Stooges Forum
Would you like to react to this message? Create an account in a few clicks or log in to continue.

Stooges Forum

Welcome to the Fun House
 
HomeHome  RegisterRegister  Log in  

 

 Rhino vs. Sony

Go down 
+20
iggy-fan
krugersoldier
mr.datsun
mghifi
mc
saichan
StoogesMySpaceAdmin
Rob Gallucci
StoogeFan
Petrie Terrace
boogie
StoogesFan
Radiobirdman73
Aku
jneilnyc
rubber legs
steve2787
MJG196
ziggy
specotron
24 posters
Go to page : Previous  1, 2, 3  Next
AuthorMessage
rubber legs

rubber legs


Number of posts : 44
Registration date : 2007-03-20

Rhino vs. Sony - Page 2 Empty
PostSubject: Re: Rhino vs. Sony   Rhino vs. Sony - Page 2 Icon_minitimeThu May 06, 2010 1:42 am

jneilnyc wrote:
It's fine to have the Bowie mix available for it's arty qualities and historical value, but it's misleading to think that it's the best possible representation of what Iggy & The Stooges sounded like circa 1972/73.

I would never claim it was, but I would argue that the Stooges weren't tamed by Bowie, but that there was a conscious choice to emphasize the guitar and vocals over the rhythm section. As is pointed out in the '97 v. '10 thread, Iggy was involved in both of the released mixes. Even if you don't believe that he was the one who mixed out the Ashetons in '73, he definitely did in '97.
Back to top Go down
steve2787




Number of posts : 15
Registration date : 2010-04-30

Rhino vs. Sony - Page 2 Empty
PostSubject: Re: Rhino vs. Sony   Rhino vs. Sony - Page 2 Icon_minitimeThu May 06, 2010 1:45 am

jneilnyc wrote:

It's fine to have the Bowie mix available for it's arty qualities and historical value, but it's misleading to think that it's the best possible representation of what Iggy & The Stooges sounded like circa 1972/73.

aku wrote:
I never said that Bowie mix is the best possible representation of what Iggy & The Stooges sounded like circa 1972/73, because it's not. The studio album has way too many vocal and guitar overdubs to represent the REAL sound of the band. No matter how much you mix the Raw Power album, - it's always going to be a studio album. - The live bonus tracks from the Atlanta Show on the new release are the best were ever gonna get... if you want the best possible representation of what Iggy & The Stooges REALLY sounded like

Look, I been listening to "Bowie RP mix" for ages and for me - that´s the one and the only mix, - it's out of control and "artsy" and for me - it's more "psychedelic" too..

I don't really wanna have balanced mix of the Raw Power, cause the "out of controlness" of the mix is one of the things that makes it so special... It´s like James Williamson said " nothing has ever sounded like Raw Power, not before or since then" --- and if you have a balanced mix, it could very easily be just another punk rock record (with great songs) and for me this record has to sound "out of control and wild."

I think it's pretty rediculous to say that the only accurate representation of how a band sounds is in a live setting. By that reasoning, no studio album recorded by an artist ultilizing any studio tech could be an accurate representation of how the artist sounded. Raw Power, the way its mixed, does not accurately represent what the band sounded like in the studio and how they wanted their songs to sound.

I don't really get the halo effect most people are giving the Bowie mix nowadays. I think it's a shit mix, as half the band is almost missing in the mix. But that's just my opinion. I get the historical importance of it, but I don't think you can sit here and argue "well thats how raw power was intended to sound" when it's common knowledge that the band were strongarmed into accepting the Bowie mix and were unhappy with it. Ultimately, the band wrote the songs and they should have had complete control over how they sounded when released. I just don't understand why so many of you guys are so insistent that the Bowie mix remain preserved in all of it's so called "glory".
Back to top Go down
Petrie Terrace
"Flame On!"
Petrie Terrace


Number of posts : 399
Location : Heaven
Registration date : 2008-01-05

Rhino vs. Sony - Page 2 Empty
PostSubject: Re: Rhino vs. Sony   Rhino vs. Sony - Page 2 Icon_minitimeThu May 06, 2010 2:01 am

Sod it, this is where the action is, so I'm re-posting this here, apologies for the repetition ...

