Tell Me :
Talk
But moaning about moaning is another local tradition
Moaning, complaining or constructive criticism - call it what you will but in the middle of all of that I learn an awful lot. And for that I am grateful.
Sorry, meant to say that I thought the unpacking video looked like a CGI mock-up, not a video of the actual product. I may be wrong of course, I often am.
Regarding the package - I am not scared a lot. Because old CBS and some Virgin CD singles were in simple card sleeves (like promo for Live Licks). No objection to that if they are made from proper carton paper. Surely, something will be missing for those mini-LP replicas. Like the inner sleeve of TSMR or poster in LIB.
Buying vinyl is a kind of fun. Though, it is more easy to get HR files from download.
I hate being told what to do, looking forward to your review though….
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2016-09-14 16:53 by Maindefender.
[forums.stevehoffman.tv]
The process doesn't bother me as much as the fact that a good chunk of the transfers from 2002 are recycled here, including some with obvious problems.
That's actually entirely incorrect.
He?
Most of the songs noted as being from the 2002 masters stay in digital sync with those versions, and sometimes even come close to nulling out to silence when inverting one. That isn't simply "using [my] ears; new digital transfers would not (and in some cases, do not) stay in sync. These are not opinions.
Nor are things like the length of fades opinions. The recordings speak for themselves.
A series of digital transfers were done in 2002 from various analog tapes. Those transfers were then tweaked in various ways in mastering: EQ, noise reduction, fades, etc.
For the new box, many of those same digital transfers have been used. In some cases, they are nearly identical to what was released in 2002, while in others certain tweaks were made, like longer or shorter fades, slightly different EQ, etc.
Different digital transfers of the same analog tape (and certainly of different analog tapes) will not stay in sync with each other. There will be a slight drift, even if the transfers were made on the same tape machine. If multiple releases stay in perfect sync with each other (as many of the 2002 and 2016 versions do), they are derived from the same analog to digital transfers.
I'm not sure what you mean by "have you analyzed the frequency response? Recording levels?". Analyzed how? To what end?
Someone in the music industry got an advance copy of the CD box and provided me with rips.
Do I think the overall sound is the same? In the case of the material that utilizes the same transfers, thus far I've found any differences to be subtle at best. More or less the difference between what somebody thought was good sounding EQ in 2002 and what somebody thought was good sounding EQ in 2016. I haven't heard anything in that respect to get excited about, but...maybe somebody else will.
A lost opportunity? That's somewhat of a loaded question. I do think there are specific issues that could/should have been addressed, such as:
- cold ending to Tell Me (instead, it's faded earlier than the 2002 s/t disc)
- mangled intros to the three December's Children tracks
- mono mix of Heart of Stone
- mono mix of 19th Nervous Breakdown
Etc. The larger question, though, is such a "mono box" a good idea? In the case of The Beatles, for example, unique mono and stereo mixes exist for almost the entire catalog, except for Let It Be and Abbey Road (which weren't included in the mono boxes). The only duplication was the handful of tracks where stereo mixes don't exist (Love Me Do, She Loves You, etc). With the Stones, however, most of the catalog currently only exists in mono or stereo. There are approximately 4 albums worth of material (Aftermath, Buttons, Satanic, and other stray material like some of Flowers, Sympathy, etc) where dedicated mono and stereo mixes exist. The early material is already mono, and the Chess tracks, Beggars (outside of Sympathy), and Let It Bleed are all fold-downs of the stereo mixes in mono. I welcome the unique mono mixes that are being released digitally for the first time. But I'm less than pleased about the method of delivery.
I'm not quite sure I understand your last question. As noted, most of the early material is already mono on the 2002 releases, as it was recorded or mixed that way. The 1964 Chess material is stereo there, which was folded to mono for this set, as apparently no dedicated mono mixes were ever made.
Yes, Satanic is the true mono mix.
And the mix of Please Go Home is a dedicated mono mix that is thus unaccounted for; known mono pressings of Between The Buttons and Flowers have a fold-down of the stereo mix.
The Rolling Stones - only exists in mono.
12 X 5 - UK songs only exist in mono, Chess songs only mixed to stereo (folded down in mono).
No. 2 - Chess songs only mixed to stereo (folded down in mono), Everybody Needs Somebody To Love released in stereo but unavailable digitally, remainder only exists in mono.
