I must humbly admit that my initial reaction was “well that kind of sucks, but at least the music still exists and it’s not 100% gone”
Then they get to the part about how revisiting old masters and mixing them down for modern (improved) playback is something we can still strive toward. Btw, if you haven’t heard the 2017 remix of Sgt. Peppers, you really, really should because it’s how that album should sound. I again humbly admit I wasn’t at all interested in hearing it, but I can’t argue that it doesn’t sound incredible, and the fidelity is crystal clear.
Imagine how many other records could’ve gotten the same treatment… Chuck Berry, Buddy Holly, Christ the list goes on and on.
Yeah this is the stuff of nightmares, horrible. The Pepper & White Album remasters have got to be the greatest remasters ever, at least that I’ve heard.
Yeah they’re more than just remasters. They’re completely remixed for stereo, going back to the original recordings before they were bounced down to 4-inch tape or whatever it was. Great work. Giles is the man. Rip George.
I have to disagree strongly. In my opinion the st. peppers and white album remixes do the old recordings no justice. They try to bring the old music into the modern world, by using todays mixing rules (the bass has to be in the middle etc.) but they are completely forgetting the experimentational mindsetting of the old days.
Pauls bass is getting a complely new feel and rhythm, when you pronounce it like in the remixes. the broadening of the stereo field and use of gimmickry effect distract the listener from the main beauty of the songs.
for me, the remixes are a gimmickry cash in that will not stand the test of time and be forgotten soon.
I would like to point out that George Martin oversaw the 2017 Sgt Pepper’s if that makes a difference…
You’re sort of right about them following “modern mixing rules” but the original recording was all in mono, so EVERYTHING was up the middle. It was the (controversial, mind you) stereo recording that did funky things like putting the bass to the left, the drums, etc.
Which, for the record, I’ve always thought was charming and I’m a big 60s recording fan. The record I’m working on now is a send up to 60s psychedelia.
That being said, I don’t think Giles effected anything more than it already was. To my ears he didn’t make any creative decisions per se (as it should be) just mixing decisions. Ringo sounds beefy like he always should have (and probably did in the control room) , for instance. Paul’s bass has more clarity and pluck but doesn’t sacrifice the low end that was always there. Who knew I was playing the ob la di bass line wrong this whole time? Lots of mutes and plucks that didn’t make it on the original.
Even Mick Jagger said that Harrison’s guitar playing was great, but that the technology made him sound kind of thin and weak.
Remastering of classic albums always seemed strange to me.
Nobody would revisit a painting of Picasso with new colors, photoshop and digital print technology. Why should we do it with music? To me the older recordings always sound better. But to each his own.
Because painting, as far as I know, hasn’t changed. Paints have been paints for a long time. There hasn’t been any great technological innovation to make us see certain paints better or whatever.
Like they point out in the article, recording technology has always been ahead of playback technology. So what we were always listening to was a photo of Picasso, not a real-deal Picasso.
How do you feel about remakes of video games? Because they’re probably the most obvious example of a medium being affected so strongly by technological innovation.
Funny enough I’m sort of on the fence… But I can’t deny that the RE2 remake was insanely good, but it was way more than just a graphical update. Something like Crash remake wasn’t really necessary. Spyro looks prettier but it’s basically the same thing…
People talk about, say, remaking the first Silent Hill, but I played that game for the first time maybe two years ago and I thought it held up just fine. It was dated and obviously from its time period, but I thought it stood on its own merits.
Yes, we have “better” audio technology now. But what does it do to us musicians? Bands almost exclusively play with clicks in their ears nowadays which results in less dynamic music. The same happens with more compression on everything. To me the newer music mostly sounds too clean.
Apart from that i don’t like the idea of changing the music of dead artists. Would Jimi Hendrix like the new remastered version of his album?
I always try to get the original versions of older albums and it’s getting harder. Even classics like “Thriller” get remastered. It sounded perfect back then. Bass was banging too. No new technology needed imo.
With video games it’s different for me. Good point! Some new version of older games do indeed look great. Maybe music feels more personal to me. That’s a tough one.
This is kind of obfuscating the point, though. I agree with these sentiments, but it doesn’t mean we can’t revisit old records and make them sound how they should’ve sounded all along so to speak. If it results in engineers fixing everything to a grid and over compressing and limiting the shit out of dynamics, I’d agree with you. But that’s not what happened to 2017 Peppers.
(it would be the music equivalent of George Lucas adding a CGI karaoke scene in Return of the Jedi…)
Also, there are lots of great modern artists who don’t lock to a grid. They’re just not on the radio
Also also we’re on a forum for electronic instruments known for their built in sequencers
Music is very personal to me, too. My friends had to convince me to listen to 2017 Sgt Peppers because I thought like you guys did. It’s already been done and it sounds the way it sounds, why mess with it? But I’m happy with Giles’ work.
Yeah I wonder, I know the old stereo mixes with the Beatles were considered bad compared to the original mono mixed… is it that much better compared to the mono mix or to the stereo mix? I think many of us at this point probably would have listened to more of the stereo mixes that the mono due to digital copys I believe being mostly the stereo version.
when the arrangement was done for mono, then the remix should also be in mono
Would you remix enrico caruso to make him sound fuller?
would a fritz lang film become a better movie, if it was digitally coloured and in 3D?
i also think that christopher nolan did a great job on the 4k remaster of kubriks 2001, he left the original version intact and didnt try to beef it up with digital special fx, like lukas did on star wars.
i think the mixing and the recording are an integral part of the history of music. for a remix or remaster, only obvious errors should be corrected.
Except that Mono hasnt been the standard for nearly 50 years. Stereo is not a fad like they (Phil Spector and Brian Wilson included) once thought it would be. That would be like “remaking” a video game from 1985 and leaving it in 8-bit.
I don’t know who that is
I don’t know who that is either, but again I argue that’s different. That is making creative decisions that fundamentally change the work. That to me is the same as what George Lucas did…Different from what Giles and George did.
As for correcting obvious errors: I don’t think I agree with that There are a lot of notorious Beatles flubs in their recordings that I don’t think should be altered. Like the infamous John saying “fuckin hell” right before the big coda in Hey Jude.
by obvious errors i mean too high loudness and wrong use of a limiter like rick rubin did on the death magnetic album from metallica. or dropouts of a tape etc.
noises from musicians during a recording should be left in, because this is what makes them come alive.
there are a lot of badly produced albums from the 80s, sounding cheap with too much reverb etc. here it would be arguable, if these are errors that should be corrected to let them sound more modern, or to leave it in to keep the trashy 80s sound.