Re the "Bowie mix"? I know it makes sense as shorthand, but everyone knows that Iggy was in on that one too. It seems pretty unlikely that he just sat in a corner reading a newspaper the whole time.

Or, to put it another way, isn't it a bit of a striking coincidence that both "Bowie" in '73, and Iggy in '97, should have decided to mix Ron and Scott off the album?

If Bowie was telling the truth about the tapes, and I'd be surprised if it mattered enough to him that he'd lie about it, then just by handing over tapes that already had most of the instrument parts mixed down onto one track Iggy was pretty much assuring the final outcome. There's only so much Bowie could have done with/to a three track tape, in a not exactly "state of the art" studio, in the early seventies.

Re Rhino vs Sony, they both suck for different reasons.
Back to top Go down
Aku




Number of posts : 235
Registration date : 2009-02-24

Rhino vs. Sony - Page 2 Empty
PostSubject: Re: Rhino vs. Sony   Rhino vs. Sony - Page 2 Icon_minitimeThu May 06, 2010 2:06 am

steve2787 wrote:


I don't think you can sit here and argue "well thats how raw power was intended to sound" when it's common knowledge that the band were strongarmed into accepting the Bowie mix and were unhappy with it.

Yes, they were unhappy with that, I know, and I never said "thats how raw power was orginally intended " cause it wasnt, but that's what they got.

steve2787 wrote:

Ultimately, the band wrote the songs and they should have had complete control over how they sounded when released. I just don't understand why so many of you guys are so insistent that the Bowie mix remain preserved in all of it's so called "glory".

the Bowie mix has not remain preserved in all of it's "glory" - it's already been re-mixed by Iggy, and that's why I sit here and argue that "RP Mix case should now be closed for good, - You already have the "orginal rough mix""Bowie mix" and "Iggy's remix".... and as for one more mix - what would that be - "a Balanced mix for mainstream audience " ? - no thank you.
Back to top Go down
jneilnyc

jneilnyc


Number of posts : 63
Registration date : 2007-07-24

Rhino vs. Sony - Page 2 Empty
PostSubject: Re: Rhino vs. Sony   Rhino vs. Sony - Page 2 Icon_minitimeThu May 06, 2010 2:14 am

steve2787 wrote:

I think it's pretty rediculous to say that the only accurate representation of how a band sounds is in a live setting. By that reasoning, no studio album recorded by an artist ultilizing any studio tech could be an accurate representation of how the artist sounded.

No one said that, so it's not really worth arguing about, especially since you basically turn around in your next few sentences and agree with the point I was making.

I think everyone in the band is on record at some point saying the record as released didn't really reflect what they sounded like as a band (Williamson might be the only exception, but I'd be happy to be proven wrong on that).
Back to top Go down
http://www.jneil.com/
rubber legs

rubber legs


Number of posts : 44
Registration date : 2007-03-20

Rhino vs. Sony - Page 2 Empty
PostSubject: Re: Rhino vs. Sony   Rhino vs. Sony - Page 2 Icon_minitimeThu May 06, 2010 5:28 am

My argument isn't that the Bowie mix is what the band wanted, my argument is that, for better or worse, the Bowie mix is what Raw Power ended up being. Trying to second guess that nearly 40 years later is ridiculous. No one can say definitively so long after the fact what the record was supposed to be. As has already been pointed out, Iggy didn't even remember the backing vocals on "Raw Power", so how can he claim to remember clearly what his overall vision was for what this record was supposed to be? Could it be "improved"? That's a matter of opinion, but to extensively remix it would make it something other than Raw Power. Would I buy it again if they did? Of course, because no matter which mix we prefer, we are all clearly very passionate about this record, or we wouldn't waste so much time arguing about it.
Back to top Go down
StoogeFan




