Red Mosquito

Sorry if there was an old thread, link me to it if you can -- I was just wondering what people thought about these remastered releases. I'm making a CD for someone who doesn't know the band at all, and was trying to decide whether to get the remasters of VS/Vitalogy for the tracks I'm including from them. I think Ten definitely sounds a lot better on the remaster, but at least from listening to snippets on iTunes I can't tell much difference in vs and vitalogy

If you're mixing them with tracks from later albums, I would use the remasters for consistancy reasons. If you're concerned about having the best sound quality, I would use the originals.

I think the Vitalogy re-master is a lot better.

numbers wrote:I think the Vitalogy re-master is a lot better.

It's barely different - they just made it louder.

numbers, where do you most hear the difference? I mean, what differences, and what songs if any stand out?

They didn't remix Vs and Vitalogy (like they did for Ten), so they're identical mixes just made louder.

yofismom wrote:numbers, where do you most hear the difference? I mean, what differences, and what songs if any stand out?

maybe it's just because it's louder, but in the bass. I think the bass sounds better on most of the songs, Satan's Bed stands out.

Thanks guys.

numbers wrote:

yofismom wrote:numbers, where do you most hear the difference? I mean, what differences, and what songs if any stand out?

maybe it's just because it's louder, but in the bass. I think the bass sounds better on most of the songs, Satan's Bed stands out.

Yeah I can hear that too, and for those others posting above this is due to the mastering not mixing. Hence them being 'remasters'.

Birds in Hell wrote:They didn't remix Vs and Vitalogy (like they did for Ten), so they're identical mixes just made louder.

I'm pretty sure there was an interview with Brendan O'Brien where he said that specifically bout Vitalogy not being remixed. They were all happy with the mix. Or something along those lines.

I missed if they mentioned other remasters are on the way. Did they stop at Vitalogy? Are they gonna do the other albums. I sure would like Binaural on vinyl, but I don't wanna pay $400 for it.

Kelly Curtis mentioned in an interview on PJ chat last year that if there is enough demand then they will do deluxe reissues for them all but there's no specific time line. I would guess No Code might get reissued in the next 2-3 years.

I remember Ed and/or Jeff saying that they were not doing anything else with remasters until after the new album comes out.

I hope they forget the idea for further remasters, personally.

I think they've been pretty disappointing so far, especially compared to what other bands are doing/have done.

Very heavy on packaging, rather light on worthwhile content.

I thought the Ten Super Deluxe was great, and the remix in particular was great, though it was mastered too loud. What I really want is the band to take a time machine and go re-record the entire album in early '92 with Dave A, when they did Even Flow/State/Breath/etc.

The remastered Vs. definitely sounds more even...in retrospect the original Vs. released product just sounds "weird".

Vitalogy through Yield, every recording is perfect, so I'm glad not much was done with Vitalogy...just a little more compression and bass to bring it closer to modern standards. I think it was done very tastefully.

A No Code/Yield set ala Vitalogy/Vs. with a full unedited 3/5/98 would be awesome, plus extras (studio New Jeremy?) Then a Binaural/Riot Act with a straight-ahead-mixed Binaural as an alternate plus the tons and tons of extra songs recording during that era would be great. Finally a remastered Avocado with extras would be awesome, because what the hell happened with that? What we have is like a raw mixdown tape compared to Backspacer or even Riot Act.

I thought the Vs/Vitalogy box was something of an improvement on the Ten boxset, I thought the latter was a genuinely terrible product.

I've been disappointed with most reissue/remaster-type products in general. Just keep the damn thing in catalog to begin with and issue the extra material independently.

Indeed, some kind of rarities/outtakes/demos collection (they only got if half right with Lost Dogs) and a steady flow of archival live releases would be greatly preferred.

All bands, when they reach a certain point, provided they have the material to support it, should do something similar to Bob Dylan's Bootleg Series or Neil Young's Archives (I'm thinking of the single disc releases more than the mammoth 19 CD box set thing, which was too expensive for the amount of previously released material it contained, but even so). It keeps the catalog tidy and de-cluttered, and provides invaluable illumination to the contemporaneous releases to people who are interested.

Unfortunately, at this point, Pearl Jam's official discography is a heaping mess because of all the live material they've put out and all the "repairs" they've made to previously existing archival recordings. They would do well to have a tape archivist like Dick Latvala, someone to rummage through their vaults and pick the good stuff but actively ban the band from any involvement in the process. (For the record, I'm thinking this would be a job for someone like ridleybradout or Cameronia, not someone like Cameron Crowe or Brendan O'Brien.)

Kevin Davis wrote:They would do well to have a tape archivist like Dick Latvala, someone to sort through their archives but actively ban the band from any involvement in the process.

"Oh Beeeeaaaaaaaaaaaa
Oh Beeeeeaaaaaaaaaaayaaaaa!"

The fact that nobody said "you sure that's how you want it, Ed?..." (or, at least, nobody listened) doesn't inspire confidence that these guys will ever be hands-off enough to allow that to happen, but I live in hope.