If you send a personal mail to acid.captain@yahoo.com ,with the message:
" i am a Stones fanatic "
or
" I would like to be a Stones fanatic "

i shall put you on a mail list for some future Acid Project Specials.

Captain Acid




Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2012-02-07 14:32 by CaptainAcid.

Best of luck with this endeavour. Hampton really needs someone skilled to work on it = save it.

Hi CaptainAcid,

I presume you are talking about the latest Hampton that has been avaialbe to buy by download.

If so what would you do to it to make it better? Would be interested in knowing in details just as you usual do for other CaptainAcid works you have done.

Thanks in advance.

Is it even possible to "un-brickwall" something? A bad EQ setting can be undone, obviously, but a destroyed dynamic range? I think the situation is similar to MP3 decoding - once the information is lost, you can't get it back.

Hi friends,
@ Hampton really needs someone skilled to work on it = save it.
i am a professional , trust me

@ I presume you are talking about the latest Hampton
Yes i am. The sound on it was remastered extremely hot, it sounds to me like mastering for "Foo Fighters" not for rock`n`roll gig from 1981.So i have tried to undo some of the harm done by bad mastering. I have lowered the volume ( by RMS, not peak - loudness) for 3 db. After that i have discovered that i also have to correct the phase and pitch ( just a bit, for - 13.2 cents). And than in the end i did some EQ, trying to undo frequencies that were exaggerated with hot,hot mastering.

@ Is it even possible to "un-brickwall" something? A bad EQ setting can be undone, obviously, but a destroyed dynamic range?
Well, it is almost impossible to restore the dynamics, once it was squashed. It would be so much better to have not limited and not compressed recording in the first place. But we`ll have to wait for that. This mastering was aimed for people with I-pod`s, small computer speakers, car stereo, cell phones...etc. It was not done for audiophiles or people with better ,sound systems.
So i was just sort of doing few tricks to make it easier on the ears, more gentle sound, warmer.It was just too harsh.

Yours truly
Captain Acid

"This mastering was aimed for people with I-pod`s, small computer speakers, car stereo, cell phones...etc"

You're probably right, alas... Once again Jagger is wrong in targeting the 13-25 y.o. market. Those who are interested in the whole "Stones archives" biz are in the 30-70 y.o. market.

"i also have to correct the pitch"
Can you explain why? I don't see the relation between a flawed mastering and the pitch.

My knowledge of the technicalities is extremely limited but I do recognise when something is easier on the ear...Thanks Captainacid, much nicer, ,Eddie

Great cover too............



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2012-02-07 15:47 by EddieByword.

@ Can you explain why? I don't see the relation between a flawed mastering and the pitch.

Well since i had files in Soundforge i have checked if pitch is correct and it was running slightly faster so i have slowed it down tiny bit.I usually tune my guitar on a guitar tuner and play along with the track and tweaking it(the track speed, i mean) until my guitar and the track are in tune.
I have also flipped the phase and it was better. I know it is a bit sacrilegious to do all this, but i just did what sounded better to me and what i have thought is better.
I mean you have the original, anyway, this is just my view.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2012-02-07 19:28 by CaptainAcid.

Nice work!! I tip my cap to the Captain! Great Service too!! Best Wishes-Jimmy

Very well done and I thank you for the alternate listen!

I like Captain Acid's work on this, too. It's now possible to listen to the show, even at louder volume without just wanting to turn the thing off. Nicely done, thanks Gile

This sounds warmer as you have stated Gile. Are you now better at this than Bob Clearmountain?

You need to start making Clearmountain money.

Quote
Munichhilton
This sounds warmer as you have stated Gile. Are you now better at this than Bob Clearmountain?

You need to start making Clearmountain money.

I am not so sure Bob Clearmountain did this to a stereo master. It was stated Bob did the mix.Probably some other "genius" did the mastering of 2 track stereo master.
Ah, maybe this is the right moment to unveil my suspicion.

