The 2011 flat transfer brings back some clarity and balance. But the best version I've listened to is the Japanese vinyl reissue from 1979 (ESS-63003).

Quote
StonedRambler
Honestly - for IORR I actually think the 2009 Universal master is the best. Yes it's a bit on Viagra and has less dynamics but doesn't sound as dull and lifeless as other releases.

It's probably the only album in the Stones catalogue that I prefer the Universal master. Give it a try.

On Viagra and has less dynamics looks like this
1986 CBS - Official DR value: DR12
1994 Virgin - Official DR value: DR10
2009 UM - Official DR value: DR6
2011 flat transfer - Official DR value: DR11
All 2009 remasters are virtually unalienable in the normal environment. They were done for 'nomad listening'. I keep them in mp3 on my phone to listen on a train or in the plane via headphones during long trips . Otherwise they caused headache.

This album do not need a remaster. It needs a remix. Because nothing can make it sound crystal clear (and it is not necessary, per se).

Here is another thing. A comparison of amplitude/frequency charts.
These are original charts for title track

These are differential charts. I.e., what was added during mastering atop of the master tape. Flat transfer 2011 was used as a base line.

As you can see all guys - Ted Jensen for CBS, Bob Ludwig for Virgin and Stephen Marcussen for Universal - added kind of similar 'smile' atop of flat transfer. But Marcussen also compressed everything to DR5 (for this track) making it absolutely messy sounding. Now it is not dull sounding but loud and messy because all instruments are almost on the same level. Well, for cheap headphones and aggressive environment this will do .

Personally I find nothing dull about IORR. The lp was sounding pretty good but the first cd I got (CBS) was disappointing (being of the first generation of dull and listless remasters for cd during the 80s, like the awful TY, GHS and Sticky Fingers jobs that CBS did).
The Virgin cd was a huge improvement, I thought. Never needed anything else.

Quote
Mathijs
If there is one album that is in need of a remastering it is IORR. All releases sound dull and flat as they mastered the life out of it.

Mathijs

A friend of mine said that the original UK vinyl sounds great, not at all as flat as the ones after it. Have you heard that and could it be really so?

I always like more CBS CDs than any other remasters, just beside the lenght rarities Released later.

Thanks you ironbelly for share the knowledge.

There's a bootleg called 'It's Only Goat's Head Soup' from 2006 which sounds pretty damn crisp to me, although I haven't heard every official release.

[www.discogs.com]

This is the most dull and listless of all Stones vinyl and CDs. Listen to the “pop” of Black and Blue and then put IORR on. Chalk and cheese.

Strangely, the only version of this I can listen to is the version on cd that was remastered in 2009 by Marcussen for Universal At least it has some vitality. But it’s still not flash.

Rod

Quote
padre69

Quote
Mathijs
If there is one album that is in need of a remastering it is IORR. All releases sound dull and flat as they mastered the life out of it.

Mathijs

A friend of mine said that the original UK vinyl sounds great, not at all as flat as the ones after it. Have you heard that and could it be really so?

Yes, the original vinyl release did sound better in terms of dynamics, life and presence.

But the rot then set in even with vinyl. The Subsequent EMI period pressings were relatively flat and tired sounding...

...and that's well before all the "Digitally Disastered" varients.

Edited just to add..

Even the cover suffered. The original had a weird, waxy feel that seemed to suite and emphasise the vibe of the cheesy cover art.

That was largely lost too



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2024-03-04 10:10 by Spud.

Quote
StonedRambler
Honestly - for IORR I actually think the 2009 Universal master is the best. Yes it's a bit on Viagra and has less dynamics but doesn't sound as dull and lifeless as other releases.

It's probably the only album in the Stones catalogue that I prefer the Universal master. Give it a try.

´

+1

IORR was the only instance where the '94 Replica-LP-Cover Virgin CD didn't really convince me sound-wise. I thought it had something to do with IORR being recorded at Musicland Studios in Munich (thinking of other albums, recorded at Musicland, like Led Zeppelin's "Presence" that sounded a bit sterile and flat as well).

So I was delighted listening to the 2009 UMG-release, adding more punch and energy to the tracks. It made me buy several more UMG-releases, which sadly don't work as well

Quote
ironbelly

Quote
StonedRambler
Honestly - for IORR I actually think the 2009 Universal master is the best. Yes it's a bit on Viagra and has less dynamics but doesn't sound as dull and lifeless as other releases.