Number of posts : 40
Registration date : 2010-03-18

Rhino vs. Sony - Page 2 Empty
PostSubject: Re: Rhino vs. Sony   Rhino vs. Sony - Page 2 Icon_minitimeThu May 06, 2010 5:34 am

In the liner notes for the legacy edition of Raw Power Scott says "After after the basic tracks were laid and rough mixed I thought, this is one kick ass rock "n" roll album. Everything was great" This would seem to sugggest to me that on the rough mixes the drums and bass where more audible and as a result Rock Action saw more more merit in the record than as a stand in for a frisbee. I know nothing about the recording process so I am confused by how the rough mix could have enough drums and bass to make Rock Action happy and how these tracks could than be rendered practically unuseable for the Bowie mix.

Also in a recent interview when James was asked about the recording of Raw Power he said " I've heard from Iggy, and secondhand through Bowie, that there wasn't a lot of level laid down on the multi-tracks for the bass and drums. I've heard from other people — Henry Rollins has some kind of multi-track — that isn't true. I don't know what to think." He also goes on to say of the Bowie mix " I wouldn't have done it that way" I don't think that wanting to hear a more balanced mix of Raw Power means making the album more mainstream. They couldnet get a quote from Scott saying anything nice about it in the liner notes for the remaster and I only ever read Ron saying anything positive about it in terms of it doesn't suck as much as the iggy mix. These aren't mainstream muscians and they don't seem to like it. Iggy didn't bring up the drums and bass on his remix but in the 90's he was also making albums like Naughty little Doggie and Brick By Brick so maybe he wouldn't have known what to do with the tracks even if they where there.
Back to top Go down
Rob Gallucci

Rob Gallucci


Number of posts : 230
Registration date : 2009-03-03

Rhino vs. Sony - Page 2 Empty
PostSubject: Re: Rhino vs. Sony   Rhino vs. Sony - Page 2 Icon_minitimeThu May 06, 2010 6:44 am

The best studio representation of the real band from then is probably disc 1 of the EA Heavy Liquid box set, including I Got A Right, Gimme Some Skin, I'm Sick Of You and Scene Of The Crime.
To me, if RP had sounded more like those, it would have been an even better album. Ron's and Scott's work on bass and drums is clearly audible, without taking away any of the power of the guitar (and they do not include the, imho, awful boogie-woogie piano present on much of the stuff from that era.)
Back to top Go down
jneilnyc

jneilnyc


Number of posts : 63
Registration date : 2007-07-24

Rhino vs. Sony - Page 2 Empty
PostSubject: Re: Rhino vs. Sony   Rhino vs. Sony - Page 2 Icon_minitimeThu May 06, 2010 7:51 am

Yeah, the whole idea some people seem to have that making the bass and drums an integral part of the mix would in any way diminish the fierceness of the guitar and vocal mystifies me. You just have to listen to those non-RP songs from the same period to know that would never be a problem.
Back to top Go down
http://www.jneil.com/
StoogesMySpaceAdmin

StoogesMySpaceAdmin


Number of posts : 726
Location : a secret location in the Nevada desert
Registration date : 2007-03-19

Rhino vs. Sony - Page 2 Empty
PostSubject: Re: Rhino vs. Sony   Rhino vs. Sony - Page 2 Icon_minitimeThu May 06, 2010 12:47 pm

The Sony set is fine. The question is, can you do better? Let's get you in the studio and find out. Ok?

Again, if you don't like it, don't buy it. And if you already bought it, then you're free to sell it on the used market.

Evil or Very Mad
Back to top Go down
http://www.myspace.com/iggyandthestooges
saichan




Number of posts : 69
Location : Melbourne, Australia
Registration date : 2009-01-13

Rhino vs. Sony - Page 2 Empty
PostSubject: Re: Rhino vs. Sony   Rhino vs. Sony - Page 2 Icon_minitimeThu May 06, 2010 2:33 pm

StoogesMySpaceAdmin wrote:
The Sony set is fine. The question is, can you do better? Let's get you in the studio and find out. Ok?

