I've read somewhere there is some kind of distortion present throughout LZII that escaped Page's attention. Any truth to that?
The only CD that I have ever sold to a used record store because I knew I would never listen to it again was the original Physical Graffiti. Sounded like a direct transfer of a 70s cassette tape. I waited until they were remastered before I tried any Zep CDs again.
There are threads on the sounds of LZII. From what I can tell, a substantial amount of recording onto analog multitrack tape "into the red" was done deliberately. The overmodulation was used as an effect, essentially. I think it sounds like poo, like the Beatles mono Revolver. But a lot of people think it's an artistic statement or something (rock 'n' roll sounding dirty/gritty etc.). The mastering may also have been done a bit too hot (not intentionally) which may be what you're referring to. I think I heard it all here so search around and you'll find info on it. The Rob Ludwig vinyl of LZII almost lives up to its reputation. Needledrops are out there. It sounds quite good but of course all the distortion is in there, it's just presented well.
As I understand it, the original master tape itself contains additional distortion from the mixdown being too hot. But, I could be wrong, and I heard it all here. I know what my ears hear on LZII - this is one of those rare cases on an audiophile forum where you can say without risking (too much) hyperbole and say you'd have to be nearly deaf to not hear the distortion
While it's a fairly primitive recording by today's standards, LZI is still quite well recorded for 1968. All you need is a good mastering. I prefer the 200g Classic Records reissue from a few years back. I've also heard some early Canadian and UK pressings that sounded very nice. The problem with LZ vinyl is that it was very popular. Early pressings were played a LOT on inferior equipment that ground those grooves into submission! Later reissues were of variable mastering quality and sometimes the master tapes were subject to wear and tear. Plus due to their popularity, stampers got worn out from so much use. As for the CDs, there's actually not a huge difference in the sound between the two official CD masterings other than "stealth" level boosts on the later remastered versions.
It don't think it escaped his attention, but I do recall reading an interview comment Page made about their running the master tape for LZII a bit too much into the red. The resulting tape overload is present more on some tracks than others, but it's there on all issues, both LP and CD. Some masterings manage to EQ around the distortion (RL, early UK & Canadian masterings, GP, etc.) whereas others just boosted treble without trying to avoid boosting distortion (MFSL and Classic Records). I know there are some who feel this distortion adds to the character of the album (the usual "Hey man, Led Zeppelin was meant to be played loud!!" etc., etc.) but anyone who's heard the outtake snippets/isolated tracks from LZII that surfaces a few years ago on the internet will tell you how much more powerful these performances sound WITHOUT the distortion. I really wish Jimmy would attempt a remix, but he likely never will.
I'm not saying the Page/Marinos are perfect either. For me they have more 'bite' and 'edge' possibly due to the more modern EQ that was added but still something missing. Like I said needs a good combination of both mastering styles.
Yeah 1990 is a lot more modern than 1986/1987, huh? Maybe you mean the early 1990's NR fad, yep love that stuff myself - yes that was sarcasm. Albums from the 1960's 1970's should not sound modern anymore than current ones should sound 40 years old. For better or worse Music evolves let it sound like it should. re: bite and edge the 5 remasters I've heard (I, II, III, HOTH, Presence) seem to lack the sock or slam of the originals and overall the edges were polished off. I am not saying they are bad - just not as good. If only to avoid the whining, crying hyperbole police
I first picked up an original III for $3 at a garage sale and the remaster for $8 at a used store. The remaster was fine, but I should have stopped with the better original and saved the half sawbuck.
Actually, merely citing hyperbole is not necessarily hyperbole itself. However, claiming "hyperbole" in itself is "hyperbole" is DEFINITELY hyperbole.
I'm still trying to figure out exactly how hyperbolic someone listing their location as "most mini-LP's are expensive and crappy sounding -avoid!" is...
I've never heard any of the Zeppelin CDs from the 80s, but I do own the 1993 box and all original vinyl pressings of Zep. With a few exception, the 1993 box sounds better than a lot of the Zep vinyl which can be very thin and treble heavy. One of my beefs with Zep is that most of the records never really made the band sound as heavy as they actually were, and I feel the CDs do a pretty fine job of accomplishing that.
Hey I'm just refering to what Page said at the time. He said applying the new EQ settings was like "presenting an old picture in a new frame". His words not mine. He was obviously refering to the original masters, not the ones Barry et al did. Always sounded around the time that Page wasnt happy with how the Zep catalogue had been done before. But I guess you know more than Page. Yes thats sarcasm too. I'm not one for hyperbole but this is a million times worse!
If anything this forum has made me listen with more of a critical ear and I end up listening for flaws in things I used to not pay attention to. I think Mark Twain said something similar about the Mississippi River, once you become overly familiar with something you start to focus on all the things that bug you... If I had to hone in on one particular thing I dislike about LZI it's the drum sound, all of it from the kick drum to the cymbals. Sounds very compressed to my ear. Overall, the album just sounds kind of flat to me. It's still one of my all-time favorites, although my tastes have wandered away from classic rock after oversaturation. I managed to hear a decent needledrop of the Classic Records remastering and I agree with Stefan above that it's pretty decent sounding. I'd choose it as my favorite version. They managed to squeeze out some fidelity that I had not heard from any other mastering.
regarding LZ-II.... I added a modest upgrade to my system (legit speaker stands!) recently, so I've been working my way through my music library and pinching myself at how great everything sounds. Anyhow, I got to LZ-II (32XD-xxx) today and the chill bump kicked in. It got me thinking, if your stereo doesn't give you chill bumps (or something to that effect), then you've got lots of room to improve. The 32XD of LZ-II is phenomenal in many parts and truly makes your room disappear. An example is Moby Dick. Truly an in the room experience. So yeah, the original "unremastered"....they are pretty darn good. Pret-ty, pret-ty, pret-ty good.....
I hear ya. The Diament CD does the trick for me. There is a lot of life in that thing to my ears. Not an album I spin with much regularity but I suspect that only 40+ years later (and here, of course ) would you ever hear about Zep I being a "crappy" recording.
Even if Page never will, I hope the original multi-track session tapes have been digitized hi-res for the sake of preservation so someone else can have the opportunity to do so in the future. Hopefully, I'll be around to hear the results.