It's probably the only album in the Stones catalogue that I prefer the Universal master. Give it a try.

On Viagra and has less dynamics looks like this
1986 CBS - Official DR value: DR12
1994 Virgin - Official DR value: DR10
2009 UM - Official DR value: DR6
2011 flat transfer - Official DR value: DR11
All 2009 remasters are virtually unalienable in the normal environment. They were done for 'nomad listening'. I keep them in mp3 on my phone to listen on a train or in the plane via headphones during long trips . Otherwise they caused headache.

This album do not need a remaster. It needs a remix. Because nothing can make it sound crystal clear (and it is not necessary, per se).

Here is another thing. A comparison of amplitude/frequency charts.
These are original charts for title track

These are differential charts. I.e., what was added during mastering atop of the master tape. Flat transfer 2011 was used as a base line.

As you can see all guys - Ted Jensen for CBS, Bob Ludwig for Virgin and Stephen Marcussen for Universal - added kind of similar 'smile' atop of flat transfer. But Marcussen also compressed everything to DR5 (for this track) making it absolutely messy sounding. Now it is not dull sounding but loud and messy because all instruments are almost on the same level. Well, for cheap headphones and aggressive environment this will do .

Thank you for your great technical analysis.Since they were both recorded at Musicland could IORR be remixed to sound like Black n Blue? And could L&G be remixed to sound better?

Quote
Taylor1
Thank you for your great technical analysis.Since they were both recorded at Musicland could IORR be remixed to sound like Black n Blue? And could L&G be remixed to sound better?

It depends if they have original multitracks. If those are lost the chances are slim for both albums.

Quote
Taylor1
Since they were both recorded at Musicland could IORR be remixed to sound like Black n Blue? And could L&G be remixed to sound better?

They can remix IORR to sound like ABBA if they want to. My understanding is that they do not have the master tapes for L&G anymore so no, what we have is likely the best available. They did record several other shows though, like Philly, Pittsburgh and MSG.

Mathijs

Quote
mosthigh
There's a bootleg called 'It's Only Goat's Head Soup' from 2006 which sounds pretty damn crisp to me, although I haven't heard every official release.

[www.discogs.com]

In fact, this bootleg has a crystal clear sound - it's one of the best studio bootlegs I know. All the songs that are on the boot are clearer than the official released versions. I'm increasingly wondering how people manage to mess up good recording material (for a lot of money).



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2024-03-15 09:59 by RobertJohnson.

Jimmy Miller must have lost sway over the Stones, the process or himself during the making and. release of GHS.

I think having the right producer is super important for many bands, esp ones like the Stones, who were maybe a bit disjointed by this time. Mick doing his thing, Keef doing his. Charlie, Bill and Taylor not always engaged. Lots of money, drugs everyone living very separate lives.

I don't think there is a single weak track on Beggars, Let It Bleed, Sticky Fingers or Exile (though almost every album prior or since has one or many). Having the right 'someone' in-charge of the process - from fleshing out songs to quality recording, mixing and mastering may have helped GHS, IORR and beyond? or maybe the magic was gone?

Quote
Spud

Quote
padre69

Quote
Mathijs
If there is one album that is in need of a remastering it is IORR. All releases sound dull and flat as they mastered the life out of it.

Mathijs

A friend of mine said that the original UK vinyl sounds great, not at all as flat as the ones after it. Have you heard that and could it be really so?

Yes, the original vinyl release did sound better in terms of dynamics, life and presence.

But the rot then set in even with vinyl. The Subsequent EMI period pressings were relatively flat and tired sounding...

...and that's well before all the "Digitally Disastered" varients.

Edited just to add..

Even the cover suffered. The original had a weird, waxy feel that seemed to suite and emphasise the vibe of the cheesy cover art.

That was largely lost too

is this only true for the uk vinyl or does the us vinyl also sound good?

the original Satanic vinyl had
strange smell to it ... Maybe it was the ink



ROCKMAN

Quote
buffalo7478

I don't think there is a single weak track on Beggars, Let It Bleed, Sticky Fingers or Exile (though almost every album prior or since has one or many). Having the right 'someone' in-charge of the process - from fleshing out songs to quality recording, mixing and mastering may have helped GHS, IORR and beyond? or maybe the magic was gone?

