Are you happy with the sound quality of the Peter Gabriel remasters? (1 Viewer)

[Mike Broadman]

But isn't this all assuming the Peter felt that In Your Eyes was more important than something else? I mean, if In Your Eyes gets moved to the outer groove, than something else has to take its place and that song suffers.

NP: Charles Mingus, Mingus Plays Piano

 

[Joel Fontenot]

^Probably a less sonically complex song went there - not necessarily less important - but one that could handle the inner grooves better without losing quality. I really don't remember as I haven't listened to So for several years now.

I've got some single albums that are an hour long and sound like pure crap.

Kim Wilde's The Very Best of (1984) on EMI from the UK is almost an hour long total. Overall volume level is about half the norm. And your needle becomes very susceptible to surface scratches because the needle rides so high up on top of the groove instead of in it.

Joel

 

[Joel Fontenot]

Sorry for the double post

 

[Mike Broadman]

I think this has been mentioned, but I wonder how the early Genesis albums sound. They were putting over 50 minutes on some of them. If I ever do get a turntable, it looks like I'd be skipping those records.

 

[Michael St. Clair]

Mike,
In the 80s I owned 3 Sides Live, Duke, and Abacab on vinyl. They all sounded like crap to me.
I didn't get into the Gabriel-era stuff until around 86-87, and the CDs were out then.
The early generation CDs didn't sound so hot either...they probably used multi-generation masters that were EQ'd for vinyl.

 

[Ryan Spaight]

Supposedly the Gabriel-era Genesis albums just released on Classic Records vinyl sound very good.

I wouldn't know because I'd never put something that expensive on my crummy turntable!

Ryan

 

[Dave Scarpa]

I've always thought the gabriel Vinyl sounded pretty good, you're right on the Genesis stuff thou. I remember getting Duke and thinking the mixing engineer needed to be shot , it was the flatest sounding recording I've ever heard, I should hunt out a CD Remaster to see if it sounds anybetter.

 

[Kevin C Brown]

I think a lot of lps were sequenced to take into account the flip of the lp too. Stronger songs at the beg and end of each side, and less strong in between. CDs are obviously more "continuous."

I have never heard of lps being sequenced purely for the better sound quality at the beg of a side vs the end...

Might be that Peter got his way this time, but the produced or engineer got their way originally.

 

[KeithH]

Very interesting discussion on placement of songs in relation to sound quality. As a vinyl neophyte, I am learning a lot from a technical standpoint, with a little trivia thrown in to boot!

 

[Ryan Spaight]

Found this on the petergabriel.com site:

When the albums were originally mastered Vinyl was the principle format. Because record players can track more complex music better at the outside of the disk, the running order of SO was determined by the format rather than by Peter. So there may be some subtle changes in the re-mastered versions.

Well, changing the song order is hardly subtle, but there you go.

Ryan

 

[KeithH]

Ryan, thanks for posting that. I will have to check out Peter Gabriel's web site because from what I have read in a few threads here, it has some good information.

NP: Penn State-Wisconsin football game (a nail-biter!)

 

[Anthony Thorne]

I haven't bought any of the PG remasters yet as I'm waiting for the mooted SACD versions sometime in 2003, but I did read the following interesting info a few days ago in the British music mag MOJO. Following the current release of UP, Gabriel will reportedly also be releasing a second album of new material - another proper PG solo album, and not a soundtrack - within the next 12-18 months. The mag gave the title, which was fairly abstract and which I can't remember for this post, but the news was in print and I thought might be of interest to some folks here. I'll have to check his website to see if it mentions this... It's anyone's guess as to what sort of music will be on it, but the mag suggested that the tracks are already recorded (maybe from the same sessions as UP?). We all know how PG announcements sometimes miss their scheduled 'dates', but it'll be good if this turns out to be true.

 

[Kevin C Brown]

Learn something new every day!

 

[MichaelAW]

The next album will be titled i/o, which almost was the title of UP.
By the way, does anyone know if the anecdote about the title of So is true?
The story I've been told is that the record company was sick of PG naming his albums after himself, so they renamed his fourth one Security without asking him. By the time his fifth album came out, they said to him "C'mon, Peter, this needs a title!"
PG simply replied "So?"

 

[KeithH]

Michael, I never heard that one. I always wondered where So came from, however.

 

[Ryan Spaight]

I heard that anecdote about So, as well. Can't say if it's true or not, but it ought to be.
I think the fourth album was only officially named "Security" in the US, it was just the fourth Peter Gabriel album everywhere else. Now the remasters have made it "Security" everywhere, I guess.
I've also heard that Peter's idea behind not naming the first four albums was that he saw his records sort of like a magazine, where a new "issue" of "Peter Gabriel" would come out every few years. Makes sense, with the consistent PG "logo" on the first four.
Cool info about i/o. Hope it's true -- I would think that after ten years he's got enough stuff stacked up for another one.
Ryan