Again, if you don't like it, don't buy it. And if you already bought it, then you're free to sell it on the used market.

Evil or Very Mad

Who made you the Stooges official cop, policing any sign of dissent on these forums? You control the MySpace page, not this venue, at least as far as I know. People are free to express an opinion here, that's what being a "fan" is all about. Your shtick's getting a bit boring, constantly running down anyone who dares to criticise, so just ease off. You got it wrong on another post, accusing a poster of paying for pirated copies, when he/she was doing no such thing, a result of you flying off at the drop of a hat.

So just relax. We all love the Stooges, here.
Back to top Go down
Petrie Terrace
"Flame On!"
Petrie Terrace


Number of posts : 399
Location : Heaven
Registration date : 2008-01-05

Rhino vs. Sony - Page 2 Empty
PostSubject: Re: Rhino vs. Sony   Rhino vs. Sony - Page 2 Icon_minitimeThu May 06, 2010 2:40 pm

saichan wrote:
StoogesMySpaceAdmin wrote:
The Sony set is fine. The question is, can you do better? Let's get you in the studio and find out. Ok?

Again, if you don't like it, don't buy it. And if you already bought it, then you're free to sell it on the used market.

Evil or Very Mad

Who made you the Stooges official cop, policing any sign of dissent on these forums? People are free to express an opinion, that's what being a "fan" all about. Your shtick's getting a bit boring. so just ease off.

I'll second that.

And where is it written that to criticize the way Sony/Robert Matheu have put this box-set together, and hyped it way past any realistic description of it's contents, someone has to first go into a recording studio and outdo Raw Power?!
Back to top Go down
specotron




Number of posts : 37
Registration date : 2009-06-23

Rhino vs. Sony - Page 2 Empty
PostSubject: Re: Rhino vs. Sony   Rhino vs. Sony - Page 2 Icon_minitimeThu May 06, 2010 3:07 pm

To have a convenient 'travel' set of Raw Power, I burned the Legacy set to CDRs. The entire thing PLUS the Pop mix fit on 2 CDs.

DISC ONE: First the entire Bowie mix, followed by the entire Pop mix, and then the three genuine outtakes: I'm Hungry, Hey, Peter and Doojiman. Disc One clocked in at 79:58 with 2 second pauses.

DISC TWO: The entire Georgia Peaches show, followed by the remaining Legacy 'bonus' tracks (not including the Pop mixes as they were already burnt in their entirity on Disc One). This too, came in at around 80 minutes.

So again, ALL of the audio material from the deluxe Sony Legacy set AND the entire Pop mix fit on 2 CDs. (Whether or not the 1997 Pop mix should have been included at all because it is not 'officially' early Raw Power in origin does not change the fact that) Sony almost randomly slapped some tracks around 3 short CDs to flesh the thing out.

Excepting the slow Cale mix (and I must repeat, if Rhino does not fix this problem on their replacement discs, this will be the worst deluxe edition of anything anywhere and it and Rhino will suck forever, the end, amen), Rhino set the example of how Raw Power should have been done:
> 2 complete existing mixes for Disc One, and
> a full disc of out alternates/outtakes.
Back to top Go down
mc

mc


Number of posts : 1786
Location : Bristol
Registration date : 2008-01-20

Rhino vs. Sony - Page 2 Empty
PostSubject: Re: Rhino vs. Sony   Rhino vs. Sony - Page 2 Icon_minitimeThu May 06, 2010 3:38 pm

We need Scotty to hook up with Rollins and see what he can do. But it's never going to happen Twisted Evil
Back to top Go down
rubber legs

rubber legs


Number of posts : 44
Registration date : 2007-03-20

Rhino vs. Sony - Page 2 Empty
PostSubject: Re: Rhino vs. Sony   Rhino vs. Sony - Page 2 Icon_minitimeThu May 06, 2010 4:22 pm