A good producer certainly helps, but the best producer in the world couldn't make IORR a truly top album. The material is simply not good enough for that. It lacks those raw, raunchy songs that its predecessors had in the form of Dancing with mr D, Rocks Off, Bitch or CYHMK.

And that's no shame after such a huge consistent output that The Stones had basically since their formation at that point. 14 albums in 10 years. Crazy high work ethic.

I see IORR and B&B as a temporary dip. With Some Girls and Tattoo You that magic was back for me.

IMO there are some good songs on IORR.The title track, TWFO, FF, Luxury, Till the Next Goodbye, I f You Really Want to Be My Friend and If You Can’t Rock Me



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2024-03-15 16:17 by Taylor1.

For me IORR is a top album alright. It's got more raw and raunchy songs on it than its immediate, softer predecessors in that it has the guitars turned up more loudly than before, Jagger singing more abrasive than usually (not always a good thing though here it works), the drums are heavier. To me it is their first more modern, fresh sounding and almost hard rock like record they made, before turning towards the more fashionable punkish, LoFi sounds of SG (speaking of sound guality, SG is about as bad as it gets).
Somehow, IORR is a bit like an Undercover of ten years earlier: as Mick stated about Undercover, The Stones were about to turn into a hard rock outfit. But then, both albums have some experimentation as well.

I guess I'm in the minority but what the heck.

Quote
SomeGuy
For me IORR is a top album alright. It's got more raw and raunchy songs on it than its immediate, softer predecessors in that it has the guitars turned up more loudly than before, Jagger singing more abrasive than usually (not always a good thing though here it works), the drums are heavier. ...

And that's exactly what the bland and listless EQ and mastering engineered out of it. It's a shame.

Quote
SomeGuy
For me IORR is a top album alright. It's got more raw and raunchy songs on it than its immediate, softer predecessors in that it has the guitars turned up more loudly than before, Jagger singing more abrasive than usually (not always a good thing though here it works), the drums are heavier. To me it is their first more modern, fresh sounding and almost hard rock like record they made, before turning towards the more fashionable punkish, LoFi sounds of SG (speaking of sound guality, SG is about as bad as it gets).
Somehow, IORR is a bit like an Undercover of ten years earlier: as Mick stated about Undercover, The Stones were about to turn into a hard rock outfit. But then, both albums have some experimentation as well.

I guess I'm in the minority but what the heck.

IORR is completely dull sounding -check the snare drum on If You Can't Rock Me. There's no snap, crackle and pop, it's a dull thud on a wet carton box. The guitars on this song are a midrange blur, to the extent that it took me 10 years to hear that the rhythm Wah guitar isn't a guitar at all but Billy Preston on the clavinet. All the energy has been sucked out of the record by compressing it to death. The only track that sounds good, strangely, is Fingerprint File.

The LoFi sound on SG is a clear choice, they wanted to sound like a garage band. But still, the drums sound better than ever, with Beast of Burden as -IMO- their best sounding track ever recorded.

Mathijs

The last ......

Quote
Mathijs

Quote
SomeGuy
For me IORR is a top album alright. It's got more raw and raunchy songs on it than its immediate, softer predecessors in that it has the guitars turned up more loudly than before, Jagger singing more abrasive than usually (not always a good thing though here it works), the drums are heavier. To me it is their first more modern, fresh sounding and almost hard rock like record they made, before turning towards the more fashionable punkish, LoFi sounds of SG (speaking of sound guality, SG is about as bad as it gets).
Somehow, IORR is a bit like an Undercover of ten years earlier: as Mick stated about Undercover, The Stones were about to turn into a hard rock outfit. But then, both albums have some experimentation as well.

I guess I'm in the minority but what the heck.

IORR is completely dull sounding -check the snare drum on If You Can't Rock Me. There's no snap, crackle and pop, it's a dull thud on a wet carton box. The guitars on this song are a midrange blur, to the extent that it took me 10 years to hear that the rhythm Wah guitar isn't a guitar at all but Billy Preston on the clavinet. All the energy has been sucked out of the record by compressing it to death. The only track that sounds good, strangely, is Fingerprint File.

The LoFi sound on SG is a clear choice, they wanted to sound like a garage band. But still, the drums sound better than ever, with Beast of Burden as -IMO- their best sounding track ever recorded.

