The Who Odds and Sods Remaster - Essential?

I've been on a Who kick lately, trying to fill holes in my collection. I have the original MCA version of this but I was wondering if it would be worthwhile to get the last remaster. I seem to remember that some people complained quite a bit about this one but I don't remember the issues. I'm more interested in content and packaging but sound quality is important too.

 

If you're a completist, it's essential; if you're not, then it isn't. Sure doesn't knock my sox off....

 

I wouldn't call myself a completist. I guess I'll pick it up if I see it cheap sometime.

 

$5.99 on yourmusic.com. Free shipping.

 

I think the complaints were that the track order was switched about (IIRC).

 

I have the O&S remastered CD. The bonus material is quite good if you are a fan.
I haven't heard your orig. MCA version, but, to me this remaster is a bit loud (compressed?) and also sounds de-hissed. The sonics vary between the earlier songs to the later songs. I would wager it sounds different from your copy, I didn't say better, but different.

As a completist, you can pick up a copy pretty cheap as someone mentioned. Let us know what you think.

I like the Who (not a fanatic). On CD, I have Who's Next (I think it's the SH version),
Who's Next remaster, Quadrophenia Orig, O&S remaster,Hooligans (orig), Greatest Hits,MeatyBeaty BigBouncy orig. On LP, I have Tommy Domestic and UK pressings, Quadrophenia, Who's Next, Greatest Hits.

I have Who Are You on my list. Not sure between orig. or remaster.

 

A few tracks are unique to this CD, even if you have the older Rarities collections, the box set and the deluxe editions. So I guess it is necessary for the completist.

But this is probably the worst of all Who remasters in terms of sound quality. Insane noise reduction plus very harsh eq. I don't think I have listened to it more than twice. Listen to the guitar at the beginning of Naked Eye. Does that sound like a real instrument? Not to my ears.

The unremastered CD is quite nice sounding. Dynamic and smooth, though a bit hissy in places. (Long Live Rock sounds better on The Who Collection). The older Polydor CD and the older MCA CD are identical.

 

I wrote this on another site a month ago - any comments or corrections welcome.

More thanks for reminding me of this controversial and, to my ears, brilliant album. I first got it in 1975 when it was a cutout (deletion) going for two bucks in K-Mart in America. Trouser Press asked John Entwistle about that fact – he was philosophical, reckoning that once all the Who freaks had acquired a copy it had served its purpose.

The CD version is wonderful, despite carping from various corners. All of those unreleased and rare tracks! – several of which the compilers were blissfully unaware they had unknowingly found and had released alternate versions of tracks even diehard fans didn't already own.

Both of the Stones covers are not the singles sides already released and which later appeared on the Two’s Missing LP-CD/ Rarities LP compilation albums from the 80's. These are alternate takes – ‘Under My Thumb ‘ is the most different, being longer with an alternate bass part from Townshend and no lead guitar overdubbed as on the single.

Similarly, ‘Young Man Blues’ is not the version from the House That Track Built as stated in the insert, it is a previously unknown version from the same session which is slower and looser. And ‘Put The Money Down’ is a longer version that on the original Odds and Sods album.

‘Leaving Here’/’Baby Don’t Do It’ are familiar songs but these are demo versions not known to exist until a battered acetate turned up at a car boot sale. Jon Astley spent days doctoring a recording taken from the disintegrating acetate, and the result is vintage Who. As a teenage Who obsessive I would have been unable to sleep if I had known these tracks existed and I had not heard them.

The packaging is nice, and includes the complete text of Pete’s NME article describing the original tracks. This was edited by MCA/Track people who did not take to his disparaging tone.

Nearly all the criticism of the CD release came from US Who fans, and to be honest, we have to be grateful to them for past efforts. But I think they went overboard in criticism of Odds and Sods. One of them, Dick Weiner (‘he has a wife…’) wrote in Record Collector that the CD was ‘a complete embarrassment and should be redone with correct liner notes, the right tracks, and someone else doing the mastering’.

What’s Weiner's beef? Well, most importantly is that the wrong tracks are identified in the insert – but in each case this is in favour of Who fans who already own the versions described. I can understand anger if it was claimed a new version is presented and it is the same LP or single version, but this is the exact opposite.

Other criticisms are that the original album stuck to four years in the band’s career – 1968, 1970, 71, and 72. The reissue includes tracks from many other years and it is claimed the original flow of the album has been obliterated, particularly since some of the tracks on the original LP are longer versions and all have been remixed by Jon Astley. There were complaints that it was impossible to programme the CD version to reproduce the original LP.

Sorry, I don’t agree. As much as I love the original LP, it was a collection of outtakes and leftovers, and I think the CD follows the spirit of the project.

The other criticism is that Jon Astley’s final remastering, done at his Pink Room studios in Twickenham, was ‘very poor’ (Dick Weiner again). Sorry, I disagree again, although I shall keep an eye out for the original MCA CD which Mr Weiner says has much better sound. It is all a matter of opinion.

At the end of the day, any attempt to upgrade a much loved release is going to annoy someone. It is a shame some people cannot enjoy this magnificent release because of carping over details.

 

It is the wrong version, but the main reason it is substantially slower is that it was mastered at the wrong speed by Jon Astley. I believe it was mastered 7.5% too slow.

Under My Thumb is missing the lead guitar, because Astley forgot to include it when he did the remix.

Time is Passing features only one channel of the stereo mix.

Complaints about this CD are not minor quibbles... these are genuine examples of extreme incompetence that should not have occurred on a professional release with any reasonable degree of quality control. The mastering is also very heavy on the NoNoise, fwiw. There are many tracks on this CD not available anywhere else it is true, so that makes it essential for completists. But the quality of the work done leaves much to be desired.

