Zappa.com

I really enjoy the rich dialogue and debate about which versions will be released as part of the upcoming reissue campaign. I've learned a thing or two about subtleties of the various mixes while listening to those debates, and now it's almost time to select which ones to buy.

So my question is, which of the upcoming reissues have the biggest potential differences sound wise from the Ryko versions?

I've purchased vinyl (in the 60's and 70's) and cassette, and now have a near complete discography of the Japan Ryko versions on CD. I personally am not interested in two CD copies of each album. But I would buy the ones that have a distinct difference in the mix or sound in general.

Please don't just say, "buy them all," that's a lazy, bullshit answer since it says nothing about the potential differences. I also understand that this is a hypothetical exercise until we actually hear them.

So which ones are worth having twice?

Based on what we know so far...

Freak Out - should be the same as the previous Ryko CD, partially remixed compared to the vinyl
Absolutely Free - should be an improvement on the Ryko CD, same as vinyl
WOIIFTM - may be an improvement on the Ryko CD, same as vinyl
Lumpy Gravy - may be an improvement on the Ryko CD, same as vinyl
Ruben - same as Ryko CD, complete remix compared to vinyl
Uncle Meat - no samples yet, may be an improvement on the Ryko CD, same as vinyl
Hot Rats - original mix so entirely different from the Ryko CD, same as vinyl
Burnt Weeny Sandwich - may be an improvement on the Ryko CD, same as vinyl
Weasels - original mix so partially different from the Ryko CD and should be an improvement, same as vinyl
Chunga's - should be a substantial improvement on the Ryko CD, same as vinyl
Fillmore 71 - should be a substantial improvement on the Ryko Cd, same as vinyl
JABFLA - should be an improvement on the Ryko CD, same as vinyl

Everything except Freak Out & Ruben will be totally free of the digital reverb and faulty compression that ruined the Rykos and will have a dry, up-front, dynamic sound. All of these albums will be significant upgrades. Hot Rats will have the most differences overall as it reverts back to the original mix.

I sort of want them all - but may just buy the essential ones to begin with - or keep listening to my vinyl albums... I wouldn't be surprised if the next big thing turned out to be a complete set of 60 albums in a neat package, like the Miles Davis box. Some time in 2013?

_________________
We make a special art in an environment hostile to dreamers. Frank Zappa, 1971

Hot Rats is not the original mix according to Gail Zappa.

Re: 7/31 re-issues
Added: June 21st, 2012 in Questions
On Jun 18, 2012, at 2:20 PM, Jess R. Hernandez wrote:

Hola-

Great news on the re-releases. A few quick questions:

1-The Hot Rats CD has always been a 1987 re-mix, not the original 1969 mix. Is this new CD the `69 mix, or the `87 re-mix? I pefer either.

2-Is the packaging faithful to the LP’s?

3-Should I sell or junk my `95 Ryko CD’s, or keep `em as collector’s items?

Thanks!

Jess R. Hernandez

Thanks! 1. Technically none of the above – this is the 2008 Bernie Grundman Re-master – which mostly resembles the original 1969 mix. You will love it. 2. Absolutely. And even more faithful to the requirements established by the original Barking Pumpkin releases. 3. I would keep them for the moment – but you decide. None of the new releases are “sourced” from the Ryko releases and although many represent the digital masters mostly as you have come to understand them, many do not! Each package will identify the actual source so you will be able to plan your collection accordingly. We think everything sounds better but I am sure you will let us know.

Thanks for your email.

gz
“Music is the Best!”~fz

http://www.zappa.com/gzsez/questions/re-731-re-issues/

A 2008 Re-master which resembles the original mix is not the original mix.

_________________
Solipsism
Herb Recordings
Blog
Shitface
Weird Fields

Jesus man, you love beating a dead horse, see my previous post. Perhaps if you removed all the cocks from your mouth you'd have more time to read things properly.

Answer me this numbnut, how can a 2008 Re-master that only "resembles" the original mix, be the original mix?? Surely even a low-sensation seeking moron like yourself can see the problem with this??