Mathijs

Yeah, I agree here. Glyn Johns mixed Fingerprint File, if I recall correctly.

Andy Johns did an interview on this record because he recorded about half of it and quit. He couldn't believe what they did to it in the mixing stage. IMO, the Glimmers needed somebody like Miller or either of the Johns (and later Kimsey) for feedback. I'm not sure they had that here.

I'm not sure who mixed Black and Blue, but I seem to remember it sounds much better.

I always thought B&B sounded almost too clear & transparent for a Stones album.

They need a bit of dirt and a bit of murky mystery in the mix.

[That's part of Exile's magic. Even though there was a lot of post production, they got it right.. and you can almost smell that damp sweaty air in Keith's basement]



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2024-03-19 10:09 by Spud.

Quote
TravelinMan

Quote
Mathijs

Quote
SomeGuy
For me IORR is a top album alright. It's got more raw and raunchy songs on it than its immediate, softer predecessors in that it has the guitars turned up more loudly than before, Jagger singing more abrasive than usually (not always a good thing though here it works), the drums are heavier. To me it is their first more modern, fresh sounding and almost hard rock like record they made, before turning towards the more fashionable punkish, LoFi sounds of SG (speaking of sound guality, SG is about as bad as it gets).
Somehow, IORR is a bit like an Undercover of ten years earlier: as Mick stated about Undercover, The Stones were about to turn into a hard rock outfit. But then, both albums have some experimentation as well.

I guess I'm in the minority but what the heck.

IORR is completely dull sounding -check the snare drum on If You Can't Rock Me. There's no snap, crackle and pop, it's a dull thud on a wet carton box. The guitars on this song are a midrange blur, to the extent that it took me 10 years to hear that the rhythm Wah guitar isn't a guitar at all but Billy Preston on the clavinet. All the energy has been sucked out of the record by compressing it to death. The only track that sounds good, strangely, is Fingerprint File.

The LoFi sound on SG is a clear choice, they wanted to sound like a garage band. But still, the drums sound better than ever, with Beast of Burden as -IMO- their best sounding track ever recorded.

Mathijs

Yeah, I agree here. Glyn Johns mixed Fingerprint File, if I recall correctly.

Andy Johns did an interview on this record because he recorded about half of it and quit. He couldn't believe what they did to it in the mixing stage. IMO, the Glimmers needed somebody like Miller or either of the Johns (and later Kimsey) for feedback. I'm not sure they had that here.

I'm not sure who mixed Black and Blue, but I seem to remember it sounds much better.

Black And Blue sounds wonderful, imo. I can understand if it's too clean for others, but for me it's very pleasant to listen to.

Regarding IORR, Short And Curlies also sounds great (like FF does), imo.

Quote
DandelionPowderman

Black And Blue sounds wonderful, imo. I can understand if it's too clean for others, but for me it's very pleasant to listen to.

.

Don't get me wrong, it does sound fantastic..

But after you've played it, you've heard it all ...

..It has no secrets

I know absolutely nothing of the technical aspects, I just know the album sounds muffled (for lack of a better word). Maybe dull.

I love most of the songs on here, but the production leaves something to be desired. Ditto Ronnie's Gimme Some Neck.

Glimmers first time out?

Quote
Elmo Lewis
I know absolutely nothing of the technical aspects, I just know the album sounds muffled (for lack of a better word). Maybe dull.

I love most of the songs on here, but the production leaves something to be desired. Ditto Ronnie's Gimme Some Neck.

Glimmers first time out?

absolutely agree

love the album hate the sound of it

the foxes in the boxes boot of that album a couple years ago was much better sounding

even though it came off of forty year old cassettes

Quote
Elmo Lewis
I know absolutely nothing of the technical aspects, I just know the album sounds muffled (for lack of a better word). Maybe dull.

I love most of the songs on here, but the production leaves something to be desired. Ditto Ronnie's Gimme Some Neck.

Glimmers first time out?

Interesting .

the only version of Gimme Some Neck I've ever had is my original day of release pressing...and that sounds pretty good on my kit.

That said, the original vinyl pressing of IORR sounded better than any subsequent reworkings too but, sadly, it "walked" many years ago and I don't still have it.

We all have different tastes and values when it comes to sound quality...and, obviously, different playback systems...

But some folks I think equate "good" sound with a big impressive "in yer face" and overtly HiFi presentation ...which isn't always what you want from a recording.