Ed's Moody Blues Appreciation Thread...

Let's return to DOFP for a moment. Last year, I was looking for a copy of the original stereo mix having determined that there is no true mono. Also keep in mind that I have not heard Time Traveller. Taking Ed Bishop's advice, I bought the oldest vinyl I could find in good condition, DES18012 distributed in Canada by London Records. It's definitely the original mix that I remembered hearing once before on a cassette in the car. The segues are less jarring and all overdubs are accounted for on Evening Time To Get Away. However, the sound quality is quite poor and it now makes sense to me why the decision was made to remix the album.
But what really happened here?
It's been stated on this thread and others that the original mix did sound good at one time and is worth releasing on CD. For classic albums such as Pet Sounds, it's obvious at least to me why the mono master doesn't have the fidelity of the multi tracks as a result of Brian's reduction mixes; but DOFP was recorded partly as a demonstration of good sounding stereo and there does not appear to be a believable reason why the original stereo mix sounds so bad.
It also doesn't make sense that only the stereo master of DOFP would deteriorate and all other Moody Blues stereo masters remained in tact.
Here are some theories:
1. Various sources were used to press DOFP in various countries back in the day and some of those sources including the Canadian were much less than good.
or,
2. The original stereo DOFP never sounded good and the decision was made to remix based on a lack of appreciation for the original and not because of any master tape damage.
or,
3. The true story which somebody else hopefully knows and will share with the rest of us. Perhaps a forum member with a "good" copy could upload 15 to 20 seconds of evidence that the original mix exists somewhere with great sound?
Thanks for reading.
Bob.

 

And of course, next up: REMIX SGT. PEPPER! .

What is more, that's your opinion as to the sound....the original mix didn't stop this album from doing well over the next....5, 7, 8, years? And many represses? Do you honestly think the DOFP remix is THE LAST WORD? Frank Zappa had the same attitude toward his music, and he was wrong too, but the Moodies stopped at the first one....

It doesn't sound 'bad'. I note that there is no mention on your part about the 'Deramic Sound System[DSS]...because, as Tony Clarke explained to me, it was just a gimmick to push a new 'stereo' idea.....it didn't mean a damn thing, and that is obvious listening to the album. The Moody Blues either shine quietly or kick serious rock'n'roll butt; their greatness remains that they can do both with equal cool.....

If it sucked that much--which it does NOT--how did it get, unfrigged, from 1968 to the late '70s? THIS IS EXACTLY WHAT I, AND OTHERS, HAVE BEEN ASKING SINCE THE EARLY 1980's about DOFP---WHY WAS ANY REMIX MADE?!? That is, beyond the 4-channel Quad mix? Gimme a break.....the band wanted the remix, yes, but if the original mix sucked that much, how did it sell over a million copies in the USA by the end of 1973?!?

Maybe YOU might explain everything? When you get that interview with Justin Hayward, by all means, post it...

 

I thought I read that DOFP was remixed because the master tape was damaged. Of course they can always use a backup copy, or even a clean vinyl record for that matter. Anything but the remix...

 

To Mr. Bishop:
AS much as I hoped you would respond to my post, it appears that I have offended you or at least that I have been misunderstood.
You wrote:
And of course, next up: REMIX SGT. PEPPER!"

SGT Pepper needs no remixing. The existing mono and stereo mixes are perfectly adequate and part of my consciousness. No Beatles album needs remixing and DOFP didn't need one either if there had not been a problem. I heard the remix first and it was a surprise to me how different the original mix sounded when I dropped the needle.

"roll eyes (give me a break) You, Sir, are an....FLO wannebe...
Big Grin So sickeningly obvious....."

Sorry, I don't understand this remark.

"Do you honestly think the DOFP remix is THE LAST WORD? Frank Zappa had the same attitude toward his music, and he was wrong too, but the Moodies stopped
at the first one...."

No I don't believe any remix is the last word. It's a different listening experience and I thought I had clearly established my position as prefering period mixes. I don't like the Carpenters remixes, the stereo Pet Sounds or the official Help and Rubber Soul CD's either.

"It doesn't sound 'bad'. I note that there is no mention on your part about the 'Deramic Sound System[DSS]...because, as Tony Clarke explained to me, it
was just a gimmick to push a new 'stereo' idea.....it didn't mean a damn thing, and that is obvious listening to the album. The Moody Blues either shine
quietly or kick serious rock'n'roll butt; their greatness remains that they can do both with equal cool....."

