Paging Jeff Partyka: Who's Next review?

[Holy Zoo]

On November 19th 2001 you wrote:
I finally decided to break down and do this [buy the Candian version of Who's Next] ... while I have assumed my US MCABD copy is the "Hoffman" based purely on how it sounds (quite good), I want to be sure I have the best version, so I placed my order at HMV.com. Can't pass it by at that price.


So, now that you've had the Canadian Hoffmanized WN for a couple months - I'm curious if you ever compared it to your old US copy?

[PsychFan]

Hi there HZ,

You know, I've played the Canadian CD a lot and just have not been able to get over how good it sounds, but I've not yet taken the time to sit down and do the audiophile A/B comparison thang.

I have today (Monday, Presidents Day) off work, and I was planning to spend some time in the listening room, so ... There's a project for myself!

I'll do a direct comparison today and come back later with my findings. Just for fun, maybe I'll use my MCA "remixed" CD with bonus tracks as well, and hey, maybe even my US Decca LP (don't have a UK Track, unfortunately) ...

[Holy Zoo]

Excellent! Should be a fun shootout. Too bad I don't have version on vinyl, or I could do nearly the same, and we could compare notes.

Thanks Jeff!

[Dave]

Jeff,

You may wanna grab some cotton, for the ears, and a vomit bag, just to be safe.;) :D :D

[PsychFan]

Hi all,

Well ... I just emerged from my listening room after the Who's Next shootout.

I decided to confine it to four of the album's nine songs, and not bother with the US Decca LP (we all know it's way too veiled and bassy). Maybe I'll listen to that separately later and post again if I hear anything significant.

To be clear, the CDs I used were:

1. The old American MCA CD (MCAD-37217) I bought in the late '80s.

2. The Canadian CD (MCABD-37217) I just bought in November from HMV.ca, which as we've all been advised is the one mastered by Steve.

3. The "remixed"/remastered CD (MCAD-11269).

Here's what I found ...

BABA O'RILEY
1. I was reasonably impressed with the American CD on this one. The synth intro was very full-bodied (hiss was just barely audible). The piano, when it came in, sounded distorted in spots and rather thin and boxy. The bass was very distinct but a bit bloated (pumped up with EQ?). Daltrey's and Townshend's voices sounded quite rich (especially Pete's) but the electric guitar came across as slightly veiled. Not bad, not outstanding overall.
2. The synth still sounded great on the Canadian CD. When Moon's drums came bursting in, though, I felt they had more impact than on the American. Bass, while still rich, was not bloated to the point of obscuring the voices, compared to the US CD. Overall, everything seemed more balanced; "Nothing sounds pushed out of its normal space," I jotted down in my notes. (Yes, I took notes ... I shall be seeking professional help later this week.) The piano, if anything, was even more distorted here but similar in timbre.
3. The piano was still distorted, but MUCH more tonally balanced and realistic on the "remixed" CD. Drums were clearer, more full-bodied and distinct, but less dynamic (and there was too much cymbal coming through). Bass was weak. Voices were not as rich and full. The guitar was grungier and sounded slightly bumped up.

LOVE AIN'T FOR KEEPING
1. Hiss was evident on my US CD; the track intro had a few seconds of hiss before the song started. This version was VERY bassy and consequently hard to listen to, to the point of being fatiguing. Bad news.
2. Still some hiss, but the music begins right at the beginning of the track on the Canadian CD. The song is still bassy here, but not as bad (I could actually hear the acoustic guitars this time!). Vocals were noticeably rich.
3. NO hiss at all on the "remixed" CD; again, WAY too bassy. The acoustic guitars had too much high-end glare on them.

BEHIND BLUE EYES
1. The US CD has lots of hiss during the intro. The acoustic guitar really shimmered, and the voices had an attractive richness. I could FEEL the bass ... but, again, it was a bit bloated.
2. Canadian CD: LESS HISS by far. The bass was more balanced and not as bloated; it didn't dominate the other instruments as it did on the US CD. The vocals seemed more dynamic and natural, less tipped up.
3. Again, NO hiss on the "remixed" version. The vocals had too much bottom and reverb (especially the backing vocals); the acoustic guitar was very crisp but it sounded compressed (a bit too much high end). The backing vocals on the phrase "... that's never free" right before Moon enters are pushed WAAAAY too far back compared to the original mix. The bass really dominates the "rock-out" section.

WON'T GET FOOLED AGAIN
1. US: lots of hiss during the intro (with, again, a few seconds of it before the music starts). Everything sounded too bassy here; the voices were kind of dull, and had a tendency to get buried. Moon's drum solo had some snap but was rather undynamic, as was Daltrey's scream that immediately follows. Not terribly exciting to listen to.
2. Canadian: some hiss but not as much (no 2-second hissy intro). Drums -- MUCH better here! Crisp, powerful, dynamic. The bass didn't dominate the track as on the US ... Voices sounded better and were easier to hear. Moon's solo was more dynamic, as were the synth notes playing at the same time. Daltrey's scream was just as distorted as on the US, but it jumped out a bit more. And in the section after that, I could REALLY hear Townshend's acoustic guitar strumming very clearly (it got lost on the American CD).
3. Too bassy. "Ichy," I wrote. Everything was LOUDER (more compressed). Moon's solo was crisp but toppy ... the synth still had dynamics, though. The acoustic guitar got lost again after the drum solo.

Well, there you go. The Canadian CD, overall, is much better balanced and way easier on the ears ... the other two discs were too bassy and much more fatiguing (though I'd rather listen to the original US CD all the way through than the later one). With the extra hiss on the US as well, it sounds like the highs and lows were boosted at the expense of the midrange (voices, guitars, etc.) ... the classic smiley EQ.

