well the whole point of these reissues/remasters is that they are supposed to improve on the listening experience. That's why they are asking people to pay extra money for music they likely already have.
― skip, Thursday, 10 May 2012 16:31 (fourteen years ago)
Yesterday afternoon's listen was totally YAY LOVELESS. I should've got that across better!
― Sick Mouthy (Scik Mouthy), Thursday, 10 May 2012 17:02 (fourteen years ago)
"Improve upon the listening experience", I suppose. But this is such a digital record, with the guitars run through MidiVerbs and recorded to DA88... Even Kevin, in the P4K interview, presents the digital remaster as both definitive and unchanged, only corrected to 0dB.
And I get it, and my "sad" is generated more out of frustration that one of my favourite bands has released three (four?) new songs in the last TWENTY YEARS, and here we are saying "well, if he's such a perfectionist, then why ___?" I'm mostly excited about the unreleased tracks
― poxen, Thursday, 10 May 2012 17:28 (fourteen years ago)
I doubt I will ever play the CD2 though
― Mark G, Thursday, 10 May 2012 17:33 (fourteen years ago)
CD2, as in the mislabelled CD1?
I have to say I prefer the fuller sound on the new master from the analog tapes.
― Chewshabadoo, Thursday, 10 May 2012 17:40 (fourteen years ago)
I'm buying this today! I'm excited, I'm skeptical too.
― poxen, Thursday, 10 May 2012 17:41 (fourteen years ago)
Is there much in the way of sleeve notes in the 'Loveless'/'Isn't Anything' remasters - I've only got 'EP's 88-91' for now and as already covered that's short on sleeve notes. I ask because was one of the excuses for the delay not "Kevin's still writing the sleeve notes", or had the dog basically eaten his homework?
― michaellambert, Thursday, 10 May 2012 18:01 (fourteen years ago)
was nothing in my loveless.
― koogs, Thursday, 10 May 2012 18:06 (fourteen years ago)
There are no sleeve notes that I've noticed thus far! Think there's an insert with the EPs that I've not looked at.
― Sick Mouthy (Scik Mouthy), Thursday, 10 May 2012 18:06 (fourteen years ago)
Aye, the EPs insert is just a reproduction of the original sleeves and some pictures.
― michaellambert, Thursday, 10 May 2012 18:22 (fourteen years ago)
Would have been nice to have some basic details about what releases the tracks were from, but aside from that I'm happy just to have all those tracks, only had the 'Tremelo EP' prior to now.
― michaellambert, Thursday, 10 May 2012 18:24 (fourteen years ago)
that info is on the reproductions of the back of the sleeves.
― koogs, Thursday, 10 May 2012 19:49 (fourteen years ago)
True. Nothing about the non-EP tracks though. I still think it's nicely put together.
― michaellambert, Thursday, 10 May 2012 20:45 (fourteen years ago)
i like seeing the art without the text. have also just noticed that the reproductions are of the 12" artwork not the cd artwork. not keen on the size though - half and inch bigger than normal cds = storage problems.
and that glitch i mentioned above is also on my original cd ep so it's not new, i just never noticed it before. does sound odd though.
― koogs, Thursday, 10 May 2012 20:54 (fourteen years ago)
I like that it's a pretty sturdy card gatefold, but the size is a little awkward.
― michaellambert, Thursday, 10 May 2012 21:04 (fourteen years ago)
The lack of sleeve notes makes the albums seem more contemporary.
― Mark G, Friday, 11 May 2012 06:28 (fourteen years ago)
Were you sitting in the marketing meeting?
― Sick Mouthy (Scik Mouthy), Friday, 11 May 2012 06:42 (fourteen years ago)
On a less facetious note, I always thought the band were very timelessly dressed / coiffed on the sleeve of Isn't Anything; plain t-shirts and shaggy hair could put them anywhere from 1966 to now.
― Sick Mouthy (Scik Mouthy), Friday, 11 May 2012 06:47 (fourteen years ago)
Well exactly.
― Mark G, Friday, 11 May 2012 08:17 (fourteen years ago)
does anyone have any secret knowledge about when the remasters will see a vinyl release?
― phantompenguin, Sunday, 13 May 2012 04:16 (fourteen years ago)
it was just "in a few months" i think. hope that's encouraging!
― blossom smulch (schlump), Sunday, 13 May 2012 15:12 (fourteen years ago)
He said that in 1992.
― Sick Mouthy (Scik Mouthy), Sunday, 13 May 2012 15:43 (fourteen years ago)
You know, the sense I'm getting is that anyone who has the EPs and the original albums doesn't really need this new one. Am I wrong?
― dlp9001, Sunday, 13 May 2012 21:13 (fourteen years ago)
You are.
I amazed myself by listening to the long version of 'Glider' as opposed to ignoring it in favour of the a-side 'remix' of 'Soon'. Plus the "untitled"'s and the 3 new tracks. You need the e.p. set, yes...
― Mark G, Sunday, 13 May 2012 22:52 (fourteen years ago)
Chart watch: The ep collection made 33, which is alright I reckons...
― Mark G, Sunday, 13 May 2012 22:54 (fourteen years ago)
Do double albums still count each sale twice?
― Sick Mouthy (Scik Mouthy), Monday, 14 May 2012 05:14 (fourteen years ago)
was that not just a US thing?
― ┗|∵|┓ (sic), Monday, 14 May 2012 05:19 (fourteen years ago)
No I think it counted over here too. But I might be wrong.
― Sick Mouthy (Scik Mouthy), Monday, 14 May 2012 07:07 (fourteen years ago)
It's not something I recognise.
Marcello to thread!
― Mark G, Monday, 14 May 2012 08:19 (fourteen years ago)
Yeah, EPs #33, Loveless #50, Isn't Anything #61.
― Michael Jones, Monday, 14 May 2012 09:30 (fourteen years ago)
The EPs reissue is a must buy I'd say. Even if you've got most of the vinyl there are some good rarities.
― Ima Skim Read That Bitch (Doran), Monday, 14 May 2012 10:59 (fourteen years ago)
I'm really, really into this remaster of Isn't Anything!And I don't hear the famous "I Only Said" digital glitch, hmm.
― poxen, Monday, 14 May 2012 14:39 (fourteen years ago)
Re: the "Loveless" analog remaster vs. the digital one.
Although the mastered-to-tape version sounds richer to my ears, less "early days" digital conversion, the mix is thrown off. The drum machines on "To here knows when" (hats) and "Sometimes" (kick) are mixed to perfection on the DAT master, i.e. barely audible but still running the track. Mastering to analog makes them inaudible, or at least, too low in the mix.
― poxen, Monday, 14 May 2012 14:45 (fourteen years ago)
Are you taking into account the CDs are printed the wrong way around?
― Chewshabadoo, Monday, 14 May 2012 19:24 (fourteen years ago)
I converted CD into WAV and onto a hard drive. I didn't notice which was which. To distinguish "tape" vs. "ADAT", I'm using my ears / comparing to the WAVs of the original CD I bought in 1998.
I don't hear the digital glitch! Really! I've listened in every possible way, studio monitors, monitor headphones, on both CDs. Hmm.
― poxen, Monday, 14 May 2012 21:07 (fourteen years ago)
And I don't hear the famous "I Only Said" digital glitch, hmm.
I thought it was the famous "What You Want" glitch?
― Mad God 40/40 (Z S), Monday, 14 May 2012 21:13 (fourteen years ago)
Another critical error is in the "1/2 inch analogue tape" remaster: there is an ugly digital transfer glitch approximately 2:46 into "What You Want", during the "I do, I do..." bit. It's prominent and ugly, audible (yuck! through headphones) and visible in a spectral view. This error was also present in the 2008 leak of the analogue tape variant, so Kevin/Sony has had (at least) 4 years to fix this.
http://thepowerofindependenttrucking.blogspot.com/2012/05/mbv-loveless-2012-remasters.html
― Mad God 40/40 (Z S), Monday, 14 May 2012 21:14 (fourteen years ago)
Oh, well there it is. Now I hear it.
― poxen, Monday, 14 May 2012 23:31 (fourteen years ago)
Finally ordered these from Amazon UK last night, now just waiting for them to get here.
― heated debate over derpy hooves (jon /via/ chi 2.0), Tuesday, 15 May 2012 02:29 (fourteen years ago)
You don't need headphones to hear that glitch in 'What You Want', it was pretty glaring when played through my computer monitor's speakers. Reminds me a bit of the famous glitch on Meat Puppets II.
― wronger than 100 geir posts (MacDara), Tuesday, 15 May 2012 07:46 (fourteen years ago)
You know what? I am resisting looking for it, because when I do I shall hear it forever. A bit like Liam gallagher's backing vocals on that Echo and the Bunnymen single.
― Mark G, Tuesday, 15 May 2012 08:17 (fourteen years ago)
I heard it when i was specifically listening for it with headphones; I didn't notice it when I played it LOUD through SPEAKERS and ROCKED OUT later on.
― Sick Mouthy (Scik Mouthy), Tuesday, 15 May 2012 08:19 (fourteen years ago)
ts: the glitch vs the deathchord.
― Mark G, Tuesday, 15 May 2012 08:25 (fourteen years ago)
there is a brown note at 3:16 in soon
― caek, Tuesday, 15 May 2012 10:54 (fourteen years ago)
So basically, there's absolutely no reason to buy to new edition of "Loveless," right? It's just a louderized version of the old one, more or less? I haven't seen anything that's really indicated the "analog" version is terribly better/superior.
― Josh in Chicago, Tuesday, 15 May 2012 14:24 (fourteen years ago)
It's not like the Beatles or Sly Stone remasters, but I'm very glad I've got it.
― Sick Mouthy (Scik Mouthy), Tuesday, 15 May 2012 14:29 (fourteen years ago)
I thankfully stopped myself from shelling out $26 or whatever for this.
― Josh in Chicago, Tuesday, 15 May 2012 14:30 (fourteen years ago)
Yeah, that's a fair bit to shell out for, i'll grant yz
― Mark G, Tuesday, 15 May 2012 14:30 (fourteen years ago)
The digital remaster is just a louder version of the original master, but to my ears the new remaster from original tapes has a fuller sound, with much less empahsis on the mid-range, and some boost on the bass.
At the moment there is the glitch problem on that one track though.
I will buy it if they release the analogue version on vinyl, but then I sold my CD and vinyl copies of Loveless a while ago when I saw prices were quite high for first editions.
― Chewshabadoo, Tuesday, 15 May 2012 14:40 (fourteen years ago)
Basically you can re-create this remaster by taking the original CDs you bought, ripping them to wave, and changing the volume. Or skip that and just change the volume on your stereo.
― Emperor Cos Dashit (Adam Bruneau), Tuesday, 15 May 2012 15:14 (fourteen years ago)