For information about how to use this forum please check out forum help and policies.
Quote
donvis
Best thing about the original vinyl was how on the last note of Ain’t to Proud to Beg ended it segued right into IORR!!! So cool!
Quote
TeaAtThree
For years this has frustrated me. It has always seemed that this album has several sonic flaws:
1. It overall feels muffled, like all the microphones were wrapped in cloth.
2. There is very little bottom end. It has no balls.
2. The lead vocals have a thin quality -- or Mick is using a vocal affectation that simply doesn't exist on the albums on either side in time. And not the late era over-annunciation that infects so many latter day ballads, but rather a tone of voice.
Anybody else notice this? And what explains it?
I think there were speed issues with Fingerprint File on some releases, but this seems to permeate the whole album. I play it less frequently because these flaws are so obvious (at least to my ears).
Thoughts?
TeaAtThree
Quote
ironbelly
Are we talking vinyl or CDs?
Because with CDs there were 4 versions of mastering
1. Old CBS from 1986 mastered by Ted Jensen
2. Virgin from 1993 mastered by Bob Ludwig
3. UM from 2009 brickwalled by Stephen Marcussen
4. Japanese flat transfer from 2011
All sound different.
Do we suppose to discuss different vinyl pressings?
Well, the existential question is - since when The Rolling Stones suppose to deliver crystal clear sound? C'mon they are not The Beatles or The Hollies .Quote
DandelionPowdermanQuote
ironbelly
Are we talking vinyl or CDs?
Because with CDs there were 4 versions of mastering
1. Old CBS from 1986 mastered by Ted Jensen
2. Virgin from 1993 mastered by Bob Ludwig
3. UM from 2009 brickwalled by Stephen Marcussen
4. Japanese flat transfer from 2011
All sound different.
Do we suppose to discuss different vinyl pressings?
While there are different masters, there is only one mix. And that mix is terrible at times on IORR. Songs like If You Can't Rock Me sound like the instruments are wrapped up in cotton. However, songs like Short And Curlies sound very good.
None of the different masters were able to improve the drum sound on If You Can't Rock Me, which sounds like a joke, imo.
Quote
ironbellyWell, the existential question is - since when The Rolling Stones suppose to deliver crystal clear sound? C'mon they are not The Beatles or The Hollies .Quote
DandelionPowdermanQuote
ironbelly
Are we talking vinyl or CDs?
Because with CDs there were 4 versions of mastering
1. Old CBS from 1986 mastered by Ted Jensen
2. Virgin from 1993 mastered by Bob Ludwig
3. UM from 2009 brickwalled by Stephen Marcussen
4. Japanese flat transfer from 2011
All sound different.
Do we suppose to discuss different vinyl pressings?
While there are different masters, there is only one mix. And that mix is terrible at times on IORR. Songs like If You Can't Rock Me sound like the instruments are wrapped up in cotton. However, songs like Short And Curlies sound very good.
None of the different masters were able to improve the drum sound on If You Can't Rock Me, which sounds like a joke, imo.
If You Can't Rock Me sounds like it was done. Muffled. And I like it
Quote
CaptainGlassback
The album that drives me mad re sound quality is the UK 'Out of our Heads'. Great playing but unbearable sound quality. Have tried all sorts from my original Decca LP on high end hi-fi through cassette, CD and a later vinyl reissue. Not the end of the world!! The Stones then delivered the unbelievably perfect recording of 'Aftermath'!!! A vinyl 'reference' material for high end hi-fis!!!
Quote
georgie48Quote
CaptainGlassback
The album that drives me mad re sound quality is the UK 'Out of our Heads'. Great playing but unbearable sound quality. Have tried all sorts from my original Decca LP on high end hi-fi through cassette, CD and a later vinyl reissue. Not the end of the world!! The Stones then delivered the unbelievably perfect recording of 'Aftermath'!!! A vinyl 'reference' material for high end hi-fis!!!
How about the USA vinyl release of Out of Our Heads? It's sound is clearly better than the U.K. vinyl release. Primitive days ...
Their best sounding album is Dirty Work. The record has the highest Dynamic Range. Emotional Rescue and Some Girls are next.Quote
wonderboy
Agree 100 pct.
They must have realized it, because they came back with B&B, maybe their best sounding album.
Quote
ironbellyTheir best sounding album is Dirty Work. The record has the highest Dynamic Range. Emotional Rescue and Some Girls are next.Quote
wonderboy
Agree 100 pct.
They must have realized it, because they came back with B&B, maybe their best sounding album.
Quote
jbwelda
I am surprised that any USA original vinyl release sounded better than the UK one. Almost never happens. Almost always the UK version sounded better, flatter, warmer bass, no upper end distortion and no warp on the disk. Guess this one is the exception to that rule. I always went out of my way to get the UK version of a vinyl LP in those days.
jb
Quote
DandelionPowdermanQuote
georgie48Quote
CaptainGlassback
The album that drives me mad re sound quality is the UK 'Out of our Heads'. Great playing but unbearable sound quality. Have tried all sorts from my original Decca LP on high end hi-fi through cassette, CD and a later vinyl reissue. Not the end of the world!! The Stones then delivered the unbelievably perfect recording of 'Aftermath'!!! A vinyl 'reference' material for high end hi-fis!!!
How about the USA vinyl release of Out of Our Heads? It's sound is clearly better than the U.K. vinyl release. Primitive days ...
Do you mean a London-version of Out Of Our Heads UK or just the vinyl-version of Out Of Our Heads US? The latter is a different album, with many songs in superior sonic quality, not featured on the UK-version.