Back to the original question:

The Sony set wins for content, regardless of how many CDs it's stretched over, and the Rhino set wins for packaging, since the Sony box is a rather flimsy affair.
Back to top Go down
steve2787




Number of posts : 15
Registration date : 2010-04-30

Rhino vs. Sony - Page 2 Empty
PostSubject: Re: Rhino vs. Sony   Rhino vs. Sony - Page 2 Icon_minitimeThu May 06, 2010 8:18 pm

Petrie Terrace wrote:

And where is it written that to criticize the way Sony/Robert Matheu have put this box-set together, and hyped it way past any realistic description of it's contents, someone has to first go into a recording studio and outdo Raw Power?!

Petrie, I think you summed up my criticism of the Legacy remaster perfectly. Based on all the press releases and comments by the the band and even some people on the board who got early editions, I just expected more. In the end we just got the same Bowie mix with a negligible amount of remastering. The funny thing is that the band ended up releasing a mix that they openly criticise in the documentary.
Back to top Go down
boogie

boogie


Number of posts : 144
Registration date : 2009-09-06

Rhino vs. Sony - Page 2 Empty
PostSubject: Re: Rhino vs. Sony   Rhino vs. Sony - Page 2 Icon_minitimeThu May 06, 2010 8:43 pm

Yeah...Iggy said it's weedy,JW didn't like it and Scott tossed it away like a frisbee...
Back to top Go down
StoogesMySpaceAdmin

StoogesMySpaceAdmin


Number of posts : 726
Location : a secret location in the Nevada desert
Registration date : 2007-03-19

Rhino vs. Sony - Page 2 Empty
PostSubject: Re: Rhino vs. Sony   Rhino vs. Sony - Page 2 Icon_minitimeThu May 06, 2010 11:07 pm

saichan wrote:
StoogesMySpaceAdmin wrote:
The Sony set is fine. The question is, can you do better? Let's get you in the studio and find out. Ok?

Again, if you don't like it, don't buy it. And if you already bought it, then you're free to sell it on the used market.

Evil or Very Mad

Who made you the Stooges official cop, policing any sign of dissent on these forums? You control the MySpace page, not this venue, at least as far as I know. People are free to express an opinion here, that's what being a "fan" is all about. Your shtick's getting a bit boring, constantly running down anyone who dares to criticise, so just ease off. You got it wrong on another post, accusing a poster of paying for pirated copies, when he/she was doing no such thing, a result of you flying off at the drop of a hat.

So just relax. We all love the Stooges, here.


I never said you couldn't express an opinion here. Please continue. I can express my opinion here as well. I understand you love the band, but some here feel it's not important to support the band. It is important. That's what I take offense to.
Back to top Go down
http://www.myspace.com/iggyandthestooges
Rob Gallucci

Rob Gallucci


Number of posts : 230
Registration date : 2009-03-03

Rhino vs. Sony - Page 2 Empty
PostSubject: Re: Rhino vs. Sony   Rhino vs. Sony - Page 2 Icon_minitimeThu May 06, 2010 11:20 pm

StoogesMySpaceAdmin wrote:
The Sony set is fine. The question is, can you do better? Let's get you in the studio and find out. Ok?

Again, if you don't like it, don't buy it. And if you already bought it, then you're free to sell it on the used market.

Evil or Very Mad

My opinion, for what it's worth:

I bought the Legacy 2CD edition and I am very happy with it for the price I paid, but that does not alter my long held opinion that cutting Ron's and Scott's input out of the finished recording was absolutely criminal because (1) it could have been an even greater album if we could hear bass and drums!!, and (2) Ron and Scott, as co-founders of The Stooges with Iggy, deserved much greater respect than they got from the finished mix.
Unless the Rollins rumour ever proves to be true, then sadly we will never get to hear The Stooges playing on those 8 studio cuts. That is all any of us "dissenters" are saying.

