(THE CLASH AND PUNK) ORIGINAL VINYL VS REMASTERED REISSUES

  ORIGINAL VINYL VS REMASTERED REISSUES

I’ve read many reviews extolling the virtues of “remastered reissues”, and their superiority, often to the original vinyl release. For me, I have to say, it’s a myth. There just ain’t anything wrong with the original vinyl. I have yet to hear a “remastered re-issue” that sounds superior, to my ears.

I recently read a review of a new Clash compilation – “Hits Back”. The reviewer’s opinion was that it shed a fresh new light on The Clash’s back catalogue. It prompted me to think I might get a copy of Hits Back, to hear these songs myself, in a new light. I was also prompted to give my Clash records a spin.

The reviewer recounted playing “Hits Back”, and being blown away by how it sounded. They also said they went to a shop that specialises in vinyl, and hearing “The story of The Clash” (which has a track list very similar to “Hits Back”) in the shop’s vastly superior sound system, didn’t stand up to “Hits Back” soundwise.

I played “The story of The Clash” album on vinyl. Sounded pretty fricken good to me.  Played The Clash first album on vinyl. Sounded pretty fricken good.  And I thought to myself, I could save the $20 I would have spent on
“Hits Back”, and buy some more vinyl.

The reviewer – now, the person knows their shit, and is on the money 99.9% of the time, and I have absolutely no interest in starting any kind of cyber war – but they’re a bit anti vinyl. Here’s a snippet of what they said in the review;

“You see, I know that some of you just love that crazy vinyl sound. It is so warm, so scratchy, so dusty, so coated in the turntable rumble of motors spinning and diamonds gouging away at your precious wobbly discs. It’s just so authentic. Pumped through the AM band and spewed out of transistor radios, we actually did hear music differently and our attempts to recreate these sounds created punk rock”.

We I don’t know about you, but I can’t hear the turntable rumble of motors when I play a record. And whilst I don’t have a top shelf sound system, it’s not some shitty old setup, but it is geared for playing vinyl. But I do love that (crazy?) vinyl sound.

Now, production on The Clash’s back catalogue increased exponentially with each record, you might say. The first album, while not being a benchmark of production qualities, isn’t some lo-fi distorted mono recording is it? Three cases in point; (depending on whether you have the UK or US version, of which I have both). “Clash City Rockers” is pretty shit, production-wise, and you’d have to change the entire sound of the song if you were going to beef it up, and it just wouldn’t be the same song. “White Riot” is a subject in point during the review of “Hits Back”;

“The bass is largely the central instrument even in the punkier first album songs (re-listen to White Riot and try to work out why you couldn’t play it in straight chords. It may be all hands on board for the intro but it backs off into sparse lead lines when the vocals come in and the bass is doing all the work). Perhaps this is why the remastering of this album has proved so successful. Paul Simonon’s playing skips and bounces. It damn near pirouettes”.

I dunno. The bass has always been pretty central and clear to me, on White Riot. And it sounds pretty bouncy. The diamonds haven’t gouged away the clarity thereof, either. And particularly on “Police and Thieves” the production is slightly better; the bass drives the song, the drums propel it, and Strummer’s guitar is through one speaker, complimenting Jones’ on the other.

The whole debate gets a bit arbitrary, really.

The question could be whether the person has actually listened to their vinyl recently, or do they have a system that can play vinyl properly, or do they have idealised notions of what the record sounded like, or is their stereo designed to play CD’s over vinyl, or do they actually like CD’s better, and so on.

The remastered reissues I’ve bought, just haven’t enhanced the sound of the album. “Your funeral my trial” by Nick Cave and the Bad Seeds is a vinyl favourite of mine, even having to change the record every two songs. (That’s where it works though, it gives the sound a unique dynamic – it’s a 45 rpm, and 45’s are cued louder and mastered to vinyl differently.) The reissue was (apparently) remastered, but I played the vinyl and CD back to back a few times, and couldn’t detect any difference in sound, and still reckoned the vinyl to sound better. The CD version of “Songs the Lord taught us” by the Cramps, I have to say (sorry Lux and Ivy) actually sounds worse, too clinical and cleaned up. The vinyl version sounds way better; there’s more distortion, reverb, and bottom end in there.

