Posted: 20 Jul 2017, 14:31
You don't sayPista wrote:Maybe The Sisters are trying it out before the inevitable ......new albumribbons69 wrote:[ Why is this on Pledge anyway?
Heartland
The Sisters of Mercy Forum
https://myheartland.co.uk/
Some Girls Wander By Mistake (4LP Vinyl Box Set)
Page 2 of 3
Posted: 21 Jul 2017, 06:15
Concurred in re: the streaming or downloaded versions and mastering. I'd like to think the vinyl resurgence has had at least some impact on the Loudness War, at least in the rock world. As far as the desirability of download codes included with vinyl, it should be noted that vinyl is not remotely a portable format. Well, LPs themselves are, it's just that a turntable, phono preamp, and pair of Adam A7Xs is pretty difficult to haul around on public transportation. I'll stick with Focal Spirit Pros and my dodgy old phone with a 32GB memory card.robertzombie wrote: You'll have noticed that, in the article, I explain how easy it is to press good quality vinyl nowadays. As you say, we have seen that in action with the last 3 reissues. If the next one is sourced from good quality analogue sources then it could be very special. Similarly, those streaming or downloading high-resolution digital versions stand to benefit if the mastering style stays the same as it has been.
Posted: 21 Jul 2017, 12:43
As you seem to be an expert on recording quality, I trust your opinion that the re-issues really are an improvement. But:robertzombie wrote:You'll have noticed that, in the article, I explain how easy it is to press good quality vinyl nowadays. As you say, we have seen that in action with the last 3 reissues. If the next one is sourced from good quality analogue sources then it could be very special. Similarly, those streaming or downloading high-resolution digital versions stand to benefit if the mastering style stays the same as it has been.Pista wrote:That's quite an interesting comment considering what you published here (which I thought was an excellent piece BTW).robertzombie wrote:Why are they not necessary? There are many reasons why this reissue could better a) the original compilation (easily) and b) the original singles. Similarly, where is the sense in owning a bunch of records all cut at the same time in the '90s when vinyl QC was at an all time low, but not having an interest in the recent advances made in vinyl cutting or indeed A/D conversion wrt the digital release?
I'm guessing the '90s saw the labels trying to herd us all into converting to CD & so their focus was on the "new" medium.
Today, like it or not, there is still a huge focus on streaming & digital copies, even to the extent that many re-issues come with download codes so people don't need to get their new platter out of the sleeve.
So, despite the advances in cutting tech & A/D conversion, it's questionable that pressing quality control is any better than 30 years ago.
That said, the last batch of Sisters re-issues were indeed very good & if that standard is maintained, this new set could be an eye opener. Let's hope so.
1. if your equipment is pretty standard (like mine), is there such an improvement that it's worth the investment?
2. a song such as "Damage Done", recorded on the most basic recording equipment sounds like crap in the original...I think it would still sound like crap on 240 g vinyl and fully remastered.
3. nobody buys bootlegs for the sound quality..suppose most people (like me) buy them because of unrelesed songs or as souvenir of a concert they attended. Agreed most are s**t.
Posted: 24 Jul 2017, 11:26
1. It depends on your equipment, hearing acuity, familiarity with the recordings, quality of the release (which we haven't heard yet)Cedarjet wrote:As you seem to be an expert on recording quality, I trust your opinion that the re-issues really are an improvement. But:robertzombie wrote:You'll have noticed that, in the article, I explain how easy it is to press good quality vinyl nowadays. As you say, we have seen that in action with the last 3 reissues. If the next one is sourced from good quality analogue sources then it could be very special. Similarly, those streaming or downloading high-resolution digital versions stand to benefit if the mastering style stays the same as it has been.Pista wrote: That's quite an interesting comment considering what you published here (which I thought was an excellent piece BTW).
I'm guessing the '90s saw the labels trying to herd us all into converting to CD & so their focus was on the "new" medium.
Today, like it or not, there is still a huge focus on streaming & digital copies, even to the extent that many re-issues come with download codes so people don't need to get their new platter out of the sleeve.
So, despite the advances in cutting tech & A/D conversion, it's questionable that pressing quality control is any better than 30 years ago.
That said, the last batch of Sisters re-issues were indeed very good & if that standard is maintained, this new set could be an eye opener. Let's hope so.
1. if your equipment is pretty standard (like mine), is there such an improvement that it's worth the investment?
2. a song such as "Damage Done", recorded on the most basic recording equipment sounds like crap in the original...I think it would still sound like crap on 240 g vinyl and fully remastered.