Where in my post did I criticize the music and artistry of the Moody Blues?
My only point about the DSS without actually mentioning it was that more of a spotlight was put on this project because consumers would see the DSS notice and perhaps pay more attention to the sound.

"If it sucked that much--which it does NOT"

I never said it sucked!

"--how did it get, unfrigged, from 1968 to the late '70s? THIS IS EXACTLY WHAT I, AND OTHERS, HAVE BEEN ASKING SINCE
THE EARLY 1980's about DOFP---WHY WAS ANY REMIX MADE?!? That is, beyond the 4-channel Quad mix?"

I was simply asking again in case there was any new information available.

Gimme a break.....the band wanted the remix, yes, but if
the original mix sucked that much, how did it sell over a million copies in the USA by the end of 1973?!?"

DOFP is an excellent album that IMO would have sold well anyway regardless of mixing differences that most consumers either don't worry or care about. Again, the original mix doesn't suck! It sounds murky and dim but it doesn't suck! All I wanted to know is why it sounds that way.

"Maybe YOU might explain everything? When you get that interview with Justin Hayward, by all means, post it..."

What I meant was a 15 to 20 second audio file from an original pressing which perhaps sounds better than my Canadian pressing.
What interview with Justin Hayward?

I have a great deal of respect for you and others like you who post regularly here and at another forum. I would appreciate any opportunity to resolve this disagreement which has obviously offended you.
If my reputation here at SH Forums is now in question, I am very sorry.
Sincerely,
Bob.

 

Moody Blues

Hi everybody. I am new on here. I just happened to be browsing different sites when I just happened on this one. Certainly your discussions on the subject of the Moodies back catalogue proved interesting to read as I have been a bit of a fan of theirs (though not hardcore) for several years now.

I was certainly taken by Justin Haywards comments on the quality of the 1997 remasters. I certainly agree with him that they sound very poor indeed, but i do not agree when he says that the Decca CD's issued in the late 1980's sound better than the latter remasters. Both issues contain dull lifeless mixes and do nothing to enhance the reputation of the band. Sadly, with the remasters, its a case of the fans being ripped off again by the record companies. When something has the word "Remastered" on the box you one is given to expect a certain level of enhanced quality. It would seem that they utilised tapes that were copies of copies from which the "Remasters" were made.

I do not own a SACD player and, to be honest, have no intention of buying into the medium. As long as I have a good stereo system then I will be happy. I do however own the Dylan backcatalogue on SACD as the CD stereo layer on the discs was remastered and sounds absolutely outstanding. If the stereo layer on the new Moodies SACD's is going to be remastered as Mr Hayward says it will be, then and only then will I consider buying the CD's for a third time

P.S. I agree with one of the earlier contributors, "THIS IS THE MOODY BLUES" is a great compilation. Yes I know they are remixes but they sound so good. If the new SACD's sound as good then we are all in for a treat

Yours, RustNeverSleeps

 

Hi, all. I'm new here as well, and my mind's on overload from the wealth of information on this site!
Recently saw Hayward, Lodge, Edge and company in concert, which led to my dragging out the different versions of their first seven albums in my possession for comparison. In 2002 Universal of Japan issued two collections, one in mini-LP sleeves as part of their "British Rock Legends" series and another a little later that year in standard jewel cases. To my ears this second set is the current definitive version, superior even to MFSL. That being said, if the promised remasters are on a par with the recently-issued "Gold" double CD, then all us Moody fans are in for a treat!
As an aside, I strongly recommend acquiring "Justin Hayward Live in San Juan Capistrano" in both the CD and DVD formats, available on his website. Great concert, without all the overblown bombast of Red Rocks.

 

Ed,

You sure put that Bob guy in his place.

Sincerely,

Tom Kennedy

 

don't worry about it BOB ...

i get people who rip me when i post too. i don't pay any attention to what they think because a lot of times it is by someone who is trying to put me in my place.

i have no interest in that.

by the way, i liked your post and keep on posting no matter what anyone thinks or says.

 

There are those who like the DOFP remix; there are those(like me)who don't. Quad is one thing; pointless remixing, another. Yeah, it's a 'cleaner' mix, but that doesn't make it a better mix, just a different one. The Canadian DOFP vinyl I have is the original mix, and very quiet--the US vinyl is just too erratic in quality to be trustworthy(and so many pressings exist you have to play it to be sure you're getting what you want--some are original, some are the remix).

