For some reason I don't think this was an artistic decision and am a bit befuddled by this, especially the tubular bells during Jerusalem which sticks out like a sore thumb (more like a thumb missing from a hand... that's how disturbing it is). If something of this nature was "missing" from the masters of a Floyd release I'm sure it would have been recreated to keep the integrity of the original intact. And while I do like the new mix for the most part I do question the integrity given the absence of these sounds.
ELP Emerson Lake & Palmer Cataloge in 5.1 Surround
- Thread starter tarkusnj
- Start date
Help Support QuadraphonicQuad:
It's not missing at all. It's clearly there in the right spot in his 5.1 mix, in the surround speakers (which is a nice effect), so I am also puzzled by the lack of the bells in the stereo mix.
Also, the beginning synthesizer in his stereo mix of "Toccata" is very dry, which is very uncharacteristic as the original stereo mix had it bathed in reverb. This is also correct in his 5.1 mix, so why the difference between the two?
Makes me feel like he didn't do his homework well enough before starting on the stereo mix...
I also agree with the dryness regarding the opening of Tocatta. I don't have the 5.1 mix for reference so thanks for chiming in. Given the facts of your post it seems that there are some obvious mistakes with the stereo version which I now find inexcusable for what I consider the best ELP album and one of the great prog-rock albums of all time. What a freakin' shame!
neil wilkes
2K Club - QQ Super Nova
Of course it's an artistic choice - it defines what the word "remix" actually means.
We have no idea what state the multitrack tapes were in.......and no idea of the mix process involved (okay, I have a pretty good idea, but how many classic album remixes have you done lately?)
Sometimes it is good to mimic the original, sometimes not - it all depends on the brief given at the time.
Is it just me, or does anyone else get the impression some folks were determined to pan this series no matter what?
Maybe it is because I am getting old that I am getting cynical - maybe it's the other way around. Who's to say?
Valhalla
Active Member
I don't think this is the case. Most of us have not heard the 5.1 because we were not prepared to buy an expensive box set after our pre-orders were 'down-graded'. I probably never will hear it.
True words. I also canceled the Pink Floyd "Division Bell" box and orderer the 5.1 DVD.
How long will they serve us limited expensive box-sets only to get a piece of it?
I will not support this anymore.
What I was expecting (can't speak for everyone after all) was a Steven Wilson-style remix, meaning that Jakko would try to be faithful to the original mix as much as possible while at the same time providing greater sonic clarity throughout the process.
There's no doubt in my mind that he did a great job providing more sonic clarity to the mix as the mixes (both stereo and 5.1) are the best I have ever heard this album, but IMO he was less successful matching the original mix element for element.
Things like the missing bells in "Jerusalem" and the missing reverb on the keyboards in "Toccata" (which are both only missing in the stereo mix and not in 5.1) are minor offenses IMO, plus adding any additional elements not present in the original mix never bothers me either.
What DOES bother me is bringing out an element in a mix more than it should be at the expense of being able to hear the main focus at any given time (i.e., the loud distorted bass in "Karn Evil 9 3rd Impression" drowning out the keyboards)
I (for one) was NEVER trying to pan this remix from the start, and I think the points that I bring up are perfectly valid, not to mention the fact that Sony screwed over consumers by making the 5.1 mix only part of the big box set.
With all that being said, I am waiting for Jakko's remix of "Trilogy" with open ears, and I hope that not only has he done a faithful job remixing that album but that Sony will allow fans to buy both Jakko's stereo and 5.1 remixes in a more affordable 3-disc set like the first two ELP reissues.
That's not too much to ask for is it?
With all due respect, Neil, rtbluray hit the nail on the head on all counts.
And if this is JJ'S method for remixing then I personally don't care for it. I much prefer Steven Wilson's approach which is to faithfully recreate the stereo mix using all of the original sonic elements and subsequently separating them into 5 discrete channels. I simply do not understand the logic of using something like the tubular bells in the 5.1 mix and then making an "artistic decision" to eliminate them from the stereo mix.
But unlike rtbluray I find these missing elements to be more than minor offenses. When the original artist makes a conscious artistic decision to incorporate specific instrumentation into their work I find it disturbing to see these things removed by someone else's reinterpretation. Mixing it at a different volume is understandable but I simply do not understand this blatant choice and have a suspicion that it may have been a simple mistake because the original multi-track elements were obviously available.
And let's face it. Most folks who buy the new mix of BSS are most likely going to be longtime fans who are very familiar with the album and will notice these differences. Do you think a single fan will think, "Cool, he left out the tubular bells!"? Its like eliminating one of the gong crashes from Tarkus.@: Instead of losing myself in the music it took me right out of the moment.
In regards to your query of whether you are getting old or becoming cynical (or perhaps both) maybe you should start a poll?
And if this is JJ'S method for remixing then I personally don't care for it. I much prefer Steven Wilson's approach which is to faithfully recreate the stereo mix using all of the original sonic elements and subsequently separating them into 5 discrete channels. I simply do not understand the logic of using something like the tubular bells in the 5.1 mix and then making an "artistic decision" to eliminate them from the stereo mix.
