Remixing of classic tracks

[Findlay]

Forgive me again if this has been covered before but I'm still confused about CD re-issues claiming to me "remastered". With the possible exception of the latest Beatles release, none of them seem to be remixed from the original multitrack master tapes. Having got hold of some of the "multitrack masters" you can download I'm amazed how much better I can mix classic tracks with even my limited equipment. Is there some reason for this (other than if the original tape has decayed) ? I'd love to hear my favourite songs properly remixed with state-of-the-art gear. Remixing some of my 1982 recordings made on my old 244 has been a revelation.

 

[witzendoz]

Call me an old fuddy duddy, (your an old fuddy duddy) I regard the original mix / master as part of the original song. Apart form a few remixes / re-masters that did fix up some awful releases most screwed up the recording in my opinion. I mean why would you re-mix / re-master the Beatles the original recordings were legendary.

Alan.

 

[miroslav]

Yeah...I don't buy the whole "remixed" thing, and I don't care how much "better" they think they made it than the original, unless of course, all the original people are directly involved with all the remixing...though if it's classic stuff that I heard a million times, it's just not appealing to hear it some different way, in most cases...
...but just some engineer making decisions without that input....naaa...I wouldn't buy it.

It's the same as when a TV broadcast of some movie is "edited for content and to fit in the time allowed" by the TV studio.
Total BS....and I REALLY hate it when some "family" channel decides to show some harder R movie...and then they remove ALL the cursing and cut out all the excess violence...and end up with a pile of shit, tied together with 800 commercials.

 

[jpmorris]

I can think of a couple of decent remixes, actually. Tubular Bells, and Tommy. Tubular Bells literally disintegrated while being played - apparently the stereo master was a mass of splicing tape and the adhesive had failed. Tommy was supposed to be a limited edition, and they set the master tape alight after the pressing run. As a result, the CDs were either made from vinyl, a pressing tape or a multi-generational copy of the master. Fortunately, the multitracks existed and a couple of years ago they were remixed, using the original as a reference. It turned out pretty well.

Also the Steve Wilson version of 'Warrior on the Edge of Time' - the stereo master exists (although the subject of litigation by the band) but was a pretty crappy mix. The Steve Wilson version sounds mostly like the original, but a lot clearer.

As for why they're being mixed digitally instead of off tape, it's probably because it's quicker and easier to do it that way. I wasn't so taken with the Court of the Crimson King remix - the reverb sounded a lot too modern.

 

[Farview]

I'm not into remixing classic tracks. Whatever shortcomings there were in the original mix are part of what made it classic.

Also, what is the definition of 'better'? If something sold enough copies for anyone to be interested in remixing it, how bad could it have been? Remember when George Lucas was able to go back and add a bunch of stuff to Star Wars that he always wanted, but was unable to pull off in 1975? His target audience lost their freaking minds!

The only remix album that I have ever bought is a version of Deep Purple's Made in Japan. But it was actually a 3 disc set of the three shows that were recorded to make the original album. So there was three performances of each song (except smoke on the water, which was left off to make room for an encore). The performances that were originally used for the album are all in there, but obviously mixed with the rest of the show they came from. It's awesome, but different.

 

[jpmorris]

Also, what is the definition of 'better'? If something sold enough copies for anyone to be interested in remixing it, how bad could it have been? Remember when George Lucas was able to go back and add a bunch of stuff to Star Wars that he always wanted, but was unable to pull off in 1975? His target audience lost their freaking minds!

Threshold did that to their second album, 'Psychedelicatessen'. The thing was actually remixed twice, as far as I know - the original 1994 version was lo-fi so they tried again in 2001, and that became the de-facto version.
Then, about three years ago they did a 'Definitive Edition' remix, which all the vinyl versions have been cut from. Like Star Wars, they dicked around with it, adding strings, and even changing the harmonies on the backing vocals. The sound quality is noticeably superior, but I don't really like what they've actually done to some of the songs. This is one of my favourite albums so I'm a bit sore about it.

