The No.1 Website for Pro Audio
 Search This Thread  Search This Forum  Search Reviews  Search Gear Database  Search Gear for sale  Search Gearslutz Go Advanced
Re-Mixing Classics?
Old 28th May 2003
  #31
Lives for gear
 
paterno's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally posted by alphajerk
well the mustang of today is nothing like the mustang of the beginning. should they rename it every year?

No, but if they do a replica of it it should be sold as such. And clearly labelled as such. My favorite example of all of this remix classic records thing is the Who catalog (I bought Who's Next to discover this). Pete Townsend got his brother in law to remix the whole catalog, and although he got the panning correct and the reverbs pretty close, it does not come near the spirit of the original. If a mix is a document of a time and place, like a photo, then let exist on it's own merit. Remastering for CD or another playback medium does enough to take advantage of todays technology while preserving the original intent of those involved in the creation of the work.

Cheers,
john
Old 28th May 2003
  #32
Lives for gear
 
Fibes's Avatar
 

I wish all archives were 2 track masters. It's a snapshot of history and I prefer it stay that way, technology or no technology.

I suppose i'm a luddite in an upgrade crazy society.
Old 28th May 2003
  #33
There is only one
 
alphajerk's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally posted by paterno
No, but if they do a replica of it it should be sold as such.
why would they want to re-create it exactly? i think it can be done better. the problem only seems to exist with people who have associated events with previous incarnations.
Old 28th May 2003
  #34
Lives for gear
 
Steve Smith's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally posted by alphajerk
well the mustang of today is nothing like the mustang of the beginning. should they rename it every year?
That is actually a great example why a original creation should not be ****ed with. New mustangs ( like 1980 and beyond ) pretty much suck donkey balls.
Old 28th May 2003
  #35
There is only one
 
alphajerk's Avatar
 

well, thats just american cars in general. but since the modelT was first listed as an example i felt inclined to keep it ford.

how about the mistubishi eclipse isnt the same today as when created. or ANY car.

i basically feel, if it can be done BETTER... then by all means do it BETTER. if it cant [or just to be done by some brother in law] then dont do it.
Old 28th May 2003
  #36
Lives for gear
 
paterno's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally posted by alphajerk
why would they want to re-create it exactly? i think it can be done better. the problem only seems to exist with people who have associated events with previous incarnations.
But can it always be done better? What are we going for here -- something 'technically improved' or something that you'll want to listen to over and over again? I have heard enough of these 'remixes' to know that the large majority of them pale in comparison to the originally released verisons. If they were better, I wouldn't be typing so furiously right now (fast, but not angry!). I felt like I got ripped off when I heard a record that I had not heard in a long time, and it was not as good as I remembered. I had to dig out my vinyl copy, and within 10 seconds I realized how much better the vinyl was. then I had to track down a re-mastered, 24K Gold, CD of the original mixes just to have it on CD, (because this was the only other version available). If I played you both CD's, you'd hear exactly what I am talking about.

And by the way, was the 80's version of the ZZ Top songs mentioned earlier better? You know, the ones with all the 'modern sounding' gated reverb on them? They sound more like period pieces than the original recordings.

It's not just a matter of 'associated events' here, it's a matter of why we bought the previous incarnation in the first place. The performance of the mixer,the producer, and the band at that time is just that - a performance, and that 'document' is an important part of the final product, even if it is not as obvious as the melody or lyrics. And it is the missing ingredient in the remix process...

In the end, it's just got to make me want to listen to it again...

Cheers,
John
Old 28th May 2003
  #37
Gear Head
 

Well, they sure murdered "Dance to the Music" by Sly and the Family Stone when they put a whole bunch of "modern" drum sounds on it. That's the kind of thing I hate.

But I have Abraxas by Santana on vinyl and on CD, and all the tinkly percussion is actually AUDIBLE on CD. The record sounds like it's coming through a sock. Then there were albums like Deep Purple in Rock which you had to put a penny on the headshell just so's it would stay in the groove. There were lots of technical limits on vinyl which some CD reissues were able to fix...
Old 29th May 2003
  #38
There is only one
 
alphajerk's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally posted by paterno
But can it always be done better?

The performance of the mixer,the producer, and the band at that time is just that - a performance, and that 'document' is an important part of the final product, even if it is not as obvious as the melody or lyrics. And it is the missing ingredient in the remix process...

In the end, it's just got to make me want to listen to it again...
maybe not always, but some of the time, yes. i would love to hear jimi sound GREAT. and there are a TON of albums where the sonics GET in the way of the performance. but it shouldnt just be done to do it, the people remixing the material should be talented individuals who have an appreciation for the artist.
Old 29th May 2003
  #39
Remastering is fine but ban the remix w**kers and everybody get back to work on new artists or we are all sunk.

Old 29th May 2003
  #40
Lives for gear
 
paterno's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally posted by Jules
Remastering is fine but ban the remix w**kers and everybody get back to work on new artists or we are all sunk.

C'mon Jules, you can say it -- ******S! Very true on the new artist comments...

-John
Old 29th May 2003
  #41
Music business

or

Historical music archive business

pick one....tutt
Old 30th May 2003
  #42
Gear Head
 
Gijs's Avatar
 

well I think a remix or a re-release or a 5.1 mix is all wrong!

Music develops over time and only "amateurs" in music-business think about the money that can be made with such things.
And "amateur-engineers" get a kick out doing someone elses stuff again with all these new toys..