Now! - Chess songs only mixed to stereo (folded down in mono), Heart of Stone has dedicated mono and stereo mixes (but ABKCO has been using what seems to be a new remix for both mono and stereo), remainder only exists in mono.
Out Of Our Heads [US] - The Last Time, Satisfaction, and Play With Fire exist in both mono and stereo, but ABKCO has only used the mono mixes. The remainder only exist in mono.
Out Of Our Heads [UK] - See Heart of Stone comment under Now!, otherwise only exists in mono.
December's Children - Look What You've Done only mixed to stereo (folded down in mono), Get Off Of My Cloud exists in both mono and stereo but ABKCO has only used the mono mix, remainder only exists in mono.
Aftermath [both versions] - Dedicated mono and stereo mixes exist for all songs.
Between The Buttons [both versions] - Dedicated mono and stereo mixes exist for all songs.
Flowers - Have You Seen Your Mother exists in stereo, but ABKCO has only used the mono mix. Most other songs have dedicated mono and stereo mixes, but some may be fold-downs.
Their Satanic Majesties Request - Dedicated mono and stereo mixes exist for all songs.
Beggars Banquet - Sympathy For The Devil exists in dedicated mono and stereo mixes, rest of the album was only mixed to stereo and folded down in mono.
Let It Bleed - only mixed to stereo, folded down in mono.
So that's three complete albums were dedicated mixes exist in both mono and stereo (Aftermath, Between The Buttons, and Satanic), plus roughly a fourth of additional songs (some of Flowers, Sympathy, Honky Tonk Women, etc).
My personal opinion is that the unique mono mixes in this set are worthwhile if you're interested in them, but that the box is terribly redundant on a few fronts, and it's unfortunate that some of the tracks will apparently be only available in the box (on Stray Cats).
Talk about your favorite band.
For information about how to use this forum please check out forum help and policies.
Re: "The Rolling Stones in Mono" - September 30 2016.
Posted by:
JumpinJimF
()
Date: September 14, 2016 15:45
Quote
ironbellySurely I did! The first day it appeared on pre-order.Quote
Maindefender
So Ironbelly can it be assumed you haven't ordered this?
But moaning is a part of local culture. And you should follow traditions
But moaning about moaning is another local tradition
Re: "The Rolling Stones in Mono" - September 30 2016.
Posted by:
JumpinJimF
()
Date: September 14, 2016 15:47
Quote
frankotero
Moaning/complaining, has another name as well.. constructive criticism. And perhaps some people aren't able to realize that? Something to consider. Back on subject, after seeing the un-packing video I'm under impressed. First it doesn't appear to be reproduction covers, just the right album picture. Maybe the video is standard and not the actual product? Then there's the question about sound. If it's not direct analog to vinyl then there isn't much point in buying the vinyl. Might as well get the CD box instead. That's my opinion and I'm entitled to it.
Moaning, complaining or constructive criticism - call it what you will but in the middle of all of that I learn an awful lot. And for that I am grateful.
Re: "The Rolling Stones in Mono" - September 30 2016.
Posted by:
JumpinJimF
()
Date: September 14, 2016 15:49
Quote
frankotero
Moaning/complaining, has another name as well.. constructive criticism. And perhaps some people aren't able to realize that? Something to consider. Back on subject, after seeing the un-packing video I'm under impressed. First it doesn't appear to be reproduction covers, just the right album picture. Maybe the video is standard and not the actual product? Then there's the question about sound. If it's not direct analog to vinyl then there isn't much point in buying the vinyl. Might as well get the CD box instead. That's my opinion and I'm entitled to it.
Sorry, meant to say that I thought the unpacking video looked like a CGI mock-up, not a video of the actual product. I may be wrong of course, I often am.
Re: "The Rolling Stones in Mono" - September 30 2016.
Posted by:
ironbelly
()
Date: September 14, 2016 16:08
The video of un-packing is another promo product. Somebody already pointed at CGI graphics. Those are not images of the actual product.Quote
frankotero
Moaning/complaining, has another name as well.. constructive criticism. And perhaps some people aren't able to realize that? Something to consider. Back on subject, after seeing the un-packing video I'm under impressed. First it doesn't appear to be reproduction covers, just the right album picture. Maybe the video is standard and not the actual product? Then there's the question about sound. If it's not direct analog to vinyl then there isn't much point in buying the vinyl. Might as well get the CD box instead. That's my opinion and I'm entitled to it.