But unlike rtbluray I find these missing elements to be more than minor offenses. When the original artist makes a conscious artistic decision to incorporate specific instrumentation into their work I find it disturbing to see these things removed by someone else's reinterpretation. Mixing it at a different volume is understandable but I simply do not understand this blatant choice and have a suspicion that it may have been a simple mistake because the original multi-track elements were obviously available.
And let's face it. Most folks who buy the new mix of BSS are most likely going to be longtime fans who are very familiar with the album and will notice these differences. Do you think a single fan will think, "Cool, he left out the tubular bells!"? Its like eliminating one of the gong crashes from Tarkus.
@: Instead of losing myself in the music it took me right out of the moment.In regards to your query of whether you are getting old or becoming cynical (or perhaps both) maybe you should start a poll?
Last edited:
tomwrock
Active Member
Agreed!
RuudMans
Well-known Member
Spot on, rontoon. That is what I meant when I referred to re-assembling versus re-mixing.
No way am I trying to pan out this series, as i absolutely love the first 2 album remixes (bot 5.1 and stereo) done by SW. I was expecting a slightly more "faithful to the original" approach, based on SW's work. Some of the mixing choices made by JJ are a bit too left wing for me. It is all personal preference.
Saying that, I love 95% of the 5.1 remixing work done by JJ on BSS.
I think the obvious differences between the 2014 2.0 and 5.1 mixes in terms of what is there and what is not, is a strange affair. In that respect I fully agree with rontoon's assessment.
One thing that's for sure is Jakko's stereo and 5.1 mix of BSS are not the same mix.
What I mean by that is even Steven Wilson's remixes (stereo and 5.1) are essentially the same mixes (when you take out the 5.1 panning). The volume automation, EQ, compression, reverbs, etc all stay the same from mix to mix, and as far as I know, there have never been any elements in his mixing that have been exclusive to either the 5.1 or stereo remixes.
So it does seem strange to me that there would be elements (like the bells in "Jerusalem") that are only in one mix as opposed to both of them.
What I mean by that is even Steven Wilson's remixes (stereo and 5.1) are essentially the same mixes (when you take out the 5.1 panning). The volume automation, EQ, compression, reverbs, etc all stay the same from mix to mix, and as far as I know, there have never been any elements in his mixing that have been exclusive to either the 5.1 or stereo remixes.
So it does seem strange to me that there would be elements (like the bells in "Jerusalem") that are only in one mix as opposed to both of them.
jefftiger
Member
I agree with the last few posts. I continue to be extremely impressed with Jakko's stereo remix. It has a clarity that I find extremely refreshing. I've never been pleased with the sound of any of the previous CD releases of BSS and I have many of them. There's a depth to the new stereo mix that's outstanding. There are the little surprises that others have pointed out which are puzzling, like the omission of the tubular bells in Jerusalem. But, I really like some of the keyboard elements that Jakko has emphasized, particularly in KE9 2nd and 3rd impressions. As another poster mentioned, those buying this release are likely the sorts of people who have listened to it hundreds of times since its release in 1973 and are intimately familiar with it. So unexpected differences are a bit jarring.
I've only had time to listen to the 5.1 mix once. Overall, I like it with the notable exception of the start of KE9 3rd impression. I'd love to hear an account from Jakko about the remix process and the differences that we've all noted between the stereo and 5.1 versions. I find the whole business of remixing ancient analog releases fascinating. Steve Wilson's description of the process in one of the first two ELP releases made for very interesting reading. It really seems to require a lot of detective work on the part of the person doing the mix.
I've only had time to listen to the 5.1 mix once. Overall, I like it with the notable exception of the start of KE9 3rd impression. I'd love to hear an account from Jakko about the remix process and the differences that we've all noted between the stereo and 5.1 versions. I find the whole business of remixing ancient analog releases fascinating. Steve Wilson's description of the process in one of the first two ELP releases made for very interesting reading. It really seems to require a lot of detective work on the part of the person doing the mix.
blue.monk
1K Club - QQ Shooting Star
Yes. I believe SW mixes in Logic where, once a stereo mix is complete, it's a relatively straightforward process to expand it to surround. The discrepancies in the Jakko mixes lead me to believe his methods are different and I suspect the missing components are oversights rather than artistic choices.
rikpepe
Well-known Member
I've never had much doubt that Trilogy would come, just glad that it looks to be this year instead of next. Welcome Back My Friends however....this is the first time it's even vaguely been mentioned as anything other than wishful thinking. Perhaps discovering some of the old quad tapes while looking for the BSS multis got them motivated to go for it?
Well I'm not as excited about this since the BSS release was so messed up because 1) JJ's mix did not live up to expectations and 2) The 3rd disc was not in surround. But I guess there's a better chance of it being in surround this time (like the 1st two releases) since there's no expensive box set to hold it hostage.
Last edited:
LizardKing
2K Club - QQ Super Nova
Calling Mr. Wilkes - are you authoring the DVD-A - and is it surround?
Similar threads