_________________
Solipsism
Herb Recordings
Blog
Shitface
Weird Fields

Where the fuck does Gail say all Same AS Vinyl!

On Jun 11, 2012, at 8:51 AM, Bruce White wrote:

Congratulations on getting the rights to Franks’ catalog or recordings. Will the new reissues be remastered or offer anything different from the original releases?

Bruce White
Tucker, GA

The digital masters were all re-transferred by the Vaultmeister and about a third of the titles were reMastered from the original analog source. So the happy answer is, you betcha!! Each one is carefully labelled with the information you are looking for. Watch the skies.

And thanks!

gz

A third while looking at the sky more like a eye full of shit

_________________
Arf you out of your fucking mind.

I think they've been at the bath salts

_________________
Solipsism
Herb Recordings
Blog
Shitface
Weird Fields

I have the 2008 Hot Rats LP. It's clearly the original mix, but Bernie Grundman's remaster sounds better than my old Reprise LP. Deeper bass, clearer sound - a pleasure. But according to the album notes this was an all-analog remastering process. I don't have enough technical insight to tell you how that analog master would be translated to digital for the 2012 reissue. But the 2008 Grundman master is a good starting point, anyway.

_________________
We make a special art in an environment hostile to dreamers. Frank Zappa, 1971

Concerning the new Hot Rats CD, it will be a remaster done in 2008 of the original 1969 mix!
It was done at the same time as the Classic Albums vinyl reissue.

According to Dweezil at the ZPZ concert I just attended a few hours ago, per the VIP pre-show meet & greet via a question a gentleman asked about the reissues, he said that the catalog will all be taken from 2 track analog masters. With that being the case, I'm getting them all. I'm thinking the re-isses will be a vast improvement over the Rykodisc version of the catalog.

Great show at the Intersection by the way Joe Travers! The current line-up is killing it!

Out of the first bunch... I think I'll only get 2 or 3.... The samples I heard on Amazon of Hot Rats definitely have more space in em I think. But I'm not an expert (or even close).

_________________
Arf!

One could either give clear, official and complete informations to the public early on or make the confusion complete as long as possible. The ZFT obviously chooses the latter. I will never understand this attitude.

Th.

_________________
Active forum member since 2005 - R E T I R E D from this forum in 2013

If you took the dicks out of your ears long enough to listen to the samples on Amazon UK you'd realize that they match the original vinyl mix.



Case in point.

I'm with ya there.

_________________
Arf!

Thanks for clearing that up and making my point. A re-master cannot be exactly the same as the original release, otherwise there would be little point in having it re-mastered. It would also be impossible to match the re-master exactly to the original. So while it may "mostly resemble" the original mix in the words of gz, it's still not exactly the same as some people are claiming it to be.

For the record, I'll be buying all of them again regardless anyway, as they will have new packaging, new label and hope amongst hope, a box set with every release in it! If they don't do the box set though, I'll make my own box to keep them in I'm a bit anal when it comes to collecting stuff

_________________
Solipsism
Herb Recordings
Blog
Shitface
Weird Fields

thanks for clarifying Joe!

_________________
Make your checks payable to QUENTIN ROBERT DeNAMELAND, Greatest Living Philostopher Known to Mankind.

You are a total windbag. Everything you say comes directly from your anus. I suggest that you take a break from posting your audiophile-wanna-be nonsense and get some mental help.

Well, I may be a windbag, but you were wrong lol and if you hadn't been so insulting to begin with, then none of this would have happened. If you think I'm going to let some dickfart insult me with no return then you're wrong and if you think that your not so subtle attempts to deflect the fact you were wrong are going to fool me into believing you, then you're a massive gonad and wrong again.

Furthermore, I'll take a break from posting when I feel like it and not because some moron who can't read things properly told me to do so.

It's there in black and white from the vaultmeister and gz, it's a 2008 remaster, so run along and put all the cocks back in your mouth, you at least had an excuse for your gibberish then.