Moot point, however, since I don't expect anyone to smarten up and extricate the entire original mix....my guess is Justin and the boys like the remix, so that's what we're stuck with.

 

Ed, what can you say about the quality of the Speaker Corner reissue of DOFP? Did they use the DOFP remix or the original mix?

 

Phil,

Haven't purchased the SC edition yet....though it is tempting to pull the trigger on that one.

Odds are, as usual, it's the remix. Remember, the story is that the original stereo mixdown had deteriorated too far to be of any use(why a copy tape wasn't found and then used is curious), so a remix was done and eventually slipped into circulation(not like there was a big announcement or anything).

A huge question is what we'll get for a Deluxe Edition. Really up to the band, I guess. Since there's no dedicated mono mix, would make sense to put the original mix on one of the discs, along with single mixes(hopefully that will include the mono mix of "Cities"). Of course in a perfect world we'd get a few of the songs without any orchestral preludes or codas as a bonus, even if it wouldn't quite be in the spirit of the concept.

 

Pointless Argument

Lets face it Tom, people have differing opinions in this world. Hey if we all agreed about everything then what a boring place it would be. Nobody has been put in their place here. Bob expressed his point of view and Ed took an opposite point of view. Its does not mean that either of them are necessarily right, or wrong for that matter. Bob was worried that his reputation on this Forum site had been tarnished in some way. Well, and this is my opinion here, I think he is silly to think like that. This is a forum for debating and thats what he, you, me and Ed are doing.

As I have said in my previous post on here, and this again is my opinion, the sound quality on previous reissues of the "Classic 7" Moodies CD's is an absolute disgrace, and if some some remixing is required for their reappearance on SACD then that is OK by me. The Who's reissued back catalogue certainly benefited from some remixing. A degree of remixing was also undertaken for some the reissues of Bob Dylan, the remixed sound in particular on "Blonde On Blonde" and "Bringing It All Back Home" has revitalised those albums. Don't get me wrong here, I believe in the old saying "If It Ain't Broke Then Don't Fix it" but sometimes even old paintings need a good clean with modern materials to enhance the overall picture.

Yours, Steven

 

Without getting off on too deep a tangent here... Before we return to our regularly scheduled thread....

While remixing can have its benefits, the only thing extra the remix of DOFP gave us was a clearer mix, one not as murky. But, ironically, as noted above, Tony Clarke says the remix wasn't done to make it sound better, but because the original master mix tape was in such lousy condition. Taking him at his word, then, the remix of DOFP was a matter of circumstance. If any of the band was dissatisfied with the original mix, they haven't been terribly vocal about it.

While stereo remixes of the Moodies early stuff would be interesting(to say the least), it's also safe to say that the original mixes are, on the main, excellent. Maybe SOJOURN could be remixed, but what would be the point? It sounds fine as is. What's more, if the word we're getting is correct, the Quad mixes are being used for the multichannel, with an adjustment to add a center channel. Obviously, if the band were not happy with those, we'd be getting new multi mixes, but that is not the case(what we're gonna get for LOST CHORD is anybody's guess!) I'm not gonna cry if we do get stereo remixes, but they're about as needed as that WHO'S NEXT remix--IMO, totally unneeded and worthless(had they done a 5.1, my tune would obviously be different, but they didn't so...) And while there may have been a bit of justification for TOMMY, I didn't the old mix sucked that bad.

And yes, we are going to disagree sometimes--that's inevitable. I never take it personally. And if any of this were a big deal, believe me, we'd have already heard about it. A veteran of regular 'Gort Greetings'----if they had taken issue with anything that was said here, or the tone of it, I'm sure I'd have heard by now....

We're Ok....

 

It's the remix. For those who are OK with that, it's an outstanding reissue. I'm surprised it's still in print as it was released quite a while ago...

Hilarious. You're my kind of guy, Tom.

 

Wow! I go out for the day and the thread heats up.
Thanks Tom and others for reading and posting. Yes, it was probably silly of me to feel that I had become less of a member here but I was shocked at the confrontational nature of Ed's response. I love the Moody Blues and the original mix of DOFP. Perhaps I could have made it clearer that my issues were with the EQ choices on my vinyl. Otherwise, it would be like listening to the McCartney Collection version of Wings Wild Life or the 1990 Capitol Pet Sounds CD and saying, "yuk, this album needs a remix". I also agree with Ed that the Canadian vinyl is nice and quiet. BTW, Ed, if you don't take these forum disagreements personally, then I won't either including the remark that you quietly removed from the thread. Let's do it again sometime.

