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

It is what it is, and what it is, is what makes it so great, so enjoy it. As with others like Goats Head Soup and Exile On Main Street, you can't remaster out the "muddyness" so why even try?

I had this same problem with my Emotional Rescue vinyl, which I bought in the record section of a grocery store (PathMark) in 1982.

It sounded extremely weak compared to other albums, and I wound up never playing it as much.

Perhaps it is a vinyl pressing issue?

Have you ever experienced this single layer sacd with a decent system?


The attack sound of the bass drums on "Till the Next Goodbye" , "Luxury" and "Dance Little Sister" is obvious.
Acoustic guitar on "Till the Next Goodbye" became recognizable with a good graininess.
A great tune with a brave new sound!

I love the original muffled sound, though.

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!

I think the bootleg 'It's Only Goat's Head Soup', which has outtakes and alternate mixes, sounds a lot fuller and crisper.

A lot of albums mixed in/for Dolby back then sound like someone put a pillow in front of the speakers.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2021-04-30 05:56 by mosthigh.

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!

You are right thats a chill up the spine moment.

I always found the mix overall to be pretty poor, whether it was the mix, or the mastering or just the pressing available in the USA at the time of release. Just sounded funny and some songs were funnier than others. IORR itself though kind of kicked ass and as donvis mentioned, it just blows out right after the previous song.

jb

The album sounds dead to my ears. Flat as a tack.

And I’ve always HATED the hissing caused by so many S Sounds in

DanCe Little SiSter DanCe
DanCe Little SiSter DanCe
DanCe

Rod

heck .. HATED ....

Seeezzz Rod hope I bump inta ya at a
She sells seashells by the sea shore competition ...



ROCKMAN

Sounds fine to me. It is what it is. The Virgin reissue sounds great. There's no telling for why it sounds flat etc. It's just what they did.

...the worse is by far ”ts only Rock and roll” for me , Mick’voice is too much hidden in the mix...!

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

In contrast to most other voices in this thread I feel the same like you.
For years I keep a burned copy of an early remastered Version with my original CD (including autograph of Mick Taylor) in it´s jewel-case.
I prefer this remaster.

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?

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?

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
DandelionPowderman

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?

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.

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 .

If You Can't Rock Me sounds like it was done. Muffled. And I like it

Quote
ironbelly

Quote
DandelionPowderman

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?

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.

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 .

If You Can't Rock Me sounds like it was done. Muffled. And I like it

I like it, too, but it doesn't alter the fact that the sound is way below their normal standard (which, as you say, never was "crystal clear")

Don't forget that the Stones started the 70s of as a bunch of bankrupt British blokes, who had to escape to France and restart all over. Making a lot of music and hopefully sell well (well, they did with great albums) was the main goal. Time pressure may have had an effect on the recording quality (get the stuff on the market ... we need money badly).
The master tape must have been good enough to later on (especially on CD) make very clear (which doesn't always sound fine) remastered versions anyway. The original vinyl album sounds as it sounds and I loved it way back then and I still love it. The greatness of The Rolling Stones is that they made a very nice IORR album (while still under pressure) which still stands the time. Remastering records can be nice, but when overdone it doesn't even sound enjoyable for my old ear.


I'm a GHOST living in a ghost town

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
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 ...

I'm a GHOST living in a ghost town

Quote
georgie48

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!!!

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.

This is the result of using vacuum-tube cutting technology.
It's Only Rock N Roll Indian Gramophone Lp

I guess this translation from Japanese to English is using a machine translation, so let it slide on this.

Agree 100 pct.
They must have realized it, because they came back with B&B, maybe their best sounding album.

Hilarious!! I dialed into IORR today, first thread I saw was this one while absolutely blowing the tops off of my 1990 Bose 301's. Dance Little Sister never sounded so gooood!! Happy Friday!

Quote
wonderboy
Agree 100 pct.
They must have realized it, because they came back with B&B, maybe their best sounding album.

Their best sounding album is Dirty Work. The record has the highest Dynamic Range. Emotional Rescue and Some Girls are next.

Quote
ironbelly

Quote
wonderboy
Agree 100 pct.
They must have realized it, because they came back with B&B, maybe their best sounding album.

Their best sounding album is Dirty Work. The record has the highest Dynamic Range. Emotional Rescue and Some Girls are next.

We can't measure sound that way only. It only means that DW is dynamic-sounding, not that the instruments are recorded splendidly, nor that the effects and EQ on each instrument is spot on - or that they ring well together. Then we have volume adjustment etc...

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
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

But is there an American version of Out Of Our Heads UK? The US-version with that name is a different album, with many other good-sounding songs, as far as I know.

Quote
DandelionPowderman

Quote
georgie48

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!!!

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.

I indeed meant the vinyl-version of Out Of Our Heads US. The albums I also have are Out Of Our Heads UK and the US Decembers Children (stereophonic) version. Several overlaps of songs, but they basically cover all the 1965 songs.

I'm a GHOST living in a ghost town

Anybody have the Japanese SHM CD version of IORR? I never cared for GHS, until I got the new Japanese version. (New stereo mix). It's not perfect, but GHS makes a hell of a lot more sense in this format. (I still haven't heard the Atmos Dolby Blu Ray version).

They want so much damn money for those SHM CDs, along with shipping, that you have to be really picky. I'm stalking Ebay now for a Sticky Fingers SHM CD. There's a Spanish version that's cheaper than the 'real' version, but it replaces Sister Morphine with the live Let It Rock. I see they use the remaster from 2009, but it might have higher fidelity.

I've got the Steel Wheels SHM CD, and it's slightly better than the original, but not greatly so. Also Through the Past Darkly on SHM CD. Not a great improvement, but it's as clean as you'll ever hear these songs, with good separation.

Some good thoughts here, but nobody has addressed what I (misnumbered originally) as point 3.

3. 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.

His voice sounds different to me than any other album. Or is it just the mix?

deardoctor, are you with me here too?

T@3