Bottom line - it's by Iggy & The Stooges, not Iggy and the stooge. So it should have been issued (and I am talking about 1973 here) with the rhythm section included in the mix. And that would have taken nothing away from the impact of JW's guitar work.
I realise this is largely an academic discussion (again, unless the Rollins rumour ever leads to another re-release,) but it will always be a sensitive issue for many Stooges fans.

There will always be a dichotomy with Raw Power. For example, this month's "Q" magazine review of the re-release describes the original recording process as "incompetent"..... and yet it is a 5 star review!
Back to top Go down
StoogeFan




Number of posts : 40
Registration date : 2010-03-18

Rhino vs. Sony - Page 2 Empty
PostSubject: Re: Rhino vs. Sony   Rhino vs. Sony - Page 2 Icon_minitimeFri May 07, 2010 12:31 am

I think that James got a bit of a raw deal on the bowie mix as well. His lead guitar work is nice and loud but the rhythm guitar is really low on some tracks. considering that the solos account for a much smaller proportion of his work on the album the fact that they alone are really up in the mix doesn't mean he got a sweet deal in the Bowie mix in my opinion. On penetration especially the rythem guitar is pretty low in the mix.
Back to top Go down
mghifi




Number of posts : 43
Registration date : 2009-07-19

Rhino vs. Sony - Page 2 Empty
PostSubject: Re: Rhino vs. Sony   Rhino vs. Sony - Page 2 Icon_minitimeFri May 07, 2010 6:35 am

Petrie Terrace wrote:
Re Rhino vs Sony, they both suck for different reasons.

This quote pretty much sums up the argument best.

However I received my Raw Power box on the 27th of April. I'm still waiting for my Rhino one to arrive, so that's where I stand if I had to choose.
Back to top Go down
mr.datsun

mr.datsun


Number of posts : 144
Location : London England UK
Registration date : 2010-03-23

Rhino vs. Sony - Page 2 Empty
PostSubject: Re: Rhino vs. Sony   Rhino vs. Sony - Page 2 Icon_minitimeFri May 07, 2010 1:54 pm

steve2787 wrote:

Petrie, I think you summed up my criticism of the Legacy remaster perfectly. Based on all the press releases and comments by the the band and even some people on the board who got early editions, I just expected more.

I agree that the press releases were over the top. The whole re-issue and gig media campaign was completely hyped up and out of proportion. Almost hysterical.

steve2787 wrote:
In the end we just got the same Bowie mix with a negligible amount of remastering. The funny thing is that the band ended up releasing a mix that they openly criticise in the documentary.


The phrase 'a negligible amount of remastering' makes it sound like you don't know what remastering actually is. It doesn't radically change anything just maximises presentation of what's there for the medium being mastered for.

But it's a shame that so many people were disappointed.
Back to top Go down
Aku




Number of posts : 235
Registration date : 2009-02-24

Rhino vs. Sony - Page 2 Empty
PostSubject: Re: Rhino vs. Sony   Rhino vs. Sony - Page 2 Icon_minitimeFri May 07, 2010 2:35 pm

steve2787 wrote:


I just expected more. In the end we just got the same Bowie mix with a negligible amount of remastering. The funny thing is that the band ended up releasing a mix that they openly criticise in the documentary.

What´s so funny about it...
No-one said that the Sony would now release a re-mix.
They all said they were goin to release the "Old Bowie mix" remastered.

Mixing:
To change what´s there on the tape (to make it sound better/different)

Mastering:
maximises presentation of what's already there for the medium being mastered for (vinyl or Cd, etc...) Mastering is done after the music has already been mixed.

In this case, they re-mastered Bowie's classic mix once again, and I think they did a great job. My new CD sounds much better than the old vinyl of the Bowie Mix and my old CD of the same mix. - The new remaster is great.

I got just what I was told I would get. And I´m happy.

I don`t understand why any Iggy fan would be dissapointed, What more do you want ? - Bonus tracks? - Well, They gave you previously unreleased studio tracks, Previously unreleased live concert and a DVD, photos..what more do you want ? A Blow job?


