Skip to main content
Topic: Problem with Rolling Stones (Read 3440 times) previous topic - next topic
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Problem with Rolling Stones

I'm wondering if anybody could verify the strange thing I found recently..

I had downloaded an mp3 of Paint it Black for my dad, then checked out some more stuff of the Rolling Stones and found I liked it, so I got their "best of" album, 40 licks.

On the first play, I noticed that 1:15 into Paint it Black there was a strange washy noise for a breif moment that I didn't remember.  I fired it up in CEP and found that the highs had just been swept out and back in, an effect similar to many old drum'n'bass tapes I have which are 3rd or 4th generation copies. 

Why has this made it into the album, when I'm assuming it's not in whatever original cd the track featured on?  Digital remastering my ass!



http://www.inthisdayandage.co.uk/shyz/paintitblack.ogg (50kb)
< w o g o n e . c o m / l o l >

Problem with Rolling Stones

Reply #1
Hmm, interesting.
I can hear a 'dropout' immediately after the middle of the word "then" during the linked section ("maybe then I'll fade away").

  The question is, who's at fault here?
  Your rip (Im sure you'd have checked the disc before posting, so I'll write that off)?   
  The new Abkco DSD (SACD) transfers?
  The Virgin mastering of the transfer for this collection?

  I dug out my original release "singles collection" (copyright 1989, probably 1986 transfers), and the song does not appear to have this problem at all.
  It's also not as loud, and the background noise seems possibly more intrusive.

  So at least on the copy of the master (they claim the original masters were used, but Abkco is unscrupulous)  they used for the 1986 transfer, this problem was not obviously audible.

  I can't verify that this problem doesn't exist on the new SACD disc because I don't own the Stones album that has this song on it.

  I do own plenty of the other early albums in their new DSD remastered form, and a lot of analog errata is more obvious (jarring maybe), whether this is due to degradation of the tapes over the last 15-odd years or Abkco using different copies of the master I don't know.
  I will say that in general, the new masters do sound better to my ears, even after the gain is equalized.
 
  My money is on Virgin screwing something up in the transfer.

Maybe if you'd like I can send you the same clip from the older Abkco mastering, but not today. Today I must drink heavily and stuff myself with candy 

Problem with Rolling Stones

Reply #2
from Hot Rocks Disc I, 1989

link
"You have the right to remain silent. Anything you say will be misquoted, then used against you."

Problem with Rolling Stones

Reply #3
I hear the drop in the sample too, but my copy (from Hot Rocks) sounds fine.  Couldn't ABX them because of track lengths, but the difference was obvious.

If you're hearing this in the source (i.e., not an encoding problem), then I'd agree that it's probably sucky (re)mastering on Virgin's part.

@Audible: Was this track transferred to DSD before remastering to standard CD Audio?  If so, could resampling be the culprit here?  As in analog --> 96KHz --> 44.1KHz?  (Or is SACD 100KHz?)  Or am I completely off-track? 

Problem with Rolling Stones

Reply #4
I can verify that it's not an encoding error. I also hear this dropout on my copy of Forty Licks (both on my encoded APE file and the original CD played in my standalone CD player).
Over thinking, over analyzing separates the body from the mind.

Problem with Rolling Stones

Reply #5
Quote
Was this track transferred to DSD before remastering to standard CD Audio? If so, could resampling be the culprit here? As in analog --> 96KHz --> 44.1KHz? (Or is SACD 100KHz?) Or am I completely off-track?


  I think the Forty Licks version could be derived from a DSD mastering, but I'm not absolutely sure. I doubt that this is an artifact of conversion from DSD just based on the quality of the dual layer Stones SACD hybrids I do have (of which I've not listened to the SACD portion). DSD is of course 1 bit 2.8MHz....

  It could very well be possible that Virgin got ahold of the tapes themselves, and did a more traditional remastering instead of using the Abkco DSD job, but I'm not sure that makes any more sense per se.
 
