Nirvana - In Utero (September 24, 2013)

[Fuzzcharger]

The Live and Loud version of Lithium is really good. The running order of the set list has a weird flow especially the second half.

[Wendy Carlos's Twin]

I like Albini and I like his 2013 mix but I think I prefer the standard mix.

Well it's not meant to be a "serious" remix of the album. They deliberately made it different. They really should have called it an alternate version or something.

[Birds in Hell]

I like Albini and I like his 2013 mix but I think I prefer the standard mix.

Well it's not meant to be a "serious" remix of the album. They deliberately made it different. They really should have called it an alternate version or something.

Yeah, it's definitely not intended to be taken as the definitive version; it's an enjoyably different perspective.

[zeb]

Well yeah, of course.

[Kevin Davis]

Is the "Sappy" on CD1 the same as the version on the "No Alternative" CD?

[Wendy Carlos's Twin]

Is the "Sappy" on CD1 the same as the version on the "No Alternative" CD?

People are saying it's a remix, but I haven't heard it yet.

[Birds in Hell]

Is the "Sappy" on CD1 the same as the version on the "No Alternative" CD?

People are saying it's a remix, but I haven't heard it yet.

Sappy, Moist Vagina and I Hate Myself and Want to Die are all new Albini mixes.

Marigold is the same mix as on the HSB single.

[Kevin Davis]

How would you say the new mixes stack up to the old ones on those tracks, Spenno?

[Birds in Hell]

How would you say the new mixes stack up to the old ones on those tracks, Spenno?

I only gave them a cursory listen thus far but they didn't strike me as dramatically different from the originals (I Hate Myself... has a longer intro with more band banter, however).

[Birds in Hell]

I feel like I should also point out that the original 1993 mixes of the album sound better here than they ever have.

Albini was famously unhappy with the mastering of his mixes on the original CD but they've really done this thing right - especially as they've included both the Albini and Scott Litt mixes of Heart-Shaped Box, All Apologies and Pennyroyal Tea.

Just an incredibly well thought-out package.

[Fuzzcharger]

How would you say the new mixes stack up to the old ones on those tracks, Spenno?

I only gave them a cursory listen thus far but they didn't strike me as dramatically different from the originals (I Hate Myself... has a longer intro with more band banter, however).

The new Sappy doesn't seem to have as much punch in the guitars as the No Alternative version to my ears. I do like how there's a bit more time for the room mics to run before the takes start.

[Wendy Carlos's Twin]

I'm glad to hear that it's good, for the most part. Every posthumous Nirvana release starting with "Muddy Banks" has been a shitstain on their catalog. Albini really saved this one.

[Birds in Hell]

Every posthumous Nirvana release starting with "Muddy Banks" has been a shitstain on their catalog. Albini really saved this one.

Agreed.

[Fuzzcharger]

I thought the Reading DVD looked and sounded great.

[Kevin Davis]

"Muddy Banks" was such a weird album--I always got the sense, for whatever reason, that it was sort of hastily thrown together with the idea that it was the only posthumous Nirvana record that was ever going to come out, that it was supposed to be some "final cap" on the Cobain legacy or something like that. I don't know why I always got that completely arbitrary, unprompted feeling--probably because the record came out when I was 13 and you think stupid shit like that when you're 13. There are some great performances on it but the sequencing is so lopsided and the sound quality so variable from track to track that it makes for a really unsatisfying listen. I did like the "Live at Reading" set pretty well, though--what were you guys' objections to that? Sound quality? Bad gig? Incomplete? All of the above?

I've made it a policy to pass on these deluxe reissue/remaster things (I definitely passed on the "Nevermind" one) but you guys are tempting me with this one.

[Birds in Hell]

I thought the Reading DVD looked and sounded great.

I was quite disappointed in the audio mix on the Reading DVD, same goes for the Paramount and Unplugged releases.

Generally I'm more interested in audio than I am video, so the CD version of the Reading CD set bugged me more than the DVD (which I've probably only watched once). It's poorly edited, the quality of the mixing left quite a lot to be desired and the crowd noise seemed overbearing.

[ridleybradout]

Really enjoying the 2013 mix so far - Unit Shifter sounds properly raucous

Has it been confirmed that there definitely won't be a Blu-Ray version of Live & Loud? Can't imagine it was captured in a format that would justify HD...

[Wendy Carlos's Twin]

"Muddy Banks" was such a weird album--I always got the sense, for whatever reason, that it was sort of hastily thrown together with the idea that it was the only posthumous Nirvana record that was ever going to come out, that it was supposed to be some "final cap" on the Cobain legacy or something like that. I don't know why I always got that completely arbitrary, unprompted feeling--probably because the record came out when I was 13 and you think stupid shit like that when you're 13. There are some great performances on it but the sequencing is so lopsided and the sound quality so variable from track to track that it makes for a really unsatisfying listen.

What they should have done was transfer every live multi-track they could find, and piece together an album from those tapes, all newly mixed to sound consistent all the way through. Instead they just grabbed what was already mixed and handy and threw a cheap compilation together. A mix tape that any one of us could have made. And some of the choices make no sense. Why do we need songs with Chad Channing? They only used one song from Seattle 93 & one from Seattle 94...all of the other In Utero stuff was from hissy cassettes. "Sliver" is a particularly awful version....they couldn't have picked a worse version to release, but that's what they did. If you look at what they have in terms of multi-tracks, there is definitely a great live album there. They didn't even come close!

Sound quality? Bad gig? Incomplete?

Bad Mix. Bad Gig. DVD is complete, CD is edited, doesn't matter...the whole show sucks.

[Fuzzcharger]

So tell us what you really think Wendy.

[Birds in Hell]

Bad Mix. Bad Gig. DVD is complete, CD is edited, doesn't matter...the whole show sucks.

Agree, I've never understood why that show is so frequently cited as being a high-water mark for the band: they kind of sucked. Particularly in comparison to a legit blistering performance like the Paramount show.

I've never been very fond of those mid/late 1992 Euro shows generally. They're kind of blah.