Moving on then, I don't have an SACD player yet. Does anybody know if these upcoming discs will have a redbook layer for the stereo mixes?
Bob.

 

I thought these were going to be hybrids, so yes to the redbook layer.

Going back to the original mix, wasn't it issued on some late 80's West German CD release?

 

and...welcome smokdogg and rustneversleeps!!

There is a lot of good information on this forum and I have rarely been disappointed with a recommendation made here.

I just picked up This is the Moody Blues and can't wait to hear it. I always assumed that since I had all the albums on the cover I didn't need it.

 

I just got done listening to the first set of the 1997 remasters. My only other experience with Moody Blues is the 1989 This Is Moody Blues 2CD import. I got On The Threshold and Seventh Sojourn so far, rest are forthcoming. I can't believe what fantastic albums these are, just incredible. Having nothing else really to compare against, I find sound quality acceptable on these; Threshold sounds better than Sojourn, which is a little murky and muffled but not awful at all. What exactly is sub-optimum about the 1997 remasters?

 

I'm not 100% sure myself. My experience is limited to only "In Search Of The Lost Chord", though. I didn't need any of them but picked this one up not long after its release just out of curiosity. Sounded reasonably good to me, with just a slight rise on top.

Frame of reference: the original UK stereo LP and the MFSL gold CD

 

If you listen to the "On The Threshold..." tracks that are issued on the 1989 "This Is The Moody Blues" and compare them with the 1986 Decca CD's and 1997 remasters you will, in my opinion, notice a big difference. Those tracks on the '89 compilation simply sparkle. And the reason for this is that they were remixed versions. For my money I just wish they would go back to the original multi tracks and use them to remix/remaster all of the "Classic 7" albums. I am not on about a drastic overhaul here but just a subtle tinkering here and there to bring these wonderful recordings sonically into the 21st century. The '97 remasters were so bad because they didn't even use the original album masters for the remastering process.

yours, Steven

 

Well, I have to say I'm hopelessly confused. I don't know which versions of which CDs are the original mix and which are re-mixes. I was under the impression that everything we have had now during the CD era are the re-mixed versions. That means the 1989 This Is Moody Blues and the 1997 remasters would be culled from the same re-mix tapes. maybe that's not the case?

I did A/B the versions on This Is with the 1997 remasters. They each have something the other doesn't which makes them a wash, IMO, I am indifferent to either version. The 1997 versions sound more modern, bigger and fuller, but they are "missing" something. Maybe it's that "sparkling" quality you point out, I don't know how else to put it. But, IMHO, the This Is comp suffers from a somewhat "rinky-dink", tinny, small and shrinked-down sound that many early CDs have. They sound "digital" not "natural", like a reasonable facsimile of the music, not the music itself.

I also have the new "Gold" 2CD collection on order so I'll have yet another take on the same material. Cheers.

 

"This is the Moody Blues" comp and DOFP and all the quad versions are remixed; everything else I was under the impression was the original two track stereo masters

 

But these recordings are of the 20th century, 1967-72 to be exact, and who needs them to sound 'modern'? Granted, remixing did 'bring out more,' which is what the Quad masters did. If the original stereo mixdowns don't quite 'sparkle,' they are still more than acceptable. I'm against stereo remixing just to make something sound cleaner or clearer. There is a lot of charm to those original mixes, and if you remix and reissue, then the old copies kind of fade away and get forgotten. I'm sure there are those who have bought the Lennon remixes who may not have even heard the originals. If the original mix and remixes were still offered, that would be one thing, but there's no guarantee of that. And I don't think any sonic improvements would be profound, though certainly noticable.

 

Even if the catalog is remixed to the max for the hybrid SACD's, it's not likely that the 1997 remasters will go out of print very quickly. The Steely Dan remasters are all still easily available despite the new SACD's. I bought all the Moody Blues 1997 remasters last summer for CDN $9 each and as long as I don't hear the MFSL golds, I'll probably continue to enjoy them.
The remix of Voyage on This Is The Moody Blues has less dynamic range but more pronounced organ which makes it a great listen. There are excellent tracks on all 7 albums and I had to have them after hearing TITMB.
Bob.

 

Thanks Ed and Arin for your answers. I just bought a sealed copy of the Speaker Corner DOFP and will keep it unplayed until I get a 24/192 A/D converter for archiving to DVD-A.