_________________
Solipsism
Herb Recordings
Blog
Shitface
Weird Fields

I was wrong about nothing I've said. I've been 100% correct from the start. Joe just made a complete ass out of you, and you respond with, "that proves my point! it's not really the original vinyl mix because it was remastered!". You must be brain damaged.



Seek professional help.

Jesus man, answer me this, how can a 2008 remaster be the same as the original mix...it may have the tracks from the original mix, but as soon as you remaster it, it is different. GZ clarifies this when she says that it "mostly resembles" the original mix. Quite simply, it's not the same as, but resembles it.

Then answer me this, why would you remaster something if the reason was for it to sound exactly the same as the original mix?? It makes no fucking sense, your argument is bordering on lunacy.

Furthermore, my initial point on the other thread clearly stated that the Ryko version was on spotify, I then went on to say after I had listened on Amazon that there was a problem as Amazon did not have the same version that Spotify had on their system. I asked you to go and check for yourself and you told me no, albeit in more colourful language than that. I then went and listened on Amazon (I rarely listen there because of the low quality and the fact it's 30 second samples), once I listened on Amazon, I came back to the thread and said I had obviously made a mistake about Spotify and wondered what the problem would be....if you recall, I also found evidence of their being a problem with the version on other sites also.

However, you then decided to conflate my point about spotify not having the original "dry" mix as you termed it, into me meaning that they hadn't used original mixes. My point was simply that they hadn't on spotify, I still stand by this and after discovering Amazon had different versions, I agreed there was a problem with spotify because Amazon would not have had all the clips otherwise.

Incidentally, it cannot be the original "dry" mixes as you term it, as that would suggest they've not been mastered after the mix. We've already established it was remastered in 2008, so my point stands, you were wrong, as these are NOT "dry" mixes....they've been remastered and therefore CANNOT be exactly the same as the original record and CANNOT be "dry" mixes either.

Hopefully this registers somewhere in your brain.

_________________
Solipsism
Herb Recordings
Blog
Shitface
Weird Fields

@TheCentralScrutinizer: Would you please explain to the rest of the world what your understanding of the process of "mastering" is? Plus your understanding of the term "dry"? Just to avoid misunderstandings here.

With regards -
Thinman

P.S.: I'm sure you know that mastering an analogue source for duplication on a digital medium can simply mean: making a transfer without any additional processing such as limiting, compression, EQ and/or any effects like artifical reverb. That would be my understanding of "dry". In your understanding "mastering" obviously means: changing the sound of the source is unevitable. I say no! Mastering in the classic sense simply means making a source compatible to a target medium (analogue tape > vinyl record, analogue tape > CD, 24-Bit/96 kHz recording > 16-Bit/44.1 kHz CD, etc.), nothing more. And by the way, as discussed earlier, in my opinion (opposed to yours) there is no reason that a historic recording must sound like a modern recording when re-released (your iPod-theory).

P.P.S.: And re-mastering at first simply means making a new transfer from the source with hopefully better quality due to updated equipment. Not neccessarily fumbling with and altering the sonic content of the source material.

_________________
Active forum member since 2005 - R E T I R E D from this forum in 2013

I'm with TCS. DACs matter. Txferring an analog 2Tk to digital guarantees some change in sound, default to the flavor of the DAC. If the flavor is undesirable, then additional processing is made, since a 30+ year 2Tk doesn't sound exactly like a fresh 2Tk.

_________________
____________________________________________________________________________________________________
Don't Be Stupid Unless You Want To

If you don't want "flavours" (what "flavours") at all you would have to construct a time machine and travel back to 1969 to listen to the master of Hot Rats right when it was done - and on the original machine of course. How can you know how an old recording on old tape would have sounded when it was knew?

Isn't this a stupid discussion?

Th.

_________________
Active forum member since 2005 - R E T I R E D from this forum in 2013

If you don't agree that every DAC has its own sound or flavor, then we disagree. Neither of us would be alone in our opinions. As for analog tape changing over the years, I think you know that, so I don;t think I really need to go through that.

_________________
____________________________________________________________________________________________________
Don't Be Stupid Unless You Want To