Last edited by Aku on Fri May 07, 2010 2:41 pm; edited 1 time in total
Back to top Go down
mr.datsun

mr.datsun


Number of posts : 144
Location : London England UK
Registration date : 2010-03-23

Rhino vs. Sony - Page 2 Empty
PostSubject: Re: Rhino vs. Sony   Rhino vs. Sony - Page 2 Icon_minitimeFri May 07, 2010 2:40 pm

This topic has been fiery and enjoyable.

I'm a little late to add my points.

On the SONY set:

As for the Deluxe or 2CD set, the only thing worth having is the remaster. They should have used the original UK 73 mix of Search and Destroy or included it as an extra.

Any live Stooges with rock 'n' roll honky piano is unlistenable irrespective of quality.

Anyone who expected a radical change in the mix over and above a remaster would have been disappointed but then they misunderstood the nature of a remaster. I think the problem was wishful thinking. The remaster presents the Bowie mix very well. Much better sound quality than my original LP and makes it more realistic, musical and rhythmic!

The packaging sucks.

On IGGY's remix:

Should be relegated to the bargain basement bins of hell. Egotistically fuelled landfill.

On Bowie's mix:

Iggy was there. But he can't remember how many days they spent in the studio. He says one. In the 2CD liner notes Kris Needs says Bowie took three days on the mix. Iggy's memory of these events may not be clear. Iggy says in the video – we were both there hands on the sliders, maaaan. He suddenly wants to take credit for it.

As stated above the Raw Power that made history was the Bowie mix. You cannot remix classic albums. Don't try.

On Rhino Set:

This could have been good. A better selection of material than Sony. They screwed it up completely with a slow mastering of Cale's mix. Also they had the sense to create a single disk of the original LP without extras on the 2005 edition – why didn't they do that again? Extra tracks tacked on the end ruin classic LPs.


VERDICT

Sony. Two points for the remastering and the single. They could have had full points for a remaster as a single disc in an LP card cover without extras. But then they probably realised that they'd do a better job of that in Japan.

Rhino. Two points for the bonus tracks + one point for the single - 3 points for the wrong speed = null points. What happened Rhino? Remember the Funhouse Sessions? Sony are a multi-national soulless megacorp and hence have an excuse – you have none.
Back to top Go down
Aku




Number of posts : 235
Registration date : 2009-02-24

Rhino vs. Sony - Page 2 Empty
PostSubject: Re: Rhino vs. Sony   Rhino vs. Sony - Page 2 Icon_minitimeFri May 07, 2010 2:54 pm

mr.datsun wrote:


As stated above the Raw Power that made history was the Bowie mix. You cannot remix classic albums. Don't try.

On Rhino Set:

This could have been good. A better selection of material than Sony. They screwed it up completely with a slow mastering of Cale's mix. Also they had the sense to create a single disk of the original LP without extras on the 2005 edition – why didn't they do that again? Extra tracks tacked on the end ruin classic LPs.


VERDICT

Sony. Two points for the remastering and the single. They could have had full points for a remaster as a single disc in an LP card cover without extras. But then they probably realised that they'd do a better job of that in Japan.

Rhino. Two points for the bonus tracks + one point for the single - 3 points for the wrong speed = null points. What happened Rhino? Remember the Funhouse Sessions? Sony are a multi-national soulless megacorp and hence have an excuse – you have none.


Great post. I agree...my vote goes to Sony - for the same reasons.
Back to top Go down
Sponsored content





Rhino vs. Sony - Page 2 Empty
PostSubject: Re: Rhino vs. Sony   Rhino vs. Sony - Page 2 Icon_minitime

Back to top Go down
 
Rhino vs. Sony
Back to top 
Page 2 of 3Go to page : Previous  1, 2, 3  Next

Permissions in this forum:You cannot reply to topics in this forum
Stooges Forum :: Stooges Main. :: Jesus Loves the Stooges.-
Jump to: