The Return Of My Bloody Valentine

ah that makes 4 then aye. but also there's 3 of the actual un-Weatherall one according to Shields.

OK, clue me:

1) 7" single
2) 12" single
3) Weatherall remix
4) LP version
5) "Analogue" version

um...

to say nothing of the cassette and minidisc versions..

or indeed the Eno remix.

The EP / single version, and the versions on the two discs of the new release, are not only different masters but different mixes, apparently.

Eno remix?

My mistake; Eno called it "the vaguest song ever" but never remixed it, as such.

Eno's favourite song ever, iirc

Mouthy, I can't help but feel saddened by your blog post. "So far I’ve not really “listened” to the new versions of Loveless." I mean, I hear digital glitches on records all the time. I once sat in on a session where the masterer was using a pencil tool to physically correct the waveform, drawing over the spikes of the glitch. I just can't really get too bent out of shape about such tiny problems.

is there an odd squeak 47 seconds into You Made Me Realise too? or have i just never heard it before?

Poxen, why's that make you sad? All I mean is that I'd been doing other things whilst they were on in the background up to that point. I played them back much louder yesterday, and, unsurprisingly, totally didn't notice the glitch in What You Want (which is totally obvious if you're listening for it in headphones).

Sometimes you want to immerse yourself in a record, especially one like Loveless, and soak in every detail and nuance and float away inside your headphones or in front of your speakers. On those occasions, glitches that are errors can totally bust you out of the zone. And really awful compression / limiting / clipping just prevent you ever being able (or wanting) to do that in the first place.

(that YMMR glitch is from the eps btw. can't remember if it's on anything else.)

WHAT makes me sad, I guess, is that the response in listening that I've read, here and elsewhere, has been more along the lines of "combing through the audio landscape" instead of engaging with the musical material. I guess it's to be expected considering how familiar this record is to you (or me or anybody). But nevertheless it's frustrating to read "boo: glitches / mislabeling" and "boo: why did it take Kevin so long" instead of "yay: Loveless".

I hope you don't take it as a criticism, I love your audiophile-style.

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.

Yesterday afternoon's listen was totally YAY LOVELESS. I should've got that across better!

"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

I doubt I will ever play the CD2 though

CD2, as in the mislabelled CD1?

I have to say I prefer the fuller sound on the new master from the analog tapes.

I'm buying this today! I'm excited, I'm skeptical too.

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?

was nothing in my loveless.

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.

Aye, the EPs insert is just a reproduction of the original sleeves and some pictures.

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.

that info is on the reproductions of the back of the sleeves.

True. Nothing about the non-EP tracks though. I still think it's nicely put together.

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.

I like that it's a pretty sturdy card gatefold, but the size is a little awkward.

The lack of sleeve notes makes the albums seem more contemporary.

Were you sitting in the marketing meeting?

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.

Well exactly.

does anyone have any secret knowledge about when the remasters will see a vinyl release?

it was just "in a few months" i think. hope that's encouraging!

He said that in 1992.

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?

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...

Chart watch: The ep collection made 33, which is alright I reckons...

Do double albums still count each sale twice?

was that not just a US thing?

No I think it counted over here too. But I might be wrong.

It's not something I recognise.

Marcello to thread!

Yeah, EPs #33, Loveless #50, Isn't Anything #61.

The EPs reissue is a must buy I'd say. Even if you've got most of the vinyl there are some good rarities.

I'm really, really into this remaster of Isn't Anything!
And I don't hear the famous "I Only Said" digital glitch, hmm.

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.

Are you taking into account the CDs are printed the wrong way around?

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.

And I don't hear the famous "I Only Said" digital glitch, hmm.

I thought it was the famous "What You Want" glitch?

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