Thats not about music!
That's stupid

pet sounds, steely dan
thats (all worthy) history, keep it that way
look ahead, explore new possibilities
new music that fit these new technologies

Not my grandma in hotpants please!

Sorry guys
this reminds me of the 80s were all vinyl was re-released, not because of the great music, but for the money.
anything that smells like this...
Old 30th May 2003
  #43
There is only one
 
alphajerk's Avatar
 

isnt brian wilson and co. doing pet sounds in 5.1?

for me its not about money... and its not about applying new technologies. in fact, i dont mind if they used all the equipment circa the year the album came out... just make the fidelity better suited for modern playback devices instead of AM radio and jukeboxes.
Old 30th May 2003
  #44
Lives for gear
 
Mikey MTC's Avatar
 

Well I'm going to go against the grain here: I LOVE MOST OF THESE NEW 5.1 REMIXES.

But first let's define our terms:
I'm talking about Dave's original point - remix in the sense of using all the original elements to make the record again. I'm not talking about taking the vocal only, Pitch'n'Time'ing it down 20bpm and writing a whole new backing track under it.

Jules has a valid point that it's taking away from the sales of new music ... maybe .... how many 40 something Steely Dan fans would have bought a new young artist had the Steely Dan choice not been there? Maybe some.

But look - we've got about 70 DVD Audio disks in our studio and the vast majority of the ones that rehash old 70's records are just fantastic. The reason they're great is that they respect the original product and they've had great people (and money) thrown at them.

The first one I ever heard was Fleetwood Mac's 'Rumors'. Let's not debate taste in music here, let's just talk about sonics. I had tears in my eyes when I first heard this because my first emotion was: "This is just like it's supposed to sound ... only better!"

These are songs that I've heard hundreds of times over the years and know very well and the new mix respected that balance. Admitedly this was in our studio with a high end DVD Audio player into our pretty schmicko system that I know very well, with proper bass mangement, yadda yadda. But my brain had an imprint of how those songs are supposed to sound and the disk got it right. So have countless others we have here.

Just to prove that it's not all beer and skittles, I recently got the DVD Video of Queen's Greatest Video Hits 1 and was less than happy at a few of the songs I knew so well because the balances weren't right. There were times where background vocals were way too soft and when you've heard these songs so many times over the years, you just know when it's not right. Just to point out - the Elliot Scheiner tracks on this DVD Video compilation were great. His 'A Night At The Opera' DVD Audio mixes are right up there with the best. Actually a vast number of the titles out there are his mixes, and for good reason. Some are a little crisper sounding than some other people's mixes, but he really nails his balances.

When these mixes are right they are a revelation. Forget the comparitively subtle differences you used to hear when going from one vinyl pressing to another, or a better quality CD or whatever. These are wholesale benefits . Also, the extra "room" that 5.1 provides allows some records that were a little congested in the past to be opened up. In saying this, I don't mean to contradict my previous points. I mean like: Remember the first time you took your favorite record or CD to a high-end hi-fi store and heard it on a really expensive system? That sort of jaw dropping thing.

I guess people are going to disagree with me here . . . . . .
Old 30th May 2003
  #45
Lives for gear
 
heinz's Avatar
 

SACRELIGE!!!

(hee hee) Man, now you have me wanting to grab Night At The Opera and freak my kids out a bit.
Old 31st May 2003
  #46
One with big hooves
 
Jay Kahrs's Avatar
Quote:
Originally posted by Dave Derr
Compared to remastering older recordings, Remixing is just an absolute NO NO NO in my book.
But what about things that truly do sound bad? The Smashing Pumpkins 'Gish' and Faith No More's "The Real Thing" come to mind.

Personally I just wish new recordings sounded better then they do. It makes the Eagles stuff from the '70's sound pretty damn good.
Old 31st May 2003
  #47
The Distressor's "daddy"
 
Dave Derr's Avatar
 

Thread Starter
Quote:
Originally posted by Mikey MTC
Well I'm going to go against the grain here: I LOVE MOST OF THESE NEW 5.1 REMIXES.
Sheesh I havnt heard enough of those remixes.

Great points Mikey. Anything Elliot does is prolly gonna be kickin. And youre right about the balance of instruments being key. It all starts there.

Ill have to check out Fleetwood Macs Rumours in 5.1. My Luv Bug, Judy, will glow when I bring it home... shes a huge Fleetwood Mac fan.

Ultimately, Im a revisionist and think everything can be improved... at least incrementally. And of course its great as long as its not promoted as the "original album"!
Old 31st May 2003
  #48
There is only one
 
alphajerk's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally posted by Jay Kahrs
But what about things that truly do sound bad?
or in utero. or ritual de lo habitual.
Loading mentioned products ...
Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook  Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter  Submit Thread to LinkedIn LinkedIn  Submit Thread to Google+ Google+  Submit Thread to Reddit Reddit 
 
Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Similar Threads
Thread
Thread Starter / Forum
Replies
thenewyear / Remote Possibilities in Acoustic Music & Location Recording
27
Paul Vnuk Jr. / Q & A with Michael H. Brauer
1
Robert / Remote Possibilities in Acoustic Music & Location Recording
8
Simon Lomax / Remote Possibilities in Acoustic Music & Location Recording
68
FOURTHTUNZ / Remote Possibilities in Acoustic Music & Location Recording
10

Forum Jump