With 15 singles down and 5 more to go, there's a total of 69 songs so far in Recycle, and my friend Bruce has done the audio transfer on all but one song - the remix of Paradise, which was done by our friend Mr. Analog Loyalist over at TPOIT. I think Bruce has done a stellar job, but he himself says in hindsight he would approach EQing the tracks differently, matching everything to the warmth of the vinyl tracks as opposed to the muddiness of Substance.
While Bruce has preserved everything as it was originally released, TPOIT has respectfully stepped forward and offered his own fresh take on the two 1987 re-recordings included with Touched By The Hand Of God, along with two possible explanations for why the originals sound so off:
Idle, restless speculation #1: They were in a rush to prepare Substance and caught [Anthony H. Wilson] off-guard when going into the studio in May 1987 to re-record these, so the resulting tracks were never properly mastered in the first place. They sound flat, lifeless enough that this could be a very real possibility.
Idle, restless speculation #2: Having just come off the Hague all-digital True Faith/1963 sessions, the band themselves recorded all-digitally as well (proof? None.) and didn't get the EQ dialed in just right. Perhaps the monitors they were using were abnormally brittle-sounding and mixing to those means the resulting product is lifeless everywhere else?
So, for those of you who'd like to hear them, download this zip file (24 MB).
This version of Temptation and the non-dub '87 re-recording of Confusion will appear in this blog later, in a bundle of tracks from '86-'87 to sit alongside Brotherhood.
Have to say, Temptaion sounds great! Thanks POIT!
ReplyDeleteMy 'idle speculation' is that both of your 'idle speculations' are possible/probable.
ReplyDeleteAfter reading Mr Hook's book regarding Fac.51 being such a 'money pit'. It could be that Substance was released in order to continue financing the Hac. and was therefore released in haste.
I seem to remember reading somewhere that the ALL digital system they were using to record in this period was [a]recently introduced and [b]particularly 'bass light'. I have always thought that; Brotherhood, for example, was particularly lacking in 'bottom end'. Although, the instruments that they were utilising may have contributed to this as well. Emulator's for example,[IMHO] were never the 'bassiest' of synth's/sampler's.
hey 50 is there any other way to contact with little priv i want to do a project of my own. Of course but really would like an honest opinion first trying to do the marc almond stuff the really rare stuff the Virgin 10'' Singles and stuff plz let me know tnx
ReplyDeleteSubstance as a whole has fairly muffled highs. Given its vintage, I had wrongly assumed that it would have been a flat transfer, but the corresponding UK vinyl is consistently brighter. Had I realized this sooner, I would've taken a very different approach to the entire project.
ReplyDeleteI don't know whether Substance was deliberately mastered with less highs (possibly because CDs back then might have seemed much brighter than vinyl on the average system?) or it was a limitation in either the monitoring set-up or whatever system they used to transfer it to digital, but the rolled-off highs are also the case for the early UK CD singles, like TBTHOG, Fine Time, etc., so I don't think it had anything to do with Substance being "rushed".
FWIW, the early Canadian CD singles seem to have less bass than the UK counterparts, as well as a boost in the upper-mids and low highs. So, UK CDs sound muffled, Canadian ones sound tinny.
@Music Archivist - you can reach me through my website www.50poundnote.net.
ReplyDeleteInteresting - I think the "new" tracks you've presented are a little overly bassy (to the point of being a bit boomy/muffled) but they definitely sound more alive than the original tracks, which are very flat.
ReplyDeleteI am an audio professional and I appreciate the work that all you folks are putting in. If I were doing this project I'd go for making everything sound good, not necessarily true to the original releases (which by and large are not that good).
jsd: I agree they are perhaps a bit bassy, but boomy/muddy just depends on what you're monitoring with. My setup presents the bass with good clarity, I'd go so far as to say with even greater clarity than the original!
ReplyDeleteI also agree with your sentiments - if we were to task poor Bruno with the odious task of starting it all over again, good sound in and of itself should be the objective, but with things the way they are to this point, it's still better than anyone could ever have expected and a VERY welcome gift to the community.