Any comments, kudos, disagreements, directions to your favorite shrink's office are welcome.

[Holy Zoo]

Excellent review! Thanks! You've inspired me to do the same shootout - us vs canadian vs remix.

I'll get back to you with the results!

[dbryant]

Well, I got inspired to do my own shoot-out between the Canadian and 'remixed' versions. I finally got the Canadian a few days ago, listened to a few spots, and really enjoyed this album on CD for the first time. So I was surprised to find when I A/B'd them directly that I actually prefer the brighter acoustic guitar sounds on the 'remixed' versions. Especially since the 'remixed' drums sound so harsh and flat, but the guitars don't strike me that way at all. They just sound like acoustics with pickups. And new strings. :D

They seem to balance the loud drums and electric bass better and flesh out the arrangements. Unfortunately, the other instruments in "Goin' Mobile" and "Behind Blue Eyes" sound so lousy, I still prefer Steve's versions on balance, but I think I like the new, modernized "Love Ain't for Keepin'" the best.

[Dave]

dbryant,

Are you talking about the remastered Who's Next with the inked surface in blue and the 20 or so page booklet?

If so, you have me mighty confused:confused: as it sounds like a piece of cardboard ie. no depth, no proper imaging of the instruments and too sterile and way too much compression. IMHO

[dbryant]

Dave,

I assure you that we are in complete agreement, generally, concerning the atrocious sound quality of the remixed/remastered/Astleyed/whateveritis version of Who's Next, and I tried to make that clear in my previous post.

On balance, I find the sonically inferior version of one track more musically engaging for the reasons outlined above. No one was more surprised than I was to discover this. It was precisely because I found my musical sense and my audiophile taste at odds with each other that I thought it worth posting.

Forget Who's Next: in general, can a sonically inferior mix/master ever be more musically engaging, for whatever reason? I think so, but I can't think of too many examples off the top of my head. For me, this was the exception that proves the rule, so I thought it was worth bringing up.

Best,
The Other Dave (Bryant)

[thxdave]

Jeff,
Great work and "thank you"! The only thing that would have made it REALLY interesting would be if you had somebody else switching the discs for you so that you didn't know which version you were evaluating during the shoot-out. Oops, sorry, that was my anal-retentive side getting out of control ;)

dave
www.morrisonphotographics.com

[Beagle]

I hate it when I don't hear tape hiss where there is supposed to be tape hiss. It means they've put the thing through computer software and ruined it. And using EQ to make acoustic guitars sound more crisp than they were on the master, and boosting the upper mids and highs to add "punch", that's bogus too.

On the Canadian MCA, it's like I'm hearing the master, warts and all, which is the way it should be, is it not? I can understand adding a wee bit of overall EQ to compensate for a deteriorated master tape, but only to try and restore it to it's original form, not make it "better" than it originally was.

[PsychFan]

Originally posted by Beagle
And using EQ to make acoustic guitars sound more crisp than they were on the master ... ... that's bogus too.

I totally agree with you there, Beagle, and I don't even think it sounds good. Definitely too much high-end glare on those acoustic guitars.

I couldn't even hear them all that well on the US or (to a lesser extent) the remixed CDs anyway, the bass was so dang overpowering ...

[lukpac]

Originally posted by Beagle
And using EQ to make acoustic guitars sound more crisp than they were on the master, and boosting the upper mids and highs to add "punch", that's bogus too.

Well, Behind Blue Eyes WAS remixed...I guess they just wanted more high end on those guitars when they mixed them.

To play devil's advocate, some would say it's "bogus" to use EQ to add the breath of life if it wasn't there on the master. What's the difference between adding punch and the breath of life, other than people here prefer the breath of life? Just a bit different EQ...

[BradOlson]

The Breath of Life is punchy enough for me.

[Beagle]

Originally posted by lukpac


To play devil's advocate, some would say it's "bogus" to use EQ to add the breath of life if it wasn't there on the master. What's the difference between adding punch and the breath of life, other than people here prefer the breath of life? Just a bit different EQ... I would think the master tape was the 'breath of life' and someone like Steve Hoffman is trying his best to get that out to us. I'll assume "breath of life" being that feeling you get when the music gets into your soul. I had always assumed that you could not improve a master tape, only make it sound a bit different, not better. I recall another mastering person criticising Steves "Pet Sounds" because he presented it the way it was on the master, after it had been 'doctored' by Capitol all these years. Some record companies had rolled off all the bass and jacked up the highs for radio play, but it is not what the artists/producers presented to them.

I believe honesty is the best policy.

[lukpac]

No, you *can* get things to sound better than the master tape. That's what "mastering" is (or can be). If not, it would be called "transferring", and everything would be a flat transfer.

An example is Magic Bus on Meaty Beaty Big And Bouncy. That's a flat transfer. Now, it sounds pretty good, but it needs some work - it's a bit to harsh and thin. With a bit of Steve's magic that *could* sound a lot better. The original LP hints at that, which in some ways sounds better than MBBB. More bass and a more full sound...

[dbryant]

Jeff -

Sorry I derailed your thread. You deserve better for all your effort. You contribute a great deal to this forum.

By the way, I live about 5 min. from the now-world-famous Fresh Pond Newbury Comics, so stop by and disagree with me in person next time you're in town.

Best,
Dave

[PsychFan]

Hey Dave,

You derailed nothing ... Give & take is what it's all about, whatever your thoughts are.

I was just at the Fresh Pond Newbury Comics today, checking for another Presley 24 Karat CD (thought we could have another drawing). Alas, it was gone ... Perhaps I'll give you a heads-up next time I'll be stopping in.

-- JP