby? and Don't Stop are the single edit versions
Emotional Rescue and Undercover Of The Night are the same edits as on Forty Licks.

The other tracks seem to be original versions.


I'm using the 3-CD edition.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2012-11-15 16:23 by kowalski.

Re: GRRR tracks comparison ?
Posted by: Doc ()
Date: November 16, 2012 13:20

Thanks !
I'd be curious if somebody has bought the 2 CD edition

40 track for 50 years is a weird way of celebrating, but it's affordable

[doctorstonesblog.blogspot.com]

Re: GRRR tracks comparison ?
Posted by: Blueranger ()
Date: November 16, 2012 13:28

YCAGWYW are the Stereo edit, which has been unavailable since ABKCO's 1989 Singles Collection went out of print.

Re: GRRR tracks comparison ?
Date: November 16, 2012 20:58

Quote
kowalski
On Disc 2 YCAGWYW, She's A Rainbow and Fool To Cry are the well-known single edits while IORR is the same edited version as on Forty Licks.

On Disc 3 Miss You, Beast Of Burden, Mixed Emotions, Highwire, Anybody Seen My Baby? and Don't Stop are the single edit versions
Emotional Rescue and Undercover Of The Night are the same edits as on Forty Licks.

The other tracks seem to be original versions.


I'm using the 3-CD edition.

The edit of Emotional Rescue - it's the same edit as the video, correct? It sure seems like it.

Re: GRRR tracks comparison ?
Posted by: Glam Descendant ()
Date: November 16, 2012 22:54

Quote
Doc
4:35 on TSMR
4:13 on GRRR! 3CD version ==> probably same version than 40 Licks

I think the carnival barker and the spinning wheel at the beginning on TSMR account for that time difference.

Re: GRRR tracks comparison ?
Posted by: NoCode0680 ()
Date: November 16, 2012 22:58

Quote
Glam Descendant
Quote
Doc
4:35 on TSMR
4:13 on GRRR! 3CD version ==> probably same version than 40 Licks

I think the carnival barker and the spinning wheel at the beginning on TSMR account for that time difference.

I haven't gotten my Grrr yet, but most compilations have that removed. More Hot Rocks and Through The Past Darkly are like that.

Re: GRRR tracks comparison ?
Posted by: Title5Take1 ()
Date: November 16, 2012 23:04

Oh, come on, the shortened version of the Doors' LIGHT MY FIRE is so much better:





Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2012-11-16 23:06 by Title5Take1.

Re: GRRR tracks comparison ?
Date: November 16, 2012 23:07

Quote
Doc
Thanks !
I'd be curious if somebody has bought the 2 CD edition

40 track for 50 years is a weird way of celebrating, but it's affordable

There isn't a 40 track edition of GRRR.

Re: GRRR tracks comparison ?
Posted by: NoCode0680 ()
Date: November 16, 2012 23:15

Quote
WeLoveToPlayTheBlues
Quote
Doc
Thanks !
I'd be curious if somebody has bought the 2 CD edition

40 track for 50 years is a weird way of celebrating, but it's affordable

There isn't a 40 track edition of GRRR.

I think there is. I don't see it on Amazon or anything, but I've heard about it a few times.

And in this review the reviewer says he bought the 2 CD, 40 Track version

Grrr Review

Re: GRRR tracks comparison ?
Date: November 16, 2012 23:23

Quote
NoCode0680
Quote
WeLoveToPlayTheBlues
Quote
Doc
Thanks !
I'd be curious if somebody has bought the 2 CD edition

40 track for 50 years is a weird way of celebrating, but it's affordable

There isn't a 40 track edition of GRRR.

I think there is. I don't see it on Amazon or anything, but I've heard about it a few times.

And in this review the reviewer says he bought the 2 CD, 40 Track version

Grrr Review

Holy crap. What is the point? ...a two-CD, 40-track budget edition available at Target stores;

Re: GRRR tracks comparison ?
Posted by: NoCode0680 ()
Date: November 16, 2012 23:27

I don't really know. It's only about $5 cheaper than the 3 CD version on Amazon. Seems like it would be worth that for the extra disc, even to a casual fan, but I don't know.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2012-11-16 23:27 by NoCode0680.

Re: GRRR tracks comparison ?
Date: November 16, 2012 23:28

This is hilarious here:

The 2-CD set does include many of their big hits but concentrated more on the U.K. charts, leaving some top twenty U.S. hits out like Time is On My Side and Heartbreaker (available only on the 3 and 4-CD sets) and Mother's Little Helper (only on the 4-CD set). Any could have replaced 1978's Respectable, 1997's Anybody Seen My Baby? and 2002's Don't Stop which appear on all three sets.