Guys, i am very suspicious this was a new remix at all?
I am thinking if it could be The Stones are bootlegging the bootleggers? Either they are using stereo mixes that they had for ages or using best bootleg sources that exists? And than they just do heavy maximizing, "REMASTERING" I mean if this is a new remix, why Bob Clearmountain? Why not Don Was?
How is it possible that i had to correct phase and pitch on official mix?
I have not yet compared this "new" mix with the VGP ( the best soundboard ), one on one, but i remember that "Some Girls In Texas `78" mix sounded strangely familiar. Just like the existing bootlegs of the show.

Quote
CaptainAcid

Quote
Munichhilton
This sounds warmer as you have stated Gile. Are you now better at this than Bob Clearmountain?

You need to start making Clearmountain money.

I am not so sure Bob Clearmountain did this to a stereo master. It was stated Bob did the mix.Probably some other "genius" did the mastering of 2 track stereo master.
Ah, maybe this is the right moment to unveil my suspicion.

Guys, i am very suspicious this was a new remix at all?
I am thinking if it could be The Stones are bootlegging the bootleggers? Either they are using stereo mixes that they had for ages or using best bootleg sources that exists? And than they just do heavy maximizing, "REMASTERING" I mean if this is a new remix, why Bob Clearmountain? Why not Don Was?
How is it possible that i had to correct phase and pitch on official mix?
I have not yet compared this "new" mix with the VGP ( the best soundboard ), one on one, but i remember that "Some Girls In Texas `78" mix sounded strangely familiar. Just like the existing bootlegs of the show.

Oh no
Can open....worms everywhere.
I have to assume they had the masters because of Still Life songs.

@...Oh no
Can open....worms everywhere.


Oh, don`t worry, i shall probably be in the minority with my suspicion. When you think logically and realistically, my suspicion is probably highly unlikely, there has to be another explanation.

As for Still LIFE, the Stones were unfortunately overdubbing lot`s of things on that "Live" album ("Still Life"). But they were doing it on every live album since "Get Yer Ya-Ya`s Out" [ they were faking it actually since "Got Live If You Want It" adding audience].

And that is why we love bootlegs better !

"I am thinking if it could be The Stones are bootlegging the bootleggers? Either they are using stereo mixes that they had for ages or using best bootleg sources that exists? And than they just do heavy maximizing, "REMASTERING"

How is it possible that i had to correct phase and pitch on official mix?

I have not yet compared this "new" mix with the VGP ( the best soundboard ), one on one, but i remember that "Some Girls In Texas `78" mix sounded strangely familiar. Just like the existing bootlegs of the show"

It'd be hilarious if they did... and have the guts to charge 9 dollars for something one could get for free off IORR!

Quote
CaptainAcid

I am thinking if it could be The Stones are bootlegging the bootleggers? Either they are using stereo mixes that they had for ages or using best bootleg sources that exists? And than they just do heavy maximizing, "REMASTERING" I mean if this is a new remix, why Bob Clearmountain? Why not Don Was?

Except for Flashpoint and No Security Bob Clearmountain has mixed every official live releases since Still Life, including Stripped which is possibly the best sounding live album by the Stones.
The hot mastering is probably due to Stones management who asked some guy (Stephen Marcussen?) to master this as loud as possible to meet market's expectations. Or maybe that's Jagger who is getting deaf?

Thanks for your great work, Captain!

Whoever is responsible for the dodgy remastering, at least we've got the Captain to sort it out for us.

But I too find it incredible that he had to correct things like phase and pitch.

Anyway, thank you for a great job.

Where can I get the CaptainAcid version?

Thanks

Quote
WeLoveYou
Where can I get the CaptainAcid version?

Thanks

Email the Captain...1st post on this thread..(at the top).........

Quote
EddieByword

Quote
WeLoveYou
Where can I get the CaptainAcid version?

