Bruce Springsteen

[petzi]

I haven´t got many Bruce Springsteen records yet... Should I look for any specific good sounding releases; should I buy CDs or LPs ?

[Sckott]

Classic Records: Born To Run, LP. Try Red Trumpet. Vocals sound much better. Nice cut too.

I have an "original" Columbia of that LP and it sounds good, but the CD sounds kinda weak and watered down. I play the LP more than anything.

In fact, there's a lot of Springsteen Cds in the catalog that sound "off" to me. Nebraska (US) sounds alright, Wild & Innocent I think will sound the way it does, but don't remix it, "The River" I remember the UK CD sounds a bit better with more soundstage, but don't quote me. I ended up owning the US one (don't ask why I donno). "Darkness On The Edge" while not my favorite, the US CD sounds nice. "Born In The USA" always sounded a bit cloudy, and I think I've owned, borrowed and tried most formats including CD, LP, Cass and MD, no imports. I think it was supposed to sound that way. The LP sounds 'OK' and that's what I kept.

Born To Run IS a nice little sonic delight once you pry into the sound of the LP, more preferably, the Classic Recs. Check it.

[Unknown]

The only "audiophile" Springsteen CD out there is the Mastersound Born the Run gold disc. Born to Run isn't exactly an audiophile recording, and I think the current stock CD may use the same master. There was also an SBM mastered version of Born in the USA released in Japan. I have it, but haven't really listened too it much (that recording sounds pretty dated to me).

The best sounding Bruce Springsteen CDs IMHO are Tunnel of Love; The Wild, the Innocent and the E Street Shuffle; and The Ties That Bind (a bootleg of 1979-80 outtakes that actually sounds better than The River CD).

Bob Irwin of Sony/Legacy has wanted to remaster the Springsteen catalog for some time, but Springsteen's people won't allow this for some reason. I wouldn't expect any sonic miracles anyway, even if they are remastered.

[CM Wolff]

I think don't think "Springsteen's people" are to blame. The responsibility is solely Bruce's. He of course is a notorious control freak, and nothing happens (or doesn't happen) without him making the decision.

I also think that great improvements can be made in his catalog. Compare the HDCD sound of Tracks to the sound of similarly dated material on the original albums - I think many Bruce fans agree that the outtakes on Tracks sound better than the "real" albums, an unfortunate situtation.

As a die-hard Bruce fan, I would love to see his whole catalog brought up to the quality it should be. However, accepting that Bruce being Bruce will not delegate this, I guess I rather see him spend his time getting a new album out - it has now been six years since Tom Joad and will almost be ten years since his last new "rock" albums, Human Touch and Lucky Town....

Bob Irwin of Sony/Legacy has wanted to remaster the Springsteen catalog for some time, but Springsteen's people won't allow this for some reason. I wouldn't expect any sonic miracles anyway, even if they are remastered.

[Matt]

Didn't they remix everything on "Tracks"? I don't have it with me now, but I remember in the liner notes, Bruce thanks someone for remixing the tapes, saying how they "really improved the sound quality," or something to that effect. Of course, there were also new overdubs done on some of the material, but I personally don't have any problem with the changes.

[njwiv]

Originally posted by Camarillo:
Didn't they remix everything on "Tracks"?

Yes, it's all remixed. But it's hard to complain when, for the most part, they weren't released in the first place. TRACKS sounds great to these ears.

As for "Bruce's people", I would guess that Jon Landau is an integral part of most decisions Bruce makes as far as his catalogue.

[Unknown]

Actually, I thought a lot of the remixes -- especially on the late 70's material -- sounded pretty thin.

It's too bad Bruce has never worked with a great producer (although Little Steven at least had some potential, based on his work with Southside Johnny). Born to Run is pretty murky and is pratically in mono, but at least Bruce was going after a very particular sound. But the Darkness mix is just plain lousy no matter which way you cut it. Every time I listen to Patti Smith's recording of Because the Night, I wish Jimmy Iovine had been allowed to work the same magic on the Darkness material. (Iovine, but the way, was involved with both the Born to Run and Darkness albums, but as engineer, not as producer). His live albums is especially bad -- they managed to completely destroy the live feel of the material on teh 1975-85 box set. In fact, so much of that was re-recorded in the studio I'm not even sure it can really be called a live album. By the Iovine engineered radio broadcasts from 1978 are something else entirely. I wish Bruce had simply released the pre-FM recordings of the Winterland or Capitol Theater broadcasts instead. Luckily there are some outstanding bootlegs of these shows floating around.