Regarding the package - I am not scared a lot. Because old CBS and some Virgin CD singles were in simple card sleeves (like promo for Live Licks). No objection to that if they are made from proper carton paper. Surely, something will be missing for those mini-LP replicas. Like the inner sleeve of TSMR or poster in LIB.
Buying vinyl is a kind of fun. Though, it is more easy to get HR files from download.
Re: "The Rolling Stones in Mono" - September 30 2016.
Posted by:
frankotero
()
Date: September 14, 2016 16:09
Originally I was led to believe this would be similar to The Beatles Mono Box. Where everything is as close to reproduction as possible, but with a digital audio source. After seeing that video I'm thinking about not getting it. Hope it is a CGI video.
Re: "The Rolling Stones in Mono" - September 30 2016.
Posted by:
Maindefender
()
Date: September 14, 2016 16:53
Quote
ironbellySurely I did! The first day it appeared on pre-order.Quote
Maindefender
So Ironbelly can it be assumed you haven't ordered this?
But moaning is a part of local culture. And you should follow traditions
I hate being told what to do, looking forward to your review though….
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2016-09-14 16:53 by Maindefender.
Re: "The Rolling Stones in Mono" - September 30 2016.
Posted by:
Blueranger
()
Date: September 14, 2016 17:16
Being digital to vinyl isn't a bad thing here.
The original Stones albums sounded like crap and without bass.
The original Stones albums sounded like crap and without bass.
Re: "The Rolling Stones in Mono" - September 30 2016.
Posted by:
ironbelly
()
Date: September 14, 2016 17:19
Luke already has a preview. And he does it betterQuote
MaindefenderQuote
ironbellySurely I did! The first day it appeared on pre-order.Quote
Maindefender
So Ironbelly can it be assumed you haven't ordered this?
But moaning is a part of local culture. And you should follow traditions
I hate being told what to do, looking forward to your review though….
[forums.stevehoffman.tv]
Re: "The Rolling Stones in Mono" - September 30 2016.
Posted by:
frankotero
()
Date: September 14, 2016 17:24
Thanks guys for the good points. Basically I feeling skiddish about cash and grab releases. Still not sure if I will get this one or maybe the CD box. To be honest I love The Beatles LP Box and find no wrong with it, but rarely do I even look at it let alone play the records. Just don't want another shelf item, especially if it's not up to standard.
Re: "The Rolling Stones in Mono" - September 30 2016.
Posted by:
Blueranger
()
Date: September 14, 2016 18:13
Luke is not a god.
He has certain points, but I disagree with him a lot.
He has certain points, but I disagree with him a lot.
Re: "The Rolling Stones in Mono" - September 30 2016.
Posted by:
whitem8
()
Date: September 14, 2016 18:38
I agree, he uses no empirical evidence about the mixes... so you need to take him for his ear/word. I will with hold judgement until I have the vinyl playing on my turntable.
Re: "The Rolling Stones in Mono" - September 30 2016.
Posted by:
lukpac
()
Date: September 15, 2016 05:34
Quote
ironbelly
Technically, we have a couple of facts from that preview in Billboard. And some of those facts are slightly alarming.
1. Once the tapes are in hand, Landi continues, “You start with a really great machine, like this Ampex ATR-102, which was made in the late ‘70s and early ‘80s,” - this means they run playback on relatively new machines.
2. “When we embarked upon restoring the Stones’ catalog, we did a test between an Ampex with electronics from a solid state machine like this -- this particular one has upgraded electronics -- and an older Ampex with tube electronics." - thus, some tapes were transferred using solid state electronics, while the others - on tube electronics. This makes one think the CDs could sound 'patchy'.
3. “And sometimes the old tube machine actually sounds better,” Klein adds. “It reproduces the sound of the tape more authentically, rather than putting it on a machine that sounds too precise or too clinical." - ouch! Knowing the way they did 2002 remaster I feel most of the new remaster could be too precise or too clinical.