 

[Chili]

The only remix album that I have ever bought is a version of Deep Purple's Made in Japan.

Did they fix that hihat track?? That always bothered me with that album. Of course, I haven't listened to it in ages, but I still remember that stupid hihat.

As for other remixes/remasters, I'm not sure if I have any remixed or remastered CDs, maybe the Beatles. I don't really think I notice the difference. What I really wish, and said this in Beagle's thread, if they're going to remix and remaster, they should eliminate the LCR panning. But people will argue that the old masters are slices of history and shouldn't be altered.

 

[Farview]

Did they fix that hihat track?? That always bothered me with that album. Of course, I haven't listened to it in ages, but I still remember that stupid hihat.

It does sound much better, but the whole thing was recorded to 8 tracks, so there was obviously some mixing to tape done. I never noticed the hat, but I was in second grade when it came out, so the sound of it was just part of what I grew up with and accepted.

 

[Findlay]

Thanks for the interest and these great replies. I'm a bit torn too - I appreciate the original mix is almost sacrosanct - great to hear that some cds have been remixed from the originals - but I'm sure the final mix could be improved in lots of other re-releases by a bit of tweaking of the original tracks in the multitrack recording. For example, one of my favourite recordings of all time is Steve Stills "Carry On" from Deja Vu from '69 which could do with a bit of a tweak to the vocals and guitars. If only the re-release came with a copy of the original multitrack so you could mix at home to suit your own taste and equipment. And to hear all the backchat and alternate vocals and guitar licks - what a treat that would be!

 

[JRSIV]

Call me an old fuddy duddy, (your an old fuddy duddy) I regard the original mix / master as part of the original song. Apart form a few remixes / re-masters that did fix up some awful releases most screwed up the recording in my opinion. I mean why would you re-mix / re-master the Beatles the original recordings were legendary.

Alan.

Alan you are certainly not a fuddy duddy, you're a sane person who appreciates the integrity of the original artistic endeavor. Hey they may be able to make "Starry Night" look better with new paint formulations but should some guy slather it over Van Gogh's epochal painting?! Of course not. Just because "rock music" is not seen as a true art form still by many people doesn't mean it should be ruined George Lucas/Star Wars tinkering style.

The Beales catalog has been transferred to digital since 2005, recorded with the best converters and 96k+ sampling rate. Son of George Martin, Giles Martin, transfered all of the session multitracks (62-63 twin tracks, 64-68 four tracks and 68-70 eight tracks) and all mono and stereo masters over to digital while he was doing the Love soundtrack which was released in 2006. Some of the the session tapes had been transferred before in 1999 for the Yelliw Submarine Songtrack CD, which is the only Beatles release to be officially REMIXED (meaning multitrack tapes mixed again into stereo), but those were only the songs in the movie and principally done for the 5.1 surround mix.

Before the Beatles catalog was reissued in 2009 there was talk of a complete remix of each album but the surviving Beatles and the Estates of John & George, along with George Martin, said that the 60's mixes are just as much a part of the identity and artistic work as Ringo's drums, etc. I was very happy they decided to not remix the catalog because earlier in 2004, 2005 the Who's Pete Townshend supervised a remix of the Who's albums that was very hit or miss...

DAW recording makes committing to anything so difficult because you can have 8 takes of a solo and never decide which one to use or spend 6 hours comping the life out of them. That same wishy washy vibe can hurt reissue projects where remastering isn't "big" enough and a full remix is undertaken to give the reissue the "buzz" they want it to have.

F that. Respect the art.

 

[RFR]

I remember when I was 'updating' my vinyl collection to cd, there were quite a few records familiar to me that sounded different.

One of the worst was ZZ Top's Tres Hombres. WTF???? All that reverb was never there! They ruined it.

I guess others felt the same way as later releases went back to normal.

Leave the classic recordings alone.