[njwiv]

Originally posted by David Olstein:
Actually, I thought a lot of the remixes -- especially on the late 70's material -- sounded pretty thin.

To clarify, I think they sound great compared to the current versions of the albums of similar recording vintage. But I certainly don't have the audiophile credentials of many here.

[Ronald]

Many of Springsteen's albums have been re-issued in Japan or in Europe on CD and LP. While the foreign issues are pricey, I would choose any of these over the US versions.

The Classic Recs "Born to Run" is a good start. It is a much better pressing than the MasterWorks LP or the Sony/Japan LP. An original Columbia is very good actually.

Personally, I like "Darkness on the Edge of Town". CBS did re-issue a half-speed MasterWorks version which to my ears did not offer much improvement over the acceptable original Columbia pressing.

I own most of Springsteen's releases on vinyl and I am pleased with the sound. I avoid the CD versions. They are too hot in the high end or the low end (bass) seems to be cut, at least on the US versions.


Happy hunting!!
As noted before, Springsteen's work is not audiophile quality. What I would listen for is lack of compression and lack of saturation.

[CM Wolff]

While there is a lot of overdubs on 1975-1985, I wouldn't characterize the album as bad. It doesn't necessarily "feel" like a Bruce concert, but it has a ton of essential performances that surpass his studio albums. And I would thoroughly disagree with characterizing Live in New York City as bad. Bruce wisely left all the raw edges in this one, and I think it deservedly won a lot of praise for capturing his live feel. Factor in that it has some of his best songwriting of his career (e.g. Land of Hope and Dreams, American Skin), some great reworkings (the slow mo version of the River) and the hardest, toughest rock he has ever committed to tape (Youngstown/Murder, Inc./Badlands - the heart of the album), LINYC is a must-have. (The DVD is also great, by the way).

His live albums is especially bad

[Ronald]

Errr.... I meant MasterSound, not MasterWorks. The MasterWorks of the late 1970's and 1980's vintage are predominantly classical and are digital.

[Uncle Al]

Mark me down as another who likes the murkey sound of of Darkness. It is one of the few albums in his catalog that aren't red hot in the high end, and actually has decent extension down under. Next best sounding is probably Wild and the Innocent or Tunnel of Love.

Sonicaly worst of the batch: toss up between Born In the USA (Screeching, grating high end) and The River (thinner than a transistor radio).

[Matt]

Has anyone compared "Greatest Hits" to the sound of the stand alone CD's? To my understanding, "Greatest Hits" is completely remastered.

Doesn't seem to be a really good Springsteen compilation to have (maybe for Murder, Inc. and Secret Garden, but you can get those elsewhere), but if sounds much better, it could be worth considering.

[btomarra]

Camarillo,

Gotta agree with you on the Springsteen Greatest Hits. It is remastered, but not very comprehensive. No "I'm On Fire," "Tunnel of Love," "Fade away," "Blinded By The Light," or "Rosalita" just to name a few.

Bruce is an artist that needs at least two CDs to do it justice. Or why not a four CD box remastered of released material to compliment Tracks. :(

[Unknown]

<<Bruce is an artist that needs at least two CDs to do it justice. Or why not a four CD box remastered of released material to compliment Tracks.>>

Bruce is an album artist, not a single artist. A Greatest Hits collection may make economic sense, but does little for me artistically. It would have made a lot of sense to remaster Bruce's entire catalog at the same time that Tracks was released. Sony was eager to do this, but Bruce said no. Go figure.

What I'd really like to see is a "From the Vaults" series, which would present complete Springsteen concerts, either remixed from the original multitracks or remastered from the original direct-to-two track recordings. There are several excellent candidates, including the Main Point, Bottom Line and Roxy broadcasts from 1975, the Roxy, Agora, Capital Theater and Winterland broadcasts from 1978, the 12/28, 29 & 31/1980 Nassau Coliseum concerts and the 8/20/84 Meadlands concert. Several of these shows have circulated among collectors in outstanding quality, but it's ridiculous that no complete concert recording of Bruce is commercially available, and 1975-85 box set is so heavily overdubbed, it barely even qualifies as a live album.

[Matt]

Absolutely! At least released them as limited editions or something. If Pearl Jam can do it, if Orbison's family can release of box of them, etc., why can't Sony do the same?

