Conference cookie::notes$archive:cd_v1

    Yes! I meant to comment on those, too. 
    
    I wonder what the range of albums is in this remastered series.
    
    I'd like "Between the Buttons" for Christmas...
    

    I have the "new" LET IT BLEED.  I haven't had the chance to A/B the new
    version with the old import version, but I would guess that there is a
    very small improvement if any.  The "new" liner notes are much nicer
    though - the "old" London (import) version doesn't have the art from
    the reverse side of the cover (just the song titles) but the "new"
    version has the back cover art and the inner liner notes (including who
    played on what track and the classic "THIS ALBUM SHOULD BE PLAYED
    LOUD").  I noticed that much of the Stones catalog is out under the
    Abkco (sp?) label (yes including BETWEEN THE BUTTONS).

    GAS

    I purchased a couple, but one at a new cd store in downtown Manchester,
    called, "CD's Unlimited," and another at Lechmere in the Mall of
    New Hampshire.  The two discs are "Let it Bleed" and "Beggar's
    Banquet."  The sound quality on both is superb and the performance,
    of course, is excellent.  I have had trouble finding "Beggar's Banquet"
    anywhere, but the cd store downtown (see note) is packed.
                              
                           -Superclam

    Today I stumbled on half a dozen (or so) Stones releases that I haven't
    seen before on CD.  They were all from the Rolling Stones Records/
    Atlantic Records period, but were Rolling Stones Records/Columbia
    releases (they must have bought the catalog when the stones changed
    labels?).
    
    At Rockit in Nashua: 
    	It's Only Rock and Roll
    	Black and Blue
    	Some Girls
    	Emotional Rescue
    	Sucking in the Seventies
    	Made in the Shade
    	Tattoo You

    Brian

	A lot of Stones CDs have been out for some time.  A new batch has been
recently been released, many on Abco.  I have many of the early Stones CDs.
In general they are much superior to the records, in large part because the
Stone's LP pressings are or were so lousy (especally the Abco ones).
My LP of Beggar' Banquet (which I bought at least 10 years ago) is actually
wedge-shaped in cross section. 

	The CDs are also have better bass than many of the LPs.  Hiss is about
the same, or a little less.  Stereo separation is also very good, where the
Stones used stereo! ( the first couple of lp/cds are mono).

	There seem to be 2 releases of Beggar's : the one I got many months
ago, which says "digitally remastered" in a small diagonal strip on the top
left of the case, and the one out now which has this printed on a large
horizontal band on the bottom, as do all the recent releases.

	I don't have Between the Buttons yet but I do have Stones Now!, 
December's Children, 12x5, Aftermath, Beggar's, Let It Bleed.
The recent Abco release of Aftermath is the American version of this album -
DON'T BUY IT!  The earlier London release is the English verison, and has
3 or 4 extra tracks (Think, What to Do, and some other's I can't remember)
and runs 53 minutes long.  Pretty good for 1965, eh?  It also has Mother's
Little Helper swapped for Paint it Black, I believe.  This is an excellent CD.

I am not sure which version of Between the Buttons was just released but I'll
wager it the American one, if its on Abco.

Stones Now! and December's Children (especially December's) are greatly 
improved by the remastering to orginal mono.  Actually they did find some
original steroo tracks for Now!, such as Heart of Stone.  the LP of December's
that is available now is a simulated stereo horror, the worst one I know of.
The CD is clean and clear mono.

Josh

    Last night I purchased Sticky Fingers and it is amazing! The stereo
    separation will blow you away! There is some background hiss, but
    the sonics are incredible. There is one thing to beware of though,
    this album was recorded with distortion. So, when you hear some
    of the distortion on the guitar riffs it was intentionally put there
    by the Stones. Classics like Brown Sugar, Bitch, Wild Horses, Sister
    Morphine all sound great. Can't You Hear Me Knockin' is probably
    the best sounding track on the CD - rock 'n' roll the way it's meant
    to be!
    
    John

    I forgot to mention that Rock 'n Mania in Framingham has *all* the
    Rolling Stones CD's. The new releases have all been digitally
    remastered. 
    
    John

                
    So how does the zipper look on a jewel box?
    
		    						-mr. bill

    
    
    	The *NEW* releases are in black boxes, which ABKO is part of
    	Polygram.  The other releases were by Columbia. I did not
    	purchase Made In The Shade, because it was not the newer one.
    	Maybe I will try, besides I get 25% off for working at a record
    	store.....
    
    				Mike
    

	The Sticky Fingers CD is a horribly botched remix.

	The bass below around 300 Hertz is from 6 to 15 dB LOWER than
	the Mobile Fidelity 1/2 Speed Master, of the regular lp pressing,
	both of which I have.  (I have the Mo Fi Stones box set)
	The hiss is the same as the 1/2 speed but thats to be expected, given
	the way the Stones recorded.

	I am ** EXTREMELY ** disappointed in the CD.

	The remix does benefit in giving clearer sound in the mid and hi range,
	but the bass is just LOST.  You can hear this, and even SEE it on
	a spectrum analyzer (in my case, an Audio Control C101).

	I was so shocked at the lack in bass that I wonder if someone
	at the plant, or the remix studio, goofed and accidently hit the
	'bass cut' control.  I compared the 1/2 speeds of Beggars Banquet
	and Let It Bleed to the CDs, and my 'regular' lps.  In both cases
	the CD and the half speed are fairly similar (lets say, within 3 db) 
	in bass content relative to the mid-hi range.  And the Cd and 1/2
	speeds are both better than the lp.

	Anybody else out there concur?
		
	I just can hardly believe that Abko would SCREW UP so badly.
	
	'I got the blues'
		Josh

I have no trouble believing Abcko could screw up so badly.  Just look at what 
lousey quality the original London releases are!  One can barely make out 
individual instruments, and even a good graphic equaliser can't improve much 
on the sound.  I found the Decca imports far superior, thiough the difference 
was not quite so dramatic as between domestic and import Beatles albums.

Stones albums from Warner/Atlantic have been of decent quality, which is 
typically the case from records manufactured at WB/Atco plants (especially the 
New York plant).

Now they're on CBS, which has improved for new releases but has lowered the 
quality considerably on the "nice price" reissue series.  Are the "nice price" 
records available on CD, and if so are they cheaper or paired in two's?  The 
dynamic range of "nice price" LP's is almost non-existant, and the frequency 
responbse is pitiful.

The early Stones albums are some of the most poorly recorded records I've ever 
heard, althiough the REALLY early British mono sounds better than the 
reprocerssed American stereo versions.

Apparantly, these CD's go back to original tapes that were actually in 
stereo?  And what's the deal with the two versions?  British CBS has rights 
now to all Stones or what?  And British CD's aren't available now that Abcko's 
making them here?  I'm confused!

Unlike with The Beatles, the American STones albums are more chronological 
than the British ones.  The Stones were more popular here than there, so they 
released stuff on albums here that got held back in England.  There's still 
more consistency to the British albums, and the UK Aftermath was the longest 
pop album of all time until Sgt. Pepper or Abbey Road (I forget which was 
longer) came out.  There's a lot of material that wasdn't released here too, 
although some of it might have popped up on More Hot Rocks.

I'm confused about why they made the imports available and then issues CD's of 
the AMerican versions.  Also, what's holding up Beatles CD's?  And why are the 
American albums still avaialble when EMI announced it was deleting them in 
favour of the original British versions?  Are the two connected?

				Mark