4. The tapes are transferred to high-resolution DSD and PCM digital formats, and sent to “super-genius mastering engineer” Bob Ludwig at his Gateway Mastering studio, where he masters the catalog from the DSD digital source files. - do you think they actually re-done all previously issued mono tracks? Can you imagine for a second that Klein company would pay twice the same guy for the same job?
5. The set isn't perfect: The art in the booklet is rather perfunctory and, in the CD version, the type is tiny; while the album covers are nearly exact reproductions of the originals, that makes them nearly illegible when shrunk down to CD size, and the lack of an inner sleeve means the discs fall out alarmingly easily. - so the artwork for ordinary CD edition is rather cheap. I do not know about Japanese version, that suppose to have better mini-LP replicas.
6. And the last, but not the least - LPs will be pressed from digital sources but not purely analog
The process doesn't bother me as much as the fact that a good chunk of the transfers from 2002 are recycled here, including some with obvious problems.
Quote
whitem8
I agree, he uses no empirical evidence about the mixes... so you need to take him for his ear/word. I will with hold judgement until I have the vinyl playing on my turntable.
That's actually entirely incorrect.
Re: "The Rolling Stones in Mono" - September 30 2016.
Posted by:
whitem8
()
Date: September 15, 2016 19:32
So what is the empirical evidence he is using? Does he have frequency monitors that are comparing and contrasting the recordings using levels? I saw a lot of "opinion" but no evidence that is "fact". He is using his ears for making the claims about the same masters at the 2002. He does give some examples, but they still are not definitive evidence based on facts.
Re: "The Rolling Stones in Mono" - September 30 2016.
Posted by:
lukpac
()
Date: September 15, 2016 19:38
Quote
whitem8
So what is the empirical evidence he is using? Does he have frequency monitors that are comparing and contrasting the recordings using levels? I saw a lot of "opinion" but no evidence that is "fact". He is using his ears for making the claims about the same masters at the 2002. He does give some examples, but they still are not definitive evidence based on facts.
He?
Most of the songs noted as being from the 2002 masters stay in digital sync with those versions, and sometimes even come close to nulling out to silence when inverting one. That isn't simply "using [my] ears; new digital transfers would not (and in some cases, do not) stay in sync. These are not opinions.
Nor are things like the length of fades opinions. The recordings speak for themselves.
Re: "The Rolling Stones in Mono" - September 30 2016.
Posted by:
whitem8
()
Date: September 15, 2016 19:54
Ah so you are him, not he, and not who are you?
Well I still think you are making some broad generalizations. I would say the fact the fade out is the same isn't necessarily they used the same 2002 masters, but perhaps that was from the original mastered source tape from the recording? Couldn't that be the case. And again, have you analyzed the frequency response? Recording levels? And compared? Not to be nit picky but where did you get your advance copy and is this vinyl? CD? Or downloads?
Well I still think you are making some broad generalizations. I would say the fact the fade out is the same isn't necessarily they used the same 2002 masters, but perhaps that was from the original mastered source tape from the recording? Couldn't that be the case. And again, have you analyzed the frequency response? Recording levels? And compared? Not to be nit picky but where did you get your advance copy and is this vinyl? CD? Or downloads?
Re: "The Rolling Stones in Mono" - September 30 2016.
Posted by:
lukpac
()
Date: September 15, 2016 20:04
Quote
whitem8
Well I still think you are making some broad generalizations. I would say the fact the fade out is the same isn't necessarily they used the same 2002 masters, but perhaps that was from the original mastered source tape from the recording? Couldn't that be the case. And again, have you analyzed the frequency response? Recording levels? And compared? Not to be nit picky but where did you get your advance copy and is this vinyl? CD? Or downloads?
A series of digital transfers were done in 2002 from various analog tapes. Those transfers were then tweaked in various ways in mastering: EQ, noise reduction, fades, etc.
For the new box, many of those same digital transfers have been used. In some cases, they are nearly identical to what was released in 2002, while in others certain tweaks were made, like longer or shorter fades, slightly different EQ, etc.
Different digital transfers of the same analog tape (and certainly of different analog tapes) will not stay in sync with each other. There will be a slight drift, even if the transfers were made on the same tape machine. If multiple releases stay in perfect sync with each other (as many of the 2002 and 2016 versions do), they are derived from the same analog to digital transfers.
I'm not sure what you mean by "have you analyzed the frequency response? Recording levels?". Analyzed how? To what end?