This is what I don't get about Bruce: 1) the guy appreciates good sound quality. He points that out on the Tracks box set when he mentions why he's glad the music was remixed. 2) One of the reasons he hates bootlegs (among many reasons) is how the quality is so poor, not just in packaging, but in sound. He's gone on record about this. Bruce, man, have you listened to your albums on CD? They ain't so hot either! And finally 3) this concerns putting concerts out on legitimate release, not remastering old albums, but remember all the reasons for doing the live 3CD set? Some say that "Live 1975-1985" just made people want to buy bootlegs rather than hurt the market as Bruce and Columbia hoped. They have to think about why people would buy these concerts. Passaic Night, Live at the Roxy, the Main Point...these are legendary concerts to Bruce fans. We cherish these babies. You want people to stop buying these illegitimate releases? You put them out as legitimate releases. A compilation isn't going to substitute these, especially one that just samples these and EDITS whole passages out of the performances! To Bruce fans, these concerts are established entities in their own right, just as his albums are. At the very least, take the best of these, like five or so, and put them each out as a limited release, maybe a direct order along the lines of the Handmade stuff Rhino does or the mail-order Lp boxes Mosaic does.

Well, that's enough ranting...

[ November 27, 2001: Message edited by: Camarillo ]

[Dr. Winston]

We can't even get a simple remaster of the back catalog but the "From the Vaults" concerts is a great idea. I've got most of those shows in A+ quality--its the continuity--

[Uncle Al]

Originally posted by Camarillo:
A compilation isn't going to substitute these recordings that are established entities in their own right among Bruce fans, especially one that just samples these and EDITS whole passages out of the performances!

I could always understand an overdub to fix a bum note or off key vocal on a "concert album", but those edits are always killers. I've always felt that this is more the producers fault than the artists. After all, one of their main functions in the studio is judicious edting to "streamline" the performance (or - in other words - make a hit). The version of "Backstreets" on the 75-85 live set edits out a good 4 minutes of a slow build up to a major musical explosion that brings you back into the final chorus (affectionately known as "Sad Eyes" by Bruce fans).

Jeez - this is the raw emotion that made the performance distinguishable from the studio version. I think record producers should continue to work their magic on studio recordings, and leave performance recordings to the artists. After all, they may not know how to make a record, but they know how to work a crowd. As long as I'm on a rant - let that apply to sequencing as well. Don't get me started on the song sequencing on the latest Springsteen live CD/DVD.....

[CM Wolff]

What I'd really like to see is a "From the Vaults" series, which would present complete Springsteen concerts, either remixed from the original multitracks or remastered from the original direct-to-two track recordings.

I would love to see this, too. However, I have long given up hope, as long as Bruce himself is alive. He has had every opportunity to go down this route, but has instead decided to shape his live albums to fit whatever theme/message/artistic statement he was trying to drive home at the time. Also, I think his perfectionism overtakes him - it took him almost a year to get LINYC to market and almost a year and a half for the DVD. In an era where Pearl Jam/Dave Matthews get a live album out within a month of the performance, you can see that Bruce has a different mentality about these things. Hence, the edited, less-than-full length concert albums. However, I think they are great for what they are - LINYC gets as much play in my house as some of the boots you mention.

If he is going spend time on any project, these days my hope is for a new studio album, hopefully something that soars as high as some of his newest music like Land of Hopes and Dreams, Missing, Back in My Arms, My City of Ruins, Code of Silence, etc. Winterland, The Roxy, etc. are great pieces of history, but the man is still making great new music that needs to get out.

[CM Wolff]

Absolutely! At least released them as limited editions or something. If Pearl Jam can do it, if Orbison's family can release of box of them, etc., why can't Sony do the same?

Bruce has 100% control over what gets out. Sony can't put anything out that Bruce doesn't want out. Simple as that. Bruce apparently has decided that he is not going to try to translate the complete concert experience to album. And there is probably no complete concert that clears his perfectionism... if Clarence butchers the sax solo on Bobby Jean on 7/1/00 (which he did), well, it makes it an easy decision for Bruce - no Bobby Jean on album and no 7/1/00 complete concert.

[Unknown]

<<He has had every opportunity to go down this route, but has instead decided to shape his live albums to fit whatever theme/message/artistic statement he was trying to drive home at the time.>>

The funny thing is, Bruce has also talked about how much effort he puts into his setlists. His concerts definitely have an arc -- but all of that is lost when he decides to edit a show down to a single CD, or combine songs from various performances.

<<Bruce apparently has decided that he is not going to try to translate the complete concert experience to album. And there is probably no complete concert that clears his perfectionism.>>

Bruce really needs to lighten up. The fact is, virtually every concert he has performed since 1984 has been recorded by someone in the audience. So if Bruce doesn't release any of his own recordings (and Bruce has had ALL of his concerts professionally recorded since the Born in the USA tour), there are plenty of fans and bootleggers who will gladly step forward to satisfy the demand. Just because Bruce doesn't release the concerts himself doesn't mean they won't get heard. It only means people will end up listening to inferior recordings. Pearl Jam had the right idea -- better to make high quality recordings available at a reasonable price than have their fans spend a lot of money on inferior sounding bootlegs.