 I got a “deluxe reissue remastered for vinyl” of The Damned’s “Black album”. I shelled out for that one after buying an album by the Supersuckers (Get it Together) on the label that put it out. The Supersuckers album sounded amazing, primo, superb, the sound on that vinyl record was just amazing, there is so much life and energy captured in those grooves. Again, I listened to the original Black album, and the remastered album back to back, and couldn’t see how it had improved.

I’ve had a copy of the Saints “I’m Stranded on CD for ages. It’s been reissued on vinyl, but I found an original copy at a garage sale for $1. Although it’s not the greatest copy, it’s a little worn, the cover is slightly tatty, and so y’know, if I was to put it on ebay, it wouldn’t really fetch much in that condition, but I was still very happy with that score. And I maintain it sounds more lively than the CD, even with the little pops and scratches in there. I put it on the turntable, smiled and thought to myself  ”Now that’s the shit”............. Then there’s the ones that sound good either way; “Feel the Darkness” by Poison Idea sounds pretty much the same on vinyl or CD.

CD’s have their merits of course, as I’m sure many remastered reissues do.  This isn’t so much the question of ”do CD’s sound better than vinyl”, it’s just in my experience and opinion, reissues rarely sound better. I can’t answer whether CD’s sound better than vinyl; I’m biased towards vinyl, obviously. And instead of getting an ipod and downloading all my music onto it, I still seek out vinyl, old and new. It’s a personal thing. If you’re into vinyl, you like and understand it.  It doesn’t mean it’s the domain of crusty old audiophiles, even though I myself may be getting  Old, Loud, and Grotty. 

THE BOYS NEXT DOOR

The Lost & Brave Exhibitions

of the Boys Next Door 1977-1979

 

This has been in circulation since 2009 or 2010, and judging by the amount of shops and dealers carrying copies, there are a LOT of them or it has been repressed several times. I passed on this one a few times and recently picked up a copy.

Whilst I was aware this was a bootleg, I thought though perhaps it was semi-official, and that all the songs were demo versions. WRONG. This record is bootlegged up the arse. The main attraction here is the inclusion of the unreleased demos of “Sex Crimes” (which is the better of these two) and “Enemy of the State” which open the record. To my knowledge they’re unreleased anyway. These two songs are at least worthy for the rarity factor, and that that they show the Boys next Door at their fastest and rawest. These two sound like they’re sourced from a tape. “These boots are made for walking”, (credited here as “Boots”), Masturbation Generation”, and “Boy Hero” are from the Lethal Weapons compilation record from 1978. These 3 songs have the best audio quality on the record, although they still sound like they were sourced from a CD or tape.  “These Boots” and “Boy Hero” were released as a single in their own right, and this 7” (which comes in a plain chequered sleeve) commands high prices on auction sites by virtue of being Nick Cave’s first recorded release. “Scatterbrain” was a rare giveaway single from 1979, and although is technically a Boys Next Door release, has been featured on previous Birthday Party compilations, where it probably sits better sound-wise.

Side Two is the entire first side of the original Boys Next Door LP “Door Door”, and as I say, I thought they were demos, they’re not, they’re ripped from a CD or somesuch, so there’s nothing new there, and the audio quality is shit.  As an overall collection of songs though, this is not a bad album, so it’s shame about the quality

Package wise this is pretty crappy, but pretty average as far as bootlegs go. The cover looks like it was supposed to be screen printed originally, although it’s just someone’s “arty” (ha ha) interpretive drawing of the band (sans Rowland S Howard, even though he is credited on nthe front). There are different pressings; this is a blue cover, there is one in red which has red coloured vinyl (and costs slightly more), but there is nothing on the cover to indicate this. Some earlier pressings have an index label on the record, but this is a generic bootleg that just has a plain blue label, and you need to look at the etching on the run out groove to see which is side A, and which is side B...... The vinyl quality itself is pretty shit as well. This one came warped to buggery, there is a fucking great warp on the outer edge, so much that the needle has to be given a bit more weight to play the thing.

If your’e a big fan of Nick Cave/Boys Next Door/ Birthday Party, there is perhaps some worth for the first two songs for their collectability and rarity.