Karantamba/Rolling Stones

look what this stereophile on Amazon has to say about the new Some Girls:

As a huge Rolling Stones fan I have to say I am disappointed in this remaster. It is one of my favorite Stones albums but this version on UMG is highly compressed with a major loss in any dynamic range it had.

Yes, the guitars are louder and even clearer in some cases and because of this, many of the songs seem to lose their swing. Oh, it rocks, alright, but the swing that was present in the Virgin issue of 'Respectable' is gone. The break in 'Miss You' (OOooohh ooohh, Everybody waits so loooong) loses it's impact as well as the vocals and Charlie's drums in 'Before They Make Me Run.' In the latter song, the drums used to kick and the chorus used to stand out from the rest of the recording, which it no longer does. The break at about 1:35 in 'Shattered' where the bass drum kicks in is a plodding mess and much clearer and listenable on the Virgin '94 issue. The record, as a whole, loses much of it's depth and warmness as a result.

Perhaps the biggest travesty, and I don't recall any other reviews mentioning this, but at the beginning of 'Beast Of Burden', Keith's guitar is in the right channel and in the left you hear an echoing or 'bleeding' effect of the guitar lines. It is plainly obvious on the Virgin issue and all previous issues of the recording. On the UMG this is all but GONE! Even when I isolated the left channel and turned it up it was close to inaudible. I put on the Virgin and it's very audible, even without much volume or isolation of the left channel.

If you want the issue that sounds better and sticks closer to the integrity of the original recording, seek out the '94 Virgin remaster and not this. If these sort of nuances are not an issue for you and just prefer loud guitars at the loss of any dynamic range, then by all means, fire away and pick up this UMG remaster. Those of you not familiar with the original recording will not notice a thing. Those of you who are familiar with it do not feel that an upgrade is necessary.

EMP was at UCLA last year, and I'm kicking myself every day for not going.  Oh well...two years.

The fact that the best band in the world hasn't sold 15,000 copies blows my mind. Then again who cares. I love them, my friends love them, and I'll see them live twice in June.

Well, I think the members of Wussy care, if just a little. Personally, I would like to see them make a modest living from their music just so that Chuck doesn't break his back.

Great Wussy article. Then again how could it not be right? The fact that the best band in the world hasn't sold 15,000 copies blows my mind. Then again who cares. I love them, my friends love them, and I'll see them live twice in June.

 

Wonderful piece on Wussy, Bob, and you're right. Four albums in--five if you count the acoustic one--and there's not a bad song on any of them. Not a one.

Nice Wussy piece!  Third-to-last paragraph: "my wife and I" or "my wife and me"?

I love Far Away Eyes and agree that the version preserved on Shine a Light is pretty great too. 

As a teenager in the late 70s, early 80s in Long Island, NY, the local radio station played Zeppelin-Stones-Beat​les-Who constantly, and they were considered the holy grail of classic rock.  Maybe that's why I love all four of those bands and heard their entire ouevres while in high school.   I classified Zep as heavy metal but noted they did branch out into other styles (blues, folk, art-rock, etc.).  The Beatles were Gods, and still are.  The Who were special - Quadrophenia and the debut were always my favorites -teen rebellion I guess.  Later The Who Sell Out became my fave.  The Stones?  They were Rock & Roll.  I got off on them musically - the riffs, the propulsion, the bluesy singing, and most of all the drums.  I remember reading Xgau in the RS Illustrated History of R&R stating something like if you don't like hearing the guitar and drums of this band you don't like rock at all - and that still defines the Stones for me.  Listened to Emotional Rescue 4 times over the last 2 days as a result of Xgau's mention of it in the above review, and it sounded fantastic  Especially Charlie.

Jesus, ****, I was too excited to catch Mr. Christgau's new article (am I too formal? I like to think I'm respectful of my elders, no disrespect, and surely even more so of my heroes), but goddamn!! Imagine, a great band like Wussy having sold so little. Even a little critical love, please? I know they're proud of Mr. Christgau's boosterism - the evidence is on their site - but how many reviews (that don't fade and thus depreciate by the second) can you point to; hell, where in today's rock scene (ha?), period, has the sense and taste for the real thing? Is there enough room? Depressing - excellent article, though.

A note on the Wussy's "recognition factors" that "take time to register":

I brought a couple of friends from Boston that were visiting to the Caked Shop show, they hadn't heard anything from Wussy and only agreed to come because it wasn't expensive (they had just paid more than a hundred bucks for a forthcoming Justice show...). They had a good time but the first band made the best impression and one of them commented on Wussy: "nice but a bit of a sonic blur".

Well English is not his mother tongue so lyrics may be harder to understand but the fact is that Wussy don't have a great hook yet and that hurts them.

PS: I thought that "Pulverized" was a bit weaker compared to Wussy's standard but hearing it live, well, it does exactly what it's called !