Then there are those top 20 hits in the U.S. and U.K. that didn't make the cut for any of the configurations:

Tell Me (1964 / #24 U.S.)
Ain't Too Proud to Beg (1974 / #17 U.S.)
Respectable (1978 / #23 U.K.)
Hang Fire (1982 / #20 U.S.)
Going to a Go-Go (1982 / #25 U.S. / #26 U.K.)
One Hit (to the Body) (1986 / #28 U.S. / #80 U.K.)
Rock and a Hard Place (1989 / #23 U.S. / #63 U.K.)
Out of Tears (1994 / #60 U.S. / #36 U.K.)
Like a Rolling Stone (1995 / #109 U.S. / #12 U.K.)



Huh. Respectable is on all three CD editions. Must just be a mistake.

Re: GRRR tracks comparison ?
Posted by: NoCode0680 ()
Date: November 16, 2012 23:30

Quote
WeLoveToPlayTheBlues

Huh. Respectable is on all three CD editions. Must just be a mistake.

I think he's advocating leaving Respectable off in favor of one of the tracks he wanted.

Re: GRRR tracks comparison ?
Date: November 16, 2012 23:44

Quote
NoCode0680
Quote
WeLoveToPlayTheBlues

Huh. Respectable is on all three CD editions. Must just be a mistake.

I think he's advocating leaving Respectable off in favor of one of the tracks he wanted.

I certainly agree with THAT!

Re: GRRR tracks comparison ?
Date: November 16, 2012 23:46

Making a monkey out of fans...


Re: GRRR tracks comparison ?
Date: November 16, 2012 23:51

From [www.superdeluxeedition.com]

Our vinyl was in a terrible state for a brand new record. It was covered in dust, dirt and had a big mark on the surface. The picture (in the post above) shows exactly how it came out of the sleeve – unacceptable in a set currently retailing at £105 on amazon.

Apart from the poster and the vinyl wallet, the only other item in the box is the massive book, which fits snugly in place. Apart from a short foreword by Rolling Stone magazine co-founder Jann Wenner, photo captions, and CD track listings, there is no text at all in this book. No critical essays, no album-by-album assessments, and no personal contributions from any of the band.

After a dozen or so pages of black and white photos, laid out on uncoated paper, the meat of the book (68 pages to be precise) is made up of white glossy pages, each with a single photograph of some piece of Rolling Stones memorabilia. A radiocassette player used by Mick Jagger in 1975, a Charlie Watts flight case, or a promotional plastic harmonica. The whole thing has the feel of a Sotheby’s auction catalog – there is even a completely pointless memorabilia ‘index’ at the end where we see all the same photos again much smaller over a few pages.

...The CDs all sit in pockets in the book, meaning that unless you take them out and store them separately, every time you fancy playing a CD you have to lug this thing out from wherever you decide to keep it to play the damn things. Apparently, even though you are paying around £100 for this set, there is not enough in the production budget for separate sleeves or packaging for the discs.

Even the music disappoints. A quick listen to Tumbling Dice reveals a harsher and ‘louder’ sound than is present on the Virgin release from 1994.

In the end this set leaves you with a rather empty feeling. Five CDs and a seven inch record are not worth £100 and the giant book that has been created to try and give the illusion of value is, frankly, pointless. It doesn’t educate, inform, or even tell you something new about the band. It takes less than 3 minutes to flick through the content and with the one-photo-per-page approach, it looks like it could have been laid out in half a day.

In the end this Rolling Stones GRRR! super deluxe edition is all style over substance. It’s ludicrously over-sized, horribly over-priced and is close to an insult to Stones fans. Stick to your bootlegs of the early demos and avoid this set.



WOW! That's just... it makes Forty Licks seem genius!

Re: GRRR tracks comparison ?
Posted by: Blueranger ()
Date: November 17, 2012 01:26

I don't care for that review. My set is nice and in perfect condition. The guy can't help but being negative about the box, because he was unlucky to have a faulty 7" record...

Re: GRRR tracks comparison ?
Posted by: drewmaster ()
Date: November 17, 2012 02:06

Quote
Blueranger
I don't care for that review. My set is nice and in perfect condition. The guy can't help but being negative about the box, because he was unlucky to have a faulty 7" record...

Plus the guy seems unaware that the 1994 Virgins were remastered by Universal a few years ago, so those are the versions (obviously) on GRRR.

Drew

Re: GRRR tracks comparison ?
Date: November 17, 2012 02:28

Quote
drewmaster
Quote
Blueranger
I don't care for that review. My set is nice and in perfect condition. The guy can't help but being negative about the box, because he was unlucky to have a faulty 7" record...

Plus the guy seems unaware that the 1994 Virgins were remastered by Universal a few years ago, so those are the versions (obviously) on GRRR.

Drew

A quick listen to Tumbling Dice reveals a harsher and ‘louder’ sound than is present on the Virgin release from 1994.

He's absolutely clear that they've been remastered, hence what he said. That's what 'than' means. This release doesn't sound as good as the Virgin remasters.

Re: GRRR tracks comparison ?
Date: November 17, 2012 02:29

Quote
Blueranger
I don't care for that review. My set is nice and in perfect condition. The guy can't help but being negative about the box, because he was unlucky to have a faulty 7" record...

So you don't disagree with the lack of content?

