SING IT AGAIN, as originally issued on CD, is great, but not honest to the original Lp, so that was redone with historical accuracy in mind. Reminds me of the original Neil Diamond HIS 12 GREATEST HITS, which was remastered to include all studio recordings, and later redone to match the Lp, which had a few live versions. Before I forget--doesn't take much--I should also mention that on the first press of 12 GREATEST, "Holly Holy" was an alternate take, and I don't think it's turned up anywhere else, and that pressing's long gone. Just FYI, in case any fans missed it. ED
"Sing It Again Rod" first CD issue was compiled by Dennis Drake from the original masters. Levenson did not like that fact that they were separated and asked Dennis to redo the CD from the album master. I think the first issue is great!
Well I went out on an impulse and found a used BMG Drake NEVER A DULL MOMENT at a local Wherehouse Records (also found a MFSL TEASER AND THE FIRECAT for $19 but that's another story). Frankly, I prefer the remaster. The vocals and acoustic guitars, especially, seem crisper and more open than on the Drake. There's hiss on the remaster too which tells ya something. The bass on the Drake might be more realistic. I know, it's all very subjective yadda yadda but it just means that I'm not a "flatter is better" in all cases. It was fun comparing though, ... I've wasted $7 on stoopider stuff.
Hmmm, The EPTAS CD i'm referring to was released in 1984-( I would consider this early 80's not late 80's) has 10 tracks not 8. There was a re-release in the late 80's maybe that's what Bill is referring to?
Suha Gur is credited with the remastering on 20th Century Millennium "Best Of' Rod Stewart which you can pick up for $7.
I am confused as well. I have owned many pressings of both said Rod Lps, and the "sound" of the Lps match the CDs (80's, Drake) entirely. Huh?? Something's wrong, and I swear it isn't my hearing. Oh, BTW, I just heard and Island/Rocket remastering of Tumbleweed Connection by Elton. Yes, it's the new version with the electric version of "Madman/Water" at the end of the CD. Added digital echo. Man, you can hear it on the first note of "Gun" for crying out loud. The Polydor and MCA, naturally dry, just like a UNi LP I own. Echo smecko. What the....?
Ok. Like Steve, I am really confused!!! I mentioned that I had a BMG direct Marketing version of the Drake EPTAS. Is this truly a Drake? Which remaster is Levinson refering to? Is it the ones that had the clear spines with the red backing? Remasters from the late nineties? Wasn't "The Rod Stewart Album" the only one that was done? Dry drum sounds vs. wet drum sounds? Drake's were wet, and then dry because of critisism? Which issues? Reason to Believe is brand new and says "Compilation Produced by Bill Levenson Mastered by Suha Gur at Universal Mastering Studios East" I slammed this initially saying it was too maxed out. Then I went to listen to it for analogue remnants (ie hiss) My Drake (again I need clarification of this) lacked as much hiss as the Reason to Believe version. Now let's all cross-reference this with Levinson's chat-board entry from above. Now take a deep breath and pass out.
I think there are three different masterings of the Rod Stewart albums on CD, that is, three that are being discussed here (I won't go into the import two-fers, etc.; not familiar with those). First, the initial pressings Michael prefers, presumably with added digital reverb, partially to give it that big drum sound. (It was the 80's, right? Probably going for that 'modern' sound, which now sounds dated.) Then, as Levinson mentioned, it was redone by Dennis Drake, and these were available for a long time. I know BMG had them, and if you look in the booklet, it will say DENNIS DRAKE in the fine print as being one of the mastering engineers. They printed it to match the original font in the artwork. Finally, the new remasters, done by Suha Gur who apparently did the recent three CD complete Mercury box set. The individual remasters have a clear tray (unlike the others) and say "Rod Stewart Remasters" along the side where you can see through the tray. The disc has a pinkish-reddish-orangish label (unlike the Drakes which were basically a silver disc with black printing). If you look in the booklet, it will say SUHA GUR. Again, it matches the old font of the original artwork. A few months after these remasters came out, BMG dropped the Drake CD's and began to offer the remasters, but only for EPTAS and Never A Dull Moment. The first two albums were no longer offered in either form. Columbia House used to offer the Drakes, but they've all been replaced by the remasters. The remasters sound louder, harder, a bit more colder and brittle, and it has a noticeable top end boost that makes it 'sharper' in an unneeded way. I have to say, go with the Drakes. As for the Mercury Anthology, I don't believe Drake did those, so I wouldn't expect the same sound. [added: When I say louder, I just mean at a higher volume. The remasters didn't sound squashed or anything to me, so I would believe Bill if he said no digital compression was done on these.]
By the way, if you haven't heard the first four Mercury albums, do yourself a favor and get them. Jimmy Guterman, a rock critic, once said those four on CD made a better collection than the four CD Rod Stewart box set that spanned his whole career, and I actually agree with him. Those four albums are all classics, and would have made a nifty double disc set, too; the first two fit on one disc, and the second two fit on one as well.
Trying not to get further confused, I believe a couple of good points have been made concerning the new Rod Stewart collection: Steve said that the original tapes sound amazing. Bill Levenson said that little or no compression were used on the new release. Bill also goes on to say that, in his opinion, new remastered CD's "should relate back to the original tone and texture of a vinyl first pressing, but, of course, take advantage of CD's dynamic range, etc." I think all this pretty much sums up how I feel, well I haven't heard the actual tapes like Steve has. But I have heard the new collection and I go along with Levenson's opinion on what remasters should sound like. This new Reason To Believe release is a keeper at my house.
In talking with Bill, it seems as if this issue still isn't totally sorted out. He did say, though, that Dennis Drake added digital reverb on a lot of things, which is something he (Bill) has been trying to rectify with more recent issues. As far as compression goes, Bill seemed to think that Suha would *not* master that way. I wonder if perhaps some CDs these days get "tweaked" after they leave the mastering engineer's hands...
Drake added reverb? Do you know on what? I've never heard any. On the contrary, his versions are the driest I've ever heard...
Rod and Allmans at least, so I've been told. I'm sure you could find out more by e-mailing Bill directly - I'm just passing on the word!
Maybe a key factor...The CD I'm referring to has 10 tracks, not 8 as all the later 80's+ reissues. Once we find the history on the 10 track CD we'll have the answer. ?????
This IS a little confusing. The original UK black label Mercury and US red label Mercury LP pressings of EPTAS have a pretty big drum sound. Like Michael, I love that sound. I haven't heard the 1984 CD to which he is referring, but the MFSL issue has the big drum sound as well. If there was digital reverb added, it certainly wasn't needed as there is a touch of echo already there with some drum passages...such as those near and at the end of "I Know I'm Losing You". Huge drum sound...great stuff!
It's driving me crazy!! I read in an early issue of ICE that had Bill Levenson stating that the "BIG DRUM" sound was on the MASTER and the 1984 CD issue was a straight transfer of such. People wrote in and complained that the drums had a BIG sound. He replied that the "BIG DRUM" sound was on the master tape? He mentioned nothing about Digital ECHO! I still believe he is speaking of the 2nd late 80's CD issue? I'm sticking to my story. I like that 1st issue CD the best. I'm still looking in the archives for the article... Also remember the 1984 CD had 10 tracks not 8...
Sometimes the old credits are just recopied onto a new medium. This happened a lot in the old days. The first Mercury CD issues had "anonymous" mastering, like ALL the MoFi CD's.
It's always been big on the vinyl issues, too. Why would people complain about something great that's always been there? You'd think there would be complaints if it wasn't there. I mean it's just plain huge at certain points. Having only heard the vinyl issues to that point, I'd think folks would be used to it and want it to remain that way on CD.