3. nobody buys bootlegs for the sound quality..suppose most people (like me) buy them because of unrelesed songs or as souvenir of a concert they attended. Agreed most are s**t.
2. I want to hear The Damage Done in a way that is transparent to the original master tape. I don't care how simple the recording is. My interest is in getting as close to the original recorded sound as possible. We know that the existing SGWBM compilation does not achieve that. Hopefully the new one will.
3. I understand that, I'm just surprised that fans are often more than happy to shell out for bootlegs but have very little interest when the actual songs could potentially be heard in a more accurate presentation.
Posted: 24 Jul 2017, 16:59
It would be nice to have a version of the Damage Done that actually sounds like the original, not the heavily compressed muffled version that is on SGWBM.
That would almost make it worth buying!
That would almost make it worth buying!
Posted: 26 Jul 2017, 23:40
This shouldn't be too difficult assuming the original 1/4" or 1/2" 2-track master is available. Straight through the cleanest A/D one can find at 24/96 (does anyone worth talking to really care about 192?). No compression or EQ. Whether it's what they were hearing in the studio upon playback... Well, that's a different animal entirely. (I suppose put a console in line, or use Burl A/Ds? Sorry; studio geek here.)robertzombie wrote: 2. I want to hear The Damage Done in a way that is transparent to the original master tape. I don't care how simple the recording is. My interest is in getting as close to the original recorded sound as possible.
Posted: 28 Jul 2017, 11:03
Yep, that's what I want!Llamatron wrote:This shouldn't be too difficult assuming the original 1/4" or 1/2" 2-track master is available. Straight through the cleanest A/D one can find at 24/96 (does anyone worth talking to really care about 192?). No compression or EQ. Whether it's what they were hearing in the studio upon playback... Well, that's a different animal entirely. (I suppose put a console in line, or use Burl A/Ds? Sorry; studio geek here.)robertzombie wrote: 2. I want to hear The Damage Done in a way that is transparent to the original master tape. I don't care how simple the recording is. My interest is in getting as close to the original recorded sound as possible.
Posted: 01 Aug 2017, 10:40
robertzombie wrote:1. It depends on your equipment, hearing acuity, familiarity with the recordings, quality of the release (which we haven't heard yet)Cedarjet wrote:As you seem to be an expert on recording quality, I trust your opinion that the re-issues really are an improvement. But:robertzombie wrote: You'll have noticed that, in the article, I explain how easy it is to press good quality vinyl nowadays. As you say, we have seen that in action with the last 3 reissues. If the next one is sourced from good quality analogue sources then it could be very special. Similarly, those streaming or downloading high-resolution digital versions stand to benefit if the mastering style stays the same as it has been.
1. if your equipment is pretty standard (like mine), is there such an improvement that it's worth the investment?
2. a song such as "Damage Done", recorded on the most basic recording equipment sounds like crap in the original...I think it would still sound like crap on 240 g vinyl and fully remastered.
3. nobody buys bootlegs for the sound quality..suppose most people (like me) buy them because of unrelesed songs or as souvenir of a concert they attended. Agreed most are s**t.
2. I want to hear The Damage Done in a way that is transparent to the original master tape. I don't care how simple the recording is. My interest is in getting as close to the original recorded sound as possible. We know that the existing SGWBM compilation does not achieve that. Hopefully the new one will.
3. I understand that, I'm just surprised that fans are often more than happy to shell out for bootlegs but have very little interest when the actual songs could potentially be heard in a more accurate presentation.
Back from holidays reunited with my record player I gave all versions of The Damage Done I got (except the SGWBM tape) a test run
My opinion:1. The original (labels on correct sides...). Really sounds best as far as you can say that with the equipment it was recorded on and 2 young musicians showing their early talent...
2. A clear second place goes to the "Japanese" bootleg. Sounds pretty much like the original.
3. SGWBM CD version
4. The Australian 2009 bootleg. Seems to be taken from the CD.
5. The "Primary" bootleg. Quite OK, but not too impressing.
6. A disappointing 6th rank in my opinion to the SGWBM vinyl. Agree it sounds muffled.
Posted: 01 Aug 2017, 11:57
I doub't they have any old masters ^^ Since I know atleast two master tapes are in private possession...robertzombie wrote:Yep, that's what I want!Llamatron wrote:This shouldn't be too difficult assuming the original 1/4" or 1/2" 2-track master is available. Straight through the cleanest A/D one can find at 24/96 (does anyone worth talking to really care about 192?). No compression or EQ. Whether it's what they were hearing in the studio upon playback... Well, that's a different animal entirely. (I suppose put a console in line, or use Burl A/Ds? Sorry; studio geek here.)robertzombie wrote: 2. I want to hear The Damage Done in a way that is transparent to the original master tape. I don't care how simple the recording is. My interest is in getting as close to the original recorded sound as possible.
