Stereo Pet Sounds LP digital or analog?
Farrell90405
remaster?
The CD credit: "Digitally remastered by Ron McMaster at Capitol Mastering,
Hollywood, 1999"
The LP credit: "Remastered by Ron McMaster at Capitol Mastering, May, 1999.
Mastering supervision: Andrew Sandoval."
Thanks.
Francois Kahn
I don't think there are such things as a complete digital remaster for
an LP. After all, the vinyl is positvely analogic...
The stereo mixes, according to Mark Linett, were produced using only
analogic equipment:
http://groups.google.fr/groups?hl=fr&lr=&ie=UTF-8&threadm=yrplace-010899
1938560001%40news.earthlink.net&rnum=8&prev=/groups%3Fq%3Dmark%2Blinett%
2Bhdcd%2Bpet%2Bsounds%26ie%3DISO-8859-1%26hl%3Dfr
After that, they were transferred to an high definition digital format
(24 bits/192 KHz, for instance). This was the basis for the Pet Sounds
Sessions digital masters.
The 1999 CD was an erroneous attempt by this Ron McMaster (what a name!)
to use the PS Sessions digital masters, make some further corrections
and declare it the final mastering. But this version was defective. For
instance, it switches continuously between HDCD and non-HDCD encoding.
As I have a compatible CD player, it's VERY annoying.
The vinyl master may be based on the analog or the high definition
digital master (with this definition, there wouldn't be any significant
difference) but I'm not sure. It could also be the 16 bit/44 KHz masters
used for either CD.
And don't forget the 1999 CD version was replaced by a 2001 version,
which reversed to the Pet Sounds sessions masters, apart from restoring
Mike Love's voice in the bridge of "Wouldn't It Be Nice?" Unfortunately,
this version isn't available in Europe (no CD version is available
here, apart from the boxset).
The forthcoming DVD-A 5.1 will however use digital mixes, I presume.
--
François Kahn
Retirer le "-vs-spam" pour me répondre
Remove "-vs-spam" for a reply
Farrell90405
The link makes tout la difference.
I was listening to the record the other day, and I noticed for the first time
that it sounds JUST like the CD. I have the 1990 mono CD, the box set, and a
mono/stereo CD with 1999 as the copyright date.
Does the 2001 CD version have a 2001 copyright date, do you know?
>Subject: Re: Stereo Pet Sounds LP digital or analog?
>From: fkahn-...@noos.fr (Francois Kahn)
>Date: 7/15/2002 9:37 AM Eastern Daylight Time
>Message-id: <1ffdauy.ls9tt5hivwnuN%fkahn-...@noos.fr>
mark
farrel...@aol.comyadayada (Farrell90405) wrote:
As another writer indicated the '99 stereo. mono CD was improperly
remastered from the digital master created for the boxset. This was done
by Capitol without the approval of either Brian or the group.
The source for the boxset was my original analog mixes for the stereo
and original analog for the mono.
The vinyl was also mastered from the digital tape (as were all the
Capitol vinyl BB's lps that were released in the late 90's) so buying
that simply gives you a CD transferred to vinyl (probably not what you
had in mind)
The 2001 CD restored the master to the boxset version. Also the liner
notes were redone in order to settle some legal issues.
The upcoming 5.1 release will include a remastering of the stereo and
mono mixes from analog at 96 khz/ 24 bit which is stunning.
The surround mix was done to both analog and 96/24 digital. We will
decide when we master which source to use. In any event the mastering
will be done analog.
Hope that helps.
Mark Linett
Farrell90405
>remastered from the digital master created for the boxset. This was done
>by Capitol without the approval of either Brian or the group.
>
>The source for the boxset was my original analog mixes for the stereo
>and original analog for the mono.
>
>The vinyl was also mastered from the digital tape (as were all the
>Capitol vinyl BB's lps that were released in the late 90's) so buying
>that simply gives you a CD transferred to vinyl (probably not what you
>had in mind)
>
>The 2001 CD restored the master to the boxset version. Also the liner
>notes were redone in order to settle some legal issues.
>
>The upcoming 5.1 release will include a remastering of the stereo and
>mono mixes from analog at 96 khz/ 24 bit which is stunning.
>
>The surround mix was done to both analog and 96/24 digital. We will
>decide when we master which source to use. In any event the mastering
>will be done analog.
>
>Hope that helps.
