Looks like June 16th is the date according to the Pitchfork site
Is the lack of extras a bad thing? Prob not as most of the time they ruin a good album when they're tagged on the end.
Looks like June 16th is the date according to the Pitchfork site
Is the lack of extras a bad thing? Prob not as most of the time they ruin a good album when they're tagged on the end.
there's loads of rarities
that will be out at some point soon, they're gonna be in the japanese box set which as yet has no uk release date
/\ lol
this was announced when i was first getting into the band, which must have been 03/04
i think its worthwhile
swegen.
I bought dino jr's remastered first album and I'm glad i did.
Could bring out some previously hidden subtle parts of a song..esp with loveless synth bits and female fox that tend to be buried in the mix
Think I might sell that
You made me realise e.p before the box set lowers its value.
20p I found it for. Best find ever?
you can still
get it new.
Really?
http://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/offer-listing/B00004SF22/ref=sr_1_olp_1?ie=UTF8&s=gateway&qid=1210187243&sr=8-1
.
I'll take it off your hands. What do you want for it?
It doesn't need extras
The albums are brilliant in themselves already.
^
This.
Also, these are two of the only albums I can thin of that I would actually LIKE remasters of.
bit weird, innit?
for an album which IS the production, to mess about with it would change the entire shape of the record. It's not like making an old rock album sharper (and louder and more compressed etc.)
As an extreme pedant i'd call it something like an "alternate master"
The mastering
and the production are vastly different things.
but remasters change the way things sound
the way Loveless sounds is its USP, regardless of whether it's to do with the mastering or production or mixing or recording as a specific practice
I dunno
it could still probably do with being a little bit less tinny, much as I love it. Sounds a little dated.
Probably what's taken 'em 15 years to do
Why fuck with perfection?
Hey, how about that new material you've promised us Kev?
It can only be a good thing
Listen to it on Vinyl then listen to it on CD.
It sounds so much better on vinyl, the CD just isn't as good, this re-master will address that.
My Bloody Valentine levels are weird
I always have to crank MBV records higher volume to compensate for the lack of production. The stereo effect is weak too. Remaster wil help MBV. Remember how limp bowie's mix down of "Raw Power" was? Then Iggy goes and remixes it too far the other way- iggy's "Raw Power" freaks my speakers out. Remastering always helps the sound quality though.
I've got a bunch of remasterd Deep Purple that crushes the AAD Deep Purple discs.
email this guy: jeff@mybloodyvalentine.net
he's the go to guy at MBV- he's never written me back but maybe one of you could get some answers.
Wow.
Have I really just heard someone accuse MBV of a "lack of production"?
Eh?
Lack of modern-style compress-the-shit-out-of-everything, I think you possibly mean...
I'm no expert
granted, I lack recording skills; I can barely follow a signal through my mackie 1640 but I do have really amazing listening skills which have shown me that MBV recordings seriously LACK BALLS.
They're quieter than stuff produced now, true
but they are very well produced.
I'd be inclined to agree
That yes, the albums are very quiet and soft-sounding.
But isn't that the whole point?
You want to add lots of "balls" to something like a Metallica album (see The Black Album for perfect example), but for MBV, I'd have to say no.
I'd say sonically, they've done a pretty damn perfect job (Loveless anyway). That said though, be interesting to hear the new re-mastered versions. This release would probably explain why Fopp seem to have stopped selling the MBV albums for £5 now...
no, it's the doggone levels
they are just wrong. It's a gaff from behing the board.
Loveless is the main culprit
I always have to turn that one up. Love the music but the recording just is real flat to me. I like recordings that sound amazing at low volume and beyond wonderful at high volume. Loveless, sonically lacks texture; it's kind of a jumble that forces me to consciously pick sounds out of the mix rather than a lush, vibrant mix which jumps out at me.
I've never heard this record while high
is this a reason everyone says its amazing...?
isn't is supposed to sound like a flat jumble?
a sonic sheet of mist over everything?
And like i say above, if you don't like the production then you don't like Loveless. I don't think vibrancy was a particular concern, nor was "jumping out", but you really can't deny the lushness at high volumes (i'd say it's one of those albums which is a completely different experience at both a bit too high and a bit too low volumes). It's a unique sort of lushness though
Maybe you've just been spoiled by the sonic texture of people inspired by Loveless..