[CM Wolff]

Bruce really needs to lighten up. The fact is, virtually every concert he has performed since 1984 has been recorded by someone in the audience. So if Bruce doesn't release any of his own recordings (and Bruce has had ALL of his concerts professionally recorded since the Born in the USA tour), there are plenty of fans and bootleggers who will gladly step forward to satisfy the demand. Just because Bruce doesn't release the concerts himself doesn't mean they won't get heard. It only means people will end up listening to inferior recordings. Pearl Jam had the right idea -- better to make high quality recordings available at a reasonable price than have their fans spend a lot of money on inferior sounding bootlegs.



I would absolutely LOVE to see Bruce do what Pearl Jam did and am in 100% agreement as to Bruce's tendencies to overanalyze. However, Pearl Jam delegated the task of preparing their 'bootleg series' to their engineers. Chance that Bruce will give up responsibility and turn over the reigns to anyone for a series of concert releases? None. Pearl Jam also turned a blind eye to the merits of individual concerts/setlists. Chance that Bruce will similarly release 'warts and all' performances? Again nada (unfortunately).

As to the fans getting ripped off on inferior quality bootlegs - Bruce is not going to let bootleggers affect his decision about what to release or not. He has made it pretty clear that he plays to the 99.9% percent of his fan base that doesn't collect boots in the first place. And the 0.1% that do? In this day and age, with the trading community as well-established as it is, if you are paying ANYTHING for boots, that is your own decision (and fault). Do your homework and you will find the huge Bruce following that wants to spread the gospel, all the while not seeking to make a penny off of the man's work while doing it.

Again, I would love to walk into my local store and pick up Bruce concerts - hopefully I am not coming across as overly negative. Just have followed him for too long and have conscientiously lowered my expectations on these issues...the Pearl Jam fans should consider themselves lucky for what they got this past year.

[Unknown]

Pearl Jam is hands down the most fan-friendly band around. But they're not the only band that's releasing a ton of live material. The Grateful Dead of course led the way, with their Dick's Picks and From the Vaults series (and they're even releasing videos now). I think Phish just released five or six complete concerts (along with a Phishpack to hold them all) and apparently there's a lot more to come. David Matthews Band has released a few live albums as well. Pete Townshend has several live albums for sale via his web site. Robert Fripp, who any experienced taper will tell you is one of the most anti-taping artsts around, has been King Crimson concert recordings through a mail-order subscription series. It's a shame that Springsteen, who for many years was considered the best live performer in the business, couldn't follow these examples.

[CM Wolff]

It's a shame that Springsteen, who for many years was considered the best live performer in the business, couldn't follow these examples.

Totally agree. In addition to the examples mentioned, Richard Thompson has mail order releases through his fan club/website. Times have changed, including technology and methods of distribution. It is heartening to know that Bruce is at least aware of both the die-hard fans' desires and the availability on non-traditional retail routes. His management clearly does watch the fan bases (e.g. Lucky Town Digest, rec.music.artists.springsteen) and Bruce himself has mentioned his desire to get out stuff that has slipped through the cracks (e.g. the scrapped "Western Swing" album, the "hip-hop"/experimental album, the early 90's "relationship" album). While I find these even more exciting prospects than older live stuff, hopefully he will eventually come around to the thought that there is a lot of material that could be released that will further cement his relationship with his fans and his legacy and stature as one of the all-time greats, and that such releases would not compete with his "official" albums.

Next topic on my gripe list, similar to all this....Bob Dylan's "Bootleg Series" has had only two releases in over ten years. Now that doesn't even qualify as a 'series' in my book....

[Unknown]

Yeah, the Dylan Bootleg Series really hasn't amounted to much. What really pisses me off is that the original box set was supposed to be 4CDs, but some bean counter at Sony thought they would sell more copies if it was cut back to 3CDs. Yeah, right. I'm sure there are lots of people out there willing to buy 3 discs of unreleased Dylan material, but who'd balk at having to shell out for a fourth. Groan.

Hopefully the remasters, if they ever come out will have bonus tracks and will help fill in some of the gaps. Still, I wonder when Sony will finally release a basement tapes box set. The bootleg Genuine Basement Tapes series is so much better than the official double album(which includes several faux basement tapes from the Band). And I'd love to see a complete concert from the first leg of the Rolling Thunder Revue Tour.