Posted: 31 Aug 2017, 13:51
"Preparing for dispatch".
Posted: 31 Aug 2017, 20:16
I picked up a copy in my local disc emporium this evening... They must have sensed I was stopping by.
Going out tonight but managed a quick look. Three covers, one gatefold (obviously), and Under The Gun has the poster that came with the original limited edition 12".
Will be playing the discs tomorrow night but look forward to downloading the hi-res files from Qobuz in the morning. Did anybody notice? They're advertising them as "24bit 384kHz"... WTF?
Going out tonight but managed a quick look. Three covers, one gatefold (obviously), and Under The Gun has the poster that came with the original limited edition 12".
Will be playing the discs tomorrow night but look forward to downloading the hi-res files from Qobuz in the morning. Did anybody notice? They're advertising them as "24bit 384kHz"... WTF?
Posted: 31 Aug 2017, 21:31
The first two remasters are available for nowt if you have Amazons subscription service (so technically not for nowt) Amazon Unlimited so hopefully this will be up there soon.
Posted: 01 Sep 2017, 08:13
Posted: 01 Sep 2017, 08:16
LOL, now that's a waste of space!waterisnat wrote: Will be playing the discs tomorrow night but look forward to downloading the hi-res files from Qobuz in the morning. Did anybody notice? They're advertising them as "24bit 384kHz"... WTF?
Posted: 01 Sep 2017, 09:35
Also available on Amazon Unlimited now if you have the service. (As is the splendid new album from Terminal Gods )robertzombie wrote:24/192 https://www.7digital.com/artist/the-sis ... ke-6808990
Posted: 01 Sep 2017, 10:02
downloaded Alice to compare to the old SGWBM... Sounds like they done a needledrop 
I am certainly not impressed.
I am certainly not impressed.Posted: 01 Sep 2017, 10:34
On the other hand, Kiss the Carpet (Reprise) is restored to it's full glory.
So far I've only listened to MP3s on crappy headphones so can't really give a proper quality assessment.
So far I've only listened to MP3s on crappy headphones so can't really give a proper quality assessment.
Posted: 01 Sep 2017, 10:42
Some technical info:
This was mastered at 24/96. Anything above that is an upsample.
DR figures: http://dr.loudness-war.info/album/view/134723
This was mastered at 24/96. Anything above that is an upsample.
DR figures: http://dr.loudness-war.info/album/view/134723
Posted: 01 Sep 2017, 10:52
Quick listen: these are obviously the same needledrops as before!
Posted: 01 Sep 2017, 11:17
Disappointing.. but not very surprised to be honest..
Posted: 01 Sep 2017, 12:59
On the plus side, some work appears to have been done on the Sister's Spotify page.
Last week sometime, the file for Temple of Love 92 was overwritten by the original 1983 version. I noticed it when a playlist I had going suddenly replaced the 'new' version with the old.
For a few weeks, the 'new' version wasn't available.
The launch of the new Some Girls Wander on Spotify has brought it back and sorted out the confusion. It also means that some Sisters tracks that weren't available before now are - Alice 93, Under the Gun (Jutland mix) and so on.
Also, unless I'm very much mistaken, a lot of the old singles have now been uploaded with B-sides intact.
Last week sometime, the file for Temple of Love 92 was overwritten by the original 1983 version. I noticed it when a playlist I had going suddenly replaced the 'new' version with the old.
For a few weeks, the 'new' version wasn't available.
The launch of the new Some Girls Wander on Spotify has brought it back and sorted out the confusion. It also means that some Sisters tracks that weren't available before now are - Alice 93, Under the Gun (Jutland mix) and so on.
Also, unless I'm very much mistaken, a lot of the old singles have now been uploaded with B-sides intact.
Posted: 01 Sep 2017, 14:21
not listened to it yet - Amazon have managed to damage the sleeves and box in the packing stage (as the outer was A - OK).TheBoyNextDoor wrote:Disappointing.. but not very surprised to be honest..
F
Posted: 12 Sep 2017, 19:54
Is it worth opening the box?
Posted: 12 Sep 2017, 19:57
hell yeah, gotta love the smell of fresh vinyl in morning!paint it black wrote:Is it worth opening the box?
F
Posted: 12 Sep 2017, 22:40
looking forward to receiving my copy of "shine like thunder"... 