  Virgin has previously remastered their own Stones catalog starting from about 1993 onward with the Apogee UV22 system, but their catalog includes only "Sticky Fingers" and later albums and so I doubt they own the original Paint It, Black master....

    The thing is, since both the Abkco DSD 60's albums and the Forty Licks collection were released in 2002, it's tough to tell from the copyright dates if Virgin did do their own mastering without having someone with the new DSD mastered version of the song to compare with. Given the quality of the SACD versions, I'm guessing Virgin either: 1) remastered the song themselves from the same tape and screwed up 2) screwed up the mastering of the DSD transfer, or 3) has access to a copy of the master of this song and that copy has this error(s) in it.
edited

Problem with Rolling Stones

Reply #6
Yes, the picture was of the original wav I ripped, and the dropout was both in the wav & encoded ogg.

I'm confused with all the remasters as to which is the best to go for?  The image /\/eph linked to almost looks like a different song, I'm guessing it sounds much 'older'?

Any suggestions on what to go for to get the best mix of Paint It Black, and also Under My Thumb, that was quite a good tune too
< w o g o n e . c o m / l o l >

Problem with Rolling Stones

Reply #7
Quote
Any suggestions on what to go for to get the best mix of Paint It Black, and also Under My Thumb, that was quite a good tune too

/\/ephaestous appears to have the original remastered version of Hot Rocks 1 (1989).
  This same (2 disc) set is now availible in DSD remastered form, and includes both the songs you mention. Also, it's quite likely you can find a used copy of the version both /\/eph and ScorLibran own for a decent price.
  I very much doubt that the new DSD remastered set includes the same 'dropout' as the Forty Licks collection, but I cannot verify this.
 
  Both the Hot Rocks collections are far too short for what you pay IMO (21 songs on the first one, >$30 in retail), much like The Beatles Red and Blue 2Disc 'best of' sets.
 
  I would recommend "The Singles Collection: The London Years" (3Discs, 58 songs) but it does not include Under My Thumb...
edit: added DSD

Problem with Rolling Stones

Reply #8
I uploaded two samples here

I prefer my version against yours, however, it could be because mine is APS and yours -q 4? vorbis...

Could you upload a good quality 30 second sample, preferably the same timing as mine.
"You have the right to remain silent. Anything you say will be misquoted, then used against you."

Problem with Rolling Stones

Reply #9
Quote
I'm confused with all the remasters as to which is the best to go for?  The image /\/eph linked to almost looks like a different song, I'm guessing it sounds much 'older'?

Any suggestions on what to go for to get the best mix of Paint It Black, and also Under My Thumb, that was quite a good tune too

It sounds like Audible knows the Stones a lot better than I do, so I'd trust his recommendations for the compilation(s) with the songs you're looking for.

However, what I ended up buying several years ago is Hot Rocks 1964-1971 (2 CDs, remastered) for earlier Stones, and for the later stuff I bought Jump Back: The Best Of The Rolling Stones '71-'93 (1 CD, remastered).  The former has both Paint It black, Under My Thumb, and 19 other tracks.  The latter has 18 tracks, with the only overlap on both sets being "Brown Sugar" and "Wild Horses".

I'm a moderate Stones fan, and already had a few albums (Sticky Fingers, It's Only Rock 'N Roll, Stripped (Live)), and wanted a couple of good compilations to cover the hits throughout their career.  There may be better options for good versions of these songs, as there are a lot of compilations out there, but I've been happy with the ones I have.

Problem with Rolling Stones

Reply #10
I have added a 30 second --preset extreme [span style='font-size:8pt;line-height:100%'](140kbs!)[/span] sample of the 40 Licks version to your uploads thread /\/ephaestous.  The Hot Rocks version sounds harder to listen to for me, with the bassy reverb and guitars hard on the right.

I will have to look around, I must say I'm cagey about spending an extra £20 just to get a nice mix of one track..    Thanks for the advice though everyone
< w o g o n e . c o m / l o l >

 
SimplePortal 1.0.0 RC1 © 2008-2019