>
>Mark Linett
>
>
>
>
>
>
Mark - Thanks very much. Two more questions:
(1) Is the mono version on the '99 CD the same as on the '01 and '90 CDs?
(2) Should I be out buying three more speakers?
Mr. Moose
(Farrell90405) wrote:
>Does the 2001 CD version have a 2001 copyright date, do you know?
>
Yes it does. It's really easy to spot.
Mark Pollock
Mr. Moose
(Farrell90405) wrote:
>Mark - Thanks very much. Two more questions:
>
>(1) Is the mono version on the '99 CD the same as on the '01 and '90 CDs?
>
>(2) Should I be out buying three more speakers?
I'm not Mark Linett, but I can take a shot at these:
The mono version on the 99 and 01 cds is NOT the same as the 90
version, although I believe they all stem from the same tape. The
noise reduction on the '90 version is rather heavy handed, and tends
to muffle the recording a bit, whereas the box set and 01 versions are
crystal clear.
There is also a DCC Gold version that is also excellent. It's a tough
choice between the 01 and DCC versions. (Or go find a nice, mint,
original vinyl! The sound is awesome!)
As far as buying three more speakers, are you crazy? Of course!! :)
Mark Pollock
Michael Davis
> The 2001 CD restored the master to the boxset version. Also the liner
> notes were redone in order to settle some legal issues.
May I ask what changes were made? Thanks.
Mike Davis
******************************************************************************
"They've forgotten all about God, but He's the only reason we exist..."
--George Harrison (1943 - 2001)
http://fornax.pa.msu.edu/~davism -- Now with "A Day in the Life of a Tree"
******************************************************************************
Farrell90405
>There is also a DCC Gold version that is also excellent. It's a tough
>choice between the 01 and DCC versions. (Or go find a nice, mint,
>original vinyl! The sound is awesome!)
Mark - I've heard the LP with best sound quality is the one that comes with "So
Tough." Can anyone confirm? Thanks.
Derek A. Bill
pretty good sound out of that LP. You'd also get a lot of noise that way,
but if you can live with that, I don't think there's a better way to hear it
as Brian did.
"Farrell90405" <farrel...@aol.comyadayada> wrote in message
news:20020715193056...@mb-mb.aol.com...
Mr. Moose
<Dere...@AllSummerLong.com> wrote:
>I always found that if you jacked the bass and highest treble up, you'd get
>pretty good sound out of that LP. You'd also get a lot of noise that way,
>but if you can live with that, I don't think there's a better way to hear it
>as Brian did.
I didn't find that necessary with original vinyl - the sound was well
balanced, nice and crisp, very warm. I wonder what masters were used
for what?
I also wonder if the original master disappeared when they did the
two-fer with "So Tough". That would make sense!
Mark
mark
farrel...@aol.comyadayada (Farrell90405) wrote:
1-The 99 version is incorrectly mastered on both the mono and the stereo.
2- I think you'll be happy if you do especially around November
mark
<ma...@vRoElMvOoVmEaCrAoPoSn.com> wrote:
sorry I misread the previous question. The 90 CD is difft from all of
the others and used no-noise (typical for its time) The DCC disc claims
it is a flat transfer, but it sounds heavily eqd.
The boxset and 2001 CDs have the proper HDCD encoding on both the stereo
and mono versions.
mark
<ma...@vRoElMvOoVmEaCrAoPoSn.com> wrote:
Now it is. The first batch had the wrong tray card so the back showed
the erroneous mastering credits and the 1999 copyright. The disc and
booklet were correct, however.
Shrinkwrapped 2001 copies have a sticker announcing HDCD on the front.
Presumeably all the ones with the wrong tray card have been recalled or
sold.
Farrell90405
>> >The 2001 CD restored the master to the boxset version. Also the liner
>> >notes were redone in order to settle some legal issues.
>> >
Mark - I e-mailed Amazon after looking up Pet Sounds on their website, and the
version they sell has the 1999 copyright date instead of 2001.
Here's what they wrote back:
<<<As noted on the detail page of ASIN B00005ASHM "Pet Sounds [EXTRA
TRACKS] [ORIGINAL RECORDING REMASTERED]" is listed as the July 13,
1999 edition.
You can find this information on the detail page of this item beside
the "Audio CD" text. I would like to apologize if this was not clear
on the web site.
Furthermore, I could not locate the 2001 remastered edition of this
item on our website based on the information you provided in your
message.>>>