Someone in the music industry got an advance copy of the CD box and provided me with rips.
Re: "The Rolling Stones in Mono" - September 30 2016.
Posted by:
whitem8
()
Date: September 16, 2016 17:38
Thanks for the explanation, and I appreciate how detailed your response was. Ok, so I am interested, do you think the over all sound is the same? Better? Was this a lost opportunity? Now with this release and your comparison to the 2002, where those stereo masters or the original mono, and if they were stereo then does that mean the tracks you said are identical to the 2002 are fold downs and not true mono?
Re: "The Rolling Stones in Mono" - September 30 2016.
Posted by:
lukpac
()
Date: September 16, 2016 19:36
Quote
whitem8
Thanks for the explanation, and I appreciate how detailed your response was. Ok, so I am interested, do you think the over all sound is the same? Better? Was this a lost opportunity? Now with this release and your comparison to the 2002, where those stereo masters or the original mono, and if they were stereo then does that mean the tracks you said are identical to the 2002 are fold downs and not true mono?
Do I think the overall sound is the same? In the case of the material that utilizes the same transfers, thus far I've found any differences to be subtle at best. More or less the difference between what somebody thought was good sounding EQ in 2002 and what somebody thought was good sounding EQ in 2016. I haven't heard anything in that respect to get excited about, but...maybe somebody else will.
A lost opportunity? That's somewhat of a loaded question. I do think there are specific issues that could/should have been addressed, such as:
- cold ending to Tell Me (instead, it's faded earlier than the 2002 s/t disc)
- mangled intros to the three December's Children tracks
- mono mix of Heart of Stone
- mono mix of 19th Nervous Breakdown
Etc. The larger question, though, is such a "mono box" a good idea? In the case of The Beatles, for example, unique mono and stereo mixes exist for almost the entire catalog, except for Let It Be and Abbey Road (which weren't included in the mono boxes). The only duplication was the handful of tracks where stereo mixes don't exist (Love Me Do, She Loves You, etc). With the Stones, however, most of the catalog currently only exists in mono or stereo. There are approximately 4 albums worth of material (Aftermath, Buttons, Satanic, and other stray material like some of Flowers, Sympathy, etc) where dedicated mono and stereo mixes exist. The early material is already mono, and the Chess tracks, Beggars (outside of Sympathy), and Let It Bleed are all fold-downs of the stereo mixes in mono. I welcome the unique mono mixes that are being released digitally for the first time. But I'm less than pleased about the method of delivery.
I'm not quite sure I understand your last question. As noted, most of the early material is already mono on the 2002 releases, as it was recorded or mixed that way. The 1964 Chess material is stereo there, which was folded to mono for this set, as apparently no dedicated mono mixes were ever made.
Re: "The Rolling Stones in Mono" - September 30 2016.
Posted by:
barbabang
()
Date: September 16, 2016 20:10
Many thanks for your initial impressions and thoughts Lupac.
Very much appreciated.
Very much appreciated.
Re: "The Rolling Stones in Mono" - September 30 2016.
Posted by:
frankotero
()
Date: September 16, 2016 22:48
Hmm. Don't like the way this is sounding. Still, I suppose TSMR should be in true mono. That means a lot to me as I prefer it to the Stereo mix.
Re: "The Rolling Stones in Mono" - September 30 2016.
Posted by:
lukpac
()
Date: September 16, 2016 23:28
Quote
frankotero
Hmm. Don't like the way this is sounding. Still, I suppose TSMR should be in true mono. That means a lot to me as I prefer it to the Stereo mix.
Yes, Satanic is the true mono mix.
And the mix of Please Go Home is a dedicated mono mix that is thus unaccounted for; known mono pressings of Between The Buttons and Flowers have a fold-down of the stereo mix.
Re: "The Rolling Stones in Mono" - September 30 2016.
Posted by:
frankotero
()
Date: September 17, 2016 00:37
Geez, am I getting this right. TSMR is the only full album in true Mono and a few more songs? I know BB and LIB are fold-downs minus SFTD.
Re: "The Rolling Stones in Mono" - September 30 2016.
Posted by:
lukpac
()
Date: September 17, 2016 02:06
Quote
frankotero
Geez, am I getting this right. TSMR is the only full album in true Mono and a few more songs? I know BB and LIB are fold-downs minus SFTD.