Thanks

Email the Captain...1st post on this thread..(at the top).........

I will thanks

I wonder if recording the official release to a high qaulity tape deck would help? Then records back to wav > mp3. It could soften up the sound and make it more pleasant on the ears.

Quote
CaptainAcid
Guys, i am very suspicious this was a new remix at all?
I am thinking if it could be The Stones are bootlegging the bootleggers? Either they are using stereo mixes that they had for ages or using best bootleg sources that exists? And than they just do heavy maximizing, "REMASTERING" I mean if this is a new remix, why Bob Clearmountain? Why not Don Was?
How is it possible that i had to correct phase and pitch on official mix?
I have not yet compared this "new" mix with the VGP ( the best soundboard ), one on one, but i remember that "Some Girls In Texas `78" mix sounded strangely familiar. Just like the existing bootlegs of the show.

I don't think you're right here. The new release has a clear channel separation - Ronnie left, Keith right. None of the bootleg releases except the 8 songs from Grande Finale has this too, they all (incl. VGP) have only poor channel separation, all comes more or less from the middle. So I would say it is simply impossible to create the new version from a bootleg release.

@ I don't think you're right here. The new release has a clear channel separation - Ronnie left, Keith right. None of the bootleg releases except the 8 songs from Grande Finale has this too, they all (incl. VGP) have only poor channel separation, all comes more or less from the middle. So I would say it is simply impossible to create the new version from a bootleg release.

Yes, yes, you are most probably right midnrambler. I got carried away a bit on that one, sorry, just a moment of paranoia, on my side.

Quote
midnrambler
So I would say it is simply impossible to create the new version from a bootleg release.

Impossible is never simple

Quote
midnrambler

Quote
CaptainAcid
Guys, i am very suspicious this was a new remix at all?
I am thinking if it could be The Stones are bootlegging the bootleggers? Either they are using stereo mixes that they had for ages or using best bootleg sources that exists? And than they just do heavy maximizing, "REMASTERING" I mean if this is a new remix, why Bob Clearmountain? Why not Don Was?
How is it possible that i had to correct phase and pitch on official mix?
I have not yet compared this "new" mix with the VGP ( the best soundboard ), one on one, but i remember that "Some Girls In Texas `78" mix sounded strangely familiar. Just like the existing bootlegs of the show.

I don't think you're right here. The new release has a clear channel separation - Ronnie left, Keith right. None of the bootleg releases except the 8 songs from Grande Finale has this too, they all (incl. VGP) have only poor channel separation, all comes more or less from the middle. So I would say it is simply impossible to create the new version from a bootleg release.

Yep, the Archive release blows all previous bootleg releases of this show out of the water (with the exception of the vinyl only release Grande Finale). The archive release possibly could benefit from a slightly less brickwalled mastering but overall I think it's a great improvement.

www.rsundercover.eu

They most probaly worked from their own 24-tracks master but as is the music sounds like it was sourced from a privately made off-the-air AM vintage recording : it sounds hot, overloaded and crappy.

Shame... Better luck with vol.III? Let's hope they'll make a "dB zero" mastering this time. Let the music breathe!

CAPTAIN ACID:

You're definitely right about the sound quality of the Hampton release.

Listening to the FLAC files, the sound is far too " bright ". It's really hard on the ears to listen to this release. VERY DISAPPOINTING !!!!!!!!!!!!!

I've compared it to my copy of SODD's " HAPPY BIRTHDAY KEITH " and frankly, I prefer the SODD 2007 re-mastered release (more mellow sounding) even though there is less clear stereo imaging on some of the tracks. At least with the bootleg, I can actually sit down and listen to the entire double disc without getting a headache.

Regards

SFTD


P.S>
.

By simply reducing the volume level on the tracks by 20 % sounded better, so I re-burned the FLAC files.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2012-02-11 23:15 by SFTD.

Quote
CaptainAcid
[...]

Why didn't you deal with the clipping?