 

I've come full circle on this. I loved the LP when it came out, and Put the Money Down might be my favorite Daltrey performance of all time (quite a feat, the more I think about it).

I was just as pissed as everyone else when the remaster came out, but I've somehow grown to love it, warts and screwed-up arrangement and all. I'll leave the sound debate to the experts, but it certainly isn't as offensive as most of what comes out on CD today.

I'm glad I have it and play it pretty regularly.

Jeff

 

The CD is fine, and I am not a purist on this matter so the mistakes don't kill my enjoyment.

HOWEVER, I think the LP version is a really solid listen all the way through--one of the best cut-outs of all time, while the CD is more spotty.

Kwad

 

The Who catalog has always been a train wreck, and although the new issues seem to be getting more definitive than in the past, it's hard to determine if they are absolutely as good as they can be. I have quibbles about practically every Who release, but I don't think I'm particularly hard to please. I could fill this page with gripes about the Max R&B boxed set, but I still treasure it in spite of it's flaws, and I listen to parts of it quite often.

The reconstructed "Odds & Sods" is vital to any Who fan's collection, IMO. The altered track order doesn't bother me because, obviously O&S was never written and performed as an album in the first place (would anyone object to any additions to Zep's Coda?) I think the sonics are pretty decent and consistant throughout, and I was thrilled to hear a few tracks in real stereo for the first time ("Faith in Something Bigger" is a good example, although it bothers me a bit to hear the lead guitar without that fat echo).

 

I think the remastered Odds and Sods is one of the poorest executed reissues ever. It's essential for the Who fan because it has some quality material that isn't anywhere else but it could of been so better. Astley is the king of using the wrong versions of songs. He obviously can't be bothered to actually LISTEN to the original albums. No less than FOUR tracks on the Odds and Sods reissue are either the wrong take, underdubs, or one channel of a stereo mix. How can a reissue producer/mastering engineer not notice that the version of Young Man Blues is not only a different (inferior) take but that it's 7.5% SLOW. How can a pro mastering engineer not notice that a song is 7.5% too slow? Naked Eye is the worst example of NR I have ever heard. Listen to the guitar. Astley really lowered the bar with Odds and Sods. I should be redone as a 2CD set...

 

In my opinion, it's not an essential disc. You'll just want to gouge your ears out when you're though with it, the mastering is so poor.

 

It would have been nice to hear those rare acetates ... before Astley turned them into unlistenable noise.

 

Ahhhhh Andreas,
Saying that is just unfair. Acetates are notoriously poor-sounding, especially one that was supposedly found at a flea market. That disc was recorded in 1964 man....without no-noise and other techniques it would have been unlistenable. It's not like de-hissing a noisy studio recording and sucking all the highs out of it. Acetate noise is LOUD and masks all the music on it. Even a good quality acetate from 1964 would still sound pretty bad today. I think Astley did what needed to be done on those tracks. That being said, he did mess up Young Man Blues and Time is Passing....how Pete, or John, allowed them to be released that way is imcomprehensible to me. Though he does mention that the master of TIP is damaged. Obviously the lead guitar track and possibly other overdubs are missing due to this problem.

My only quibbles... I'm The Face fades out...it's cool to have it in stereo..but I miss that "trash can" lid cymbal smash at the end , and Now I'm a Farmer fades too fast and you miss Pete's hilarious dialogue..maybe Astley didn't like him talking about his dog's lovely form and lovely buttocks I do get a bit bothered when people talk about how the sound quality differs throughout the set...ummm duh...we're talking primitive mono acetates from 1964 to 24 track recordings from 1974. Of course, the sound will fluctuate. Overall this is a fine re-issue, more than twice the length of the original, and you can get it for 6 bucks used....Jeeeez

 

Well, we can't really say without having heard the unprocessed acetates. Also, those acetates are mono. It's likely that any surface noise, pops, clicks, etc will be in stereo. There are several programs that remove anything *unique* to one channel so the pops will disappear leaving the music underneath intact. KInda if like a reverse OOPS if I understand it correctly. In any event those 2 1964 performances are tremendous. The acetate Baby Don't You Do It is my favorite Who R&B cover.

 

I think O & S is essential. It has 3 of my very favorite Who songs on it. Pure & Easy, Naked Eye & Water.

 

Isn't that actually dialogue from the ending fade of "Dogs"?

 

For "Pure and Easy" and "Naked Eye", I recommend the original Odds & Sods CD.
For "Water", I recommend Two's Missing, or (if you can't find Two's Missing) Rarities Vol. 1&2.

 

The problem with Time Is Passing is that the tape is damaged, to the point where the right channel is constantly drifting in and out. Some clever volume automation might have fixed it, but would have taken a long time. This is why the official release is left channel only.

It was recorded during the Olympic sessions for Who's Next - I guess the multitracks for this are missing aswell as the others songs we know about.

 

There are stereo mixes on boots that sound fine, both channels stay in sync. Astley may of needed to do some basic speed correction to get the channels in sync but it could of easily been done.

 

Sorry, I should have been more specific - it is the drifting volume of the right hand channel that is a problem.

 

What is featured on the O&S disc is the left channel of the song only. The right channel was supposedly damaged or unavailable on the tape Astley had. However, the right channel appears undamaged on a bootleg called "Exciting the Who" which had been released before the O&S remaster. So, if nothing else, with a little research they would have found they could have at minimum used the bootleg version to present a true stereo version of this track.

(edit: I see Chris already mentioned this...)

 

I'd say it's a matter of taste. I've got an MP3 of that, and if you play that right hand channel only, the volume still drifts up and down, at least to my ears...