Re: GRRR tracks comparison ?
Posted by: nick ()
Date: November 17, 2012 02:32

Quote
drewmaster
Quote
Blueranger
I don't care for that review. My set is nice and in perfect condition. The guy can't help but being negative about the box, because he was unlucky to have a faulty 7" record...

Plus the guy seems unaware that the 1994 Virgins were remastered by Universal a few years ago, so those are the versions (obviously) on GRRR.

Drew

Yes BUT, those Virgin's didn't suck until Universal remastered them.

Re: GRRR tracks comparison ?
Date: November 17, 2012 02:38

Quote
nick
Quote
drewmaster
Quote
Blueranger
I don't care for that review. My set is nice and in perfect condition. The guy can't help but being negative about the box, because he was unlucky to have a faulty 7" record...

Plus the guy seems unaware that the 1994 Virgins were remastered by Universal a few years ago, so those are the versions (obviously) on GRRR.

Drew

Yes BUT, those Virgin's didn't suck until Universal remastered them.

That's not what he said. He said the UMe's suck! The Virgin's still sound good and always will - all you have to do is play them. Universal didn't remaster the Virgins, Universal remastered their own issues.

Re: GRRR tracks comparison ?
Posted by: drewmaster ()
Date: November 17, 2012 03:28

Quote
WeLoveToPlayTheBlues
Quote
drewmaster
Quote
Blueranger
I don't care for that review. My set is nice and in perfect condition. The guy can't help but being negative about the box, because he was unlucky to have a faulty 7" record...

Plus the guy seems unaware that the 1994 Virgins were remastered by Universal a few years ago, so those are the versions (obviously) on GRRR.

Drew

A quick listen to Tumbling Dice reveals a harsher and ‘louder’ sound than is present on the Virgin release from 1994.

He's absolutely clear that they've been remastered, hence what he said. That's what 'than' means. This release doesn't sound as good as the Virgin remasters.

Anyone who is all of a sudden "disappointed" that a Universal release of the Stones sounds different from the Virgin release, when the Universal remasters came out several years ago, is without a clue.

Drew

Re: GRRR tracks comparison ?
Date: November 17, 2012 03:49

Quote
drewmaster
Quote
WeLoveToPlayTheBlues
Quote
drewmaster
Quote
Blueranger
I don't care for that review. My set is nice and in perfect condition. The guy can't help but being negative about the box, because he was unlucky to have a faulty 7" record...

Plus the guy seems unaware that the 1994 Virgins were remastered by Universal a few years ago, so those are the versions (obviously) on GRRR.

Drew

A quick listen to Tumbling Dice reveals a harsher and ‘louder’ sound than is present on the Virgin release from 1994.

He's absolutely clear that they've been remastered, hence what he said. That's what 'than' means. This release doesn't sound as good as the Virgin remasters.

Anyone who is all of a sudden "disappointed" that a Universal release of the Stones sounds different from the Virgin release, when the Universal remasters came out several years ago, is without a clue.

Drew

Except it wasn't "several" years ago and he's obviously aware enough to understand that UMe screwed up the sound, which keeps going over your head. Perhaps the dude didn't buy any of the UMe remasters, just like me, when he found out they screwed the sound up. When I got the Some Girls double reissue I was floored at how bad it sounded - and that was two years after the UMe remasters came out.

Re: GRRR tracks comparison ?
Posted by: drewmaster ()
Date: November 17, 2012 04:03

Quote
WeLoveToPlayTheBlues
Quote
drewmaster
Quote
WeLoveToPlayTheBlues
Quote
drewmaster
Quote
Blueranger
I don't care for that review. My set is nice and in perfect condition. The guy can't help but being negative about the box, because he was unlucky to have a faulty 7" record...

Plus the guy seems unaware that the 1994 Virgins were remastered by Universal a few years ago, so those are the versions (obviously) on GRRR.

Drew

A quick listen to Tumbling Dice reveals a harsher and ‘louder’ sound than is present on the Virgin release from 1994.

He's absolutely clear that they've been remastered, hence what he said. That's what 'than' means. This release doesn't sound as good as the Virgin remasters.

Anyone who is all of a sudden "disappointed" that a Universal release of the Stones sounds different from the Virgin release, when the Universal remasters came out several years ago, is without a clue.

Drew

Except it wasn't "several" years ago and he's obviously aware enough to understand that UMe screwed up the sound, which keeps going over your head. Perhaps the dude didn't buy any of the UMe remasters, just like me, when he found out they screwed the sound up. When I got the Some Girls double reissue I was floored at how bad it sounded - and that was two years after the UMe remasters came out.

It WAS several years ago ... three, to be exact. And they sound BETTER than the Virgins, to my ears and those of a lot of other people. Nobody screwed up.

Drew

Goto Page: 12Next
Current Page: 1 of 2


Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.

Online Users

Guests: 1972
Record Number of Users: 206 on June 1, 2022 23:50
Record Number of Guests: 9627 on January 2, 2024 23:10

Previous page Next page First page IORR home