The Rolling Stones - only exists in mono.
12 X 5 - UK songs only exist in mono, Chess songs only mixed to stereo (folded down in mono).
No. 2 - Chess songs only mixed to stereo (folded down in mono), Everybody Needs Somebody To Love released in stereo but unavailable digitally, remainder only exists in mono.
Now! - Chess songs only mixed to stereo (folded down in mono), Heart of Stone has dedicated mono and stereo mixes (but ABKCO has been using what seems to be a new remix for both mono and stereo), remainder only exists in mono.
Out Of Our Heads [US] - The Last Time, Satisfaction, and Play With Fire exist in both mono and stereo, but ABKCO has only used the mono mixes. The remainder only exist in mono.
Out Of Our Heads [UK] - See Heart of Stone comment under Now!, otherwise only exists in mono.
December's Children - Look What You've Done only mixed to stereo (folded down in mono), Get Off Of My Cloud exists in both mono and stereo but ABKCO has only used the mono mix, remainder only exists in mono.
Aftermath [both versions] - Dedicated mono and stereo mixes exist for all songs.
Between The Buttons [both versions] - Dedicated mono and stereo mixes exist for all songs.
Flowers - Have You Seen Your Mother exists in stereo, but ABKCO has only used the mono mix. Most other songs have dedicated mono and stereo mixes, but some may be fold-downs.
Their Satanic Majesties Request - Dedicated mono and stereo mixes exist for all songs.
Beggars Banquet - Sympathy For The Devil exists in dedicated mono and stereo mixes, rest of the album was only mixed to stereo and folded down in mono.
Let It Bleed - only mixed to stereo, folded down in mono.
So that's three complete albums were dedicated mixes exist in both mono and stereo (Aftermath, Between The Buttons, and Satanic), plus roughly a fourth of additional songs (some of Flowers, Sympathy, Honky Tonk Women, etc).
Re: "The Rolling Stones in Mono" - September 30 2016.
Posted by:
DrPete
()
Date: September 17, 2016 23:18
Glad I ordered the vinyl set. Since I have the SACD s, this cd set is mostly superfluous
Re: "The Rolling Stones in Mono" - September 30 2016.
Posted by:
frankotero
()
Date: September 18, 2016 00:40
Love The Stones to death, but I will say I cancelled my pre-order for this. Really feel it's another cash and grab deal. Maybe I'm wrong and hope so. On the brighter side of life I am looking forward to a Euro Tour next year, plus any new albums, blues or whatever they conjure up.
Re: "The Rolling Stones in Mono" - September 30 2016.
Posted by:
lukpac
()
Date: September 18, 2016 00:59
Quote
frankotero
Love The Stones to death, but I will say I cancelled my pre-order for this. Really feel it's another cash and grab deal. Maybe I'm wrong and hope so. On the brighter side of life I am looking forward to a Euro Tour next year, plus any new albums, blues or whatever they conjure up.
My personal opinion is that the unique mono mixes in this set are worthwhile if you're interested in them, but that the box is terribly redundant on a few fronts, and it's unfortunate that some of the tracks will apparently be only available in the box (on Stray Cats).
Re: "The Rolling Stones in Mono" - September 30 2016.
Posted by:
DrPete
()
Date: September 18, 2016 02:51
I am happy to get the set in pristine vinyl as my vinyl is well worn. The singles are very cool too
Re: "The Rolling Stones in Mono" - September 30 2016.
Posted by:
whitem8
()
Date: September 18, 2016 07:42
Well I agree. I think this is a great opportunity to get the entire set on vinyl. Something I am really looking forward to.
Re: "The Rolling Stones in Mono" - September 30 2016.
Posted by:
whitem8
()
Date: September 18, 2016 07:42
Well I agree. I think this is a great opportunity to get the entire set on vinyl. Something I am really looking forward to.
Re: "The Rolling Stones in Mono" - September 30 2016.
Posted by:
Maindefender
()
Date: September 18, 2016 16:33
The 2002 TSMR SACD is not mono, correct? I'm looking for a reason not to cancel my order. Happy Sunday all......
Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.
Online Users
Guests:
1548
Record Number of Users:
206
on June 1, 2022 23:50
Record Number of Guests:
9627
on January 2, 2024 23:10