1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.

    Dismiss Notice

Rolling Stones : Let it Bleed

Discussion in 'Music' started by wil, May 16, 2005.
  1. Wil
    Wow. i bought the SACD (Hybrid) published by Abkco records (er?)

    And it sounds like utter and complete crap. Highs are crackly (Very), mids are congested and the bass is muddy.

    Ok,Granted i dont have an SACD player. But, i wasnt expecting the CD-Audio side of the CD to be that BAD.And, i only bought it cos it was cheap.

    Cant say the same for the SACD version of Pink Floyd's Dark side of the Moon though.heh.
     
  2. sacd lover
     
  3. elrod-tom
    I've posted about this before...that one is a REAL letdown. The SACD layer is just as bad...perhaps worse, as the defects are magnified.

    This is not the case for some others, like Their Satanic Majesties Request, Aftermath, and Beggar's Banquet. It must be reflective of the state of the original recordings, I guess.
     
  4. markl
    You can't polish a t*rd. All of those early Stones albums were recorded *very badly* even for the time. Bob Ludwig (who mastered the SACDs and their Redbook layers) did the best he could with the tapes he had. Bob does great work. He's very well-respected. At least know that as bad as they sound, those SACDs are *about* as good as they can sound.
     
  5. elrod-tom
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by markl
    You can't polish a t*rd. All of those early Stones albums were recorded *very badly* even for the time. Bob Ludwig (who mastered the SACDs and their Redbook layers) did the best he could with the tapes he had. Bob does great work. He's very well-respected. At least know that as bad as they sound, those SACDs are *about* as good as they can sound.



    Yeah, I know...it's just very disappointing to hear "Monkeyman" sound worse than it did on my old vinyl rig-recorded SA tape. I expected so much more...[​IMG]
     
  6. Wmcmanus
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by markl
    You can't polish a t*rd.



    Too funny, but so true! When these came out, I snapped them all up right away, but Let It Bleed and a couple of others were so bad that it took me over a year to get through them all. Every time I'd reach for one I'd ask myself, "Are you up for another round of Russian Roulete?" Finally, I resorted to listening to all of them for the first time while doing ironing. So once per week, I'd give one a spin, figuring that if I cranked it up high enough I'd at least enjoy the music, if not the recording itself. A couple of them have passed this initial test and have moved to the second phase which involves a more critical listening session with headphones. Their Satanic Majesties Request is definitely well done (B+ I'd say), but Let It Bleed is a D- at best.
     
  7. Old Pa
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Wil
    And it sounds like utter and complete crap. Highs are crackly (Very), mids are congested and the bass is muddy.



    The redbook remaster is pretty good stuff, but then I cut my teeth on this part of the Stones' career.
     
  8. hogger129
    I'm surprised.  This is one of their better-recorded albums and I thought the remaster sounded really, very good - even compared to my Japan London P33L disc.  Both beat the 80s ABKCO one though.
     
  9. stonesfan129
    Decided to revisit this since the 50th Anniversary Edition came out recently and I finally stopped by Walmart and picked up the CD other night. I am surprised by those who didn't like the 2002 ABKCO remaster. I thought that it sounded significantly better than the 1986 ABKCO especially in regards to the clarity and separation. It seemed to get a lot of positive feedback on various audio forums. I also have a WG London 820-052-2 and Japan London P33L. I did some reading and discovered that these London discs come from sources closer to the original and are supposed to be mastered better. But anyway, I gave it a listen and I found the 50th Anniversary Edition to sound very close to the 2002 ABKCO (maybe the same source?). I can still hear the crackling noises on "Gimme Shelter" that were on the 2002. I do not hear that on the Londons. I'm surprised they didn't find a cleaner source to use for that song. The bleedthrough of "Midnight Rambler" on "You Can't Always Get What You Want" sounds more buried in the mix to the point where you can barely hear it now. Some of the instruments seem to come through higher in the mix with the vocals more laid back. By no means a bad remaster, just that I really didn't find a whole lot different about it compared with the 2002. I listened to all three (2002, 50th, WG London) for awhile and my honest feelings are that I still prefer the sound on the WG London. I thought it sounded the closest to the US London stereo LP copy and they sound the least messed with (Iike as in I don't hear any added compression or wonky effects going on). You can play it loud.
     
    Last edited: Nov 29, 2019

Share This Page