ROCKS OFF - The Rolling Stones Message Board
Licks World Tour 2002 - 2003


Bob Dylan's 30th Anniversary - MSG, NYC October 16, 1992
Jeff Christensen
WEBRADIO CHANNELS:
[Ch1: Sike-ay-delic 60's] [Random Sike-ay-delia] [Ch3: British Invasion]

[THE WET PAGE] [IORR NEWS] [IORR TOUR SCHEDULE] [SETLISTS 62-99] [THE A/V ROOM] [THE ART GALLERY] [MICK JAGGER] [KEITHFUCIUS] [CHARLIE WATTS ] [RON WOOD] [BRIAN JONES] [MICK TAYLOR] [BILL WYMAN] [IAN STEWART ] [NICKY HOPKINS] [MERRY CLAYTON] [IAN 'MAC' McLAGAN] [BERNARD FOWLER] [LISA FISCHER] [DARRYL JONES] [BOBBY KEYS] [JAMES PHELGE] [CHUCK LEAVELL] [LINKS] [PHOTOS] [MAGAZINE COVERS] [MUSIC COVERS ] [JIMI HENDRIX] [BOOTLEGS] [TEMPLE] [GUESTBOOK] [ADMIN]

[CHAT ROOM aka THE FUN HOUSE] [RESTROOMS]

NEW: SEARCH ZONE:
Search for goods, you'll find the impossible collector's item!!!
Enter artist an start searching using "Power Search" (RECOMMENDED) inside.
Search for information in the wet page, the archives and this board:

PicoSearch

ROCKS OFF - The Rolling Stones Message Board
Register | Update Profile | F.A.Q. | Admin Control Panel

Topic: 40 Licks and remasters Return to archive
08-13-02 06:45 AM
Mathijs On his website Nico Zentgraf describes the promo of the new remasters series (http://www.nzentgraf.de/books/news.htm):

"08/04/02A rare promo was made to promote the upcoming string of newly remastered abkco (was Decca/London) records which are due out in October this year. This promo includes 21 tracks taken from nearly all different upcoming releases. Is the sound quality really so much better than on the first incarnation of abkco CD's, done in 1986? Not to my ears".

So, it's gonna be a good year for us Stones fans!!! A complete remaster series that doesn't sound any better than the original London releases, the new "40 Licks" set with 36 tracks wich I have at least an 2 vinyl releases and 3 CD releases.....thank you very much Stones, for considering your fans.

Mathijs
08-13-02 09:00 AM
scull This sounds a bit worrying, all the hype around these remasters suggests big improvements in the sound has anyone else (apart from Nico) heard this promo, and if so, any comments on sound quality?
08-13-02 09:16 AM
T&A yes - there have been many recent reviews - and most of them are completely counter to this review.

Stop all the friggin' whining. Don't buy the damned things if you don't want to!

08-13-02 09:34 AM
scull Thank God for that! I'd have bought them anyway (they do look nice). I reckon that they're gonna sound fantastic.

T&A, are any of these reviews online anywhere?
08-13-02 10:14 AM
T&A scull - check the other messageboards like IORR and stonesdoug
08-13-02 10:37 AM
jb Mathjis, are you still protesting no new album and not attending any shows? I know you are a man of your word, so I certainly hope you are not using this post to re-engage with the Stones and justify any concert attendance.
08-13-02 10:50 AM
Jumacfly Mathjis you ve won the tittle , you re the most boring and anger Stones fan!!!

the box will come one day , but as Keith said :" a box set?? but we re not dead, only dead bands release box set!!!"
and i m sorry i agree with him...

Cheers Stones fans, REAL STONES fans!!
08-13-02 11:46 AM
tumblingdice This is what was posted in Sticky Finger Journal earlier today by Skippy.

NEW ABKCO REMASTERS SOUND GREAT
by Skippy


Abkco's new promo release 21 X 5 sampler of the upcoming SACD hybrid of the
Rolling Stones remastered albums gives us a peak of what we are to expect
from the 21 SACDs coming our way.

Since these tracks are remixed from the master tapes we have different mixes
of the Stones material we are use to. Having new mixes is unavoidable no
mater how much
Abkco and they're counterparts may have or may not have tried to stay true
to the original mixes.

Do these remixes change the songs? The answer is yes. Are they better, worse
or different you may ask? A little different is my answer. However many are
better end the jury is still out on others.

The older material has a more noticeable different mix on many tracks while
the post 1967 doesn't have noticeable differences over all.

Mosty the songs on the new sampler all have a new mix and improved sound.
What is most noticeable
about the older material is the mix and the newer material is the improved
sound. The sond has improved throughout. Twenty-one songs is only a small
sampling.

It's All Over Now, Jumping Jack Flash, Honky Tonk Woman, Factory Girl and
Brown Sugar jumped out at me as terrific ground breaking improvements!

Jumping Jack Flash gave me goose bumps and made me teary-eyed since it is such a
great improvement. The song is stronger and more clear than ever! From the
beginning of the song all of the way through it had a harder edge! The drums
pounded harder the guitar was in my face. This song never rocked
so hard! It's great! I can't put into words how great it has become. It's a
major improvement like many of the twenty-one SACD sampler shows.

Jumping Jack Flash like many of these new releases has more separation than
most of it's predecessors but they are not wide stereo. It's not just the
over all great sound and fabulous mix of Jumping Jack Flash that makes this
new version. It's the clarity! I believe this separation comes from the fact
that the technology of producing recorded music has improved greatly that
everything is much clearer now to hear. What impressed me most is at the end
of Jumping Jack Flash we can now hear guitar work that was very buried
before. Now this guitar stands out clearly and adds great dimensions to the
song and helps take it from a pop tune to more serious heavier rock!

I was never crazy over Brown Sugar. I held the track in the highest esteem.
I've analyzed it over the years and
was in awe over it magnificence. Even with my love of the Rolling Stones and
it didn't 'get my motor running'. I always preferred the 1976 Love You Live
version.

Brown Sugar has a noticeable difference, I feel, for the better. It's not
that barrage of sound that it once came charging at us. It has more clarity
and the mix brings out more of the song. The mix weaves more than meshes.
It's like waves flowing one on top of the other. It reminds me of the mix of
Goats Head Soup where
each instrument would take turns to rise to the forefront of the mix at the
appropriate time. It's not that radical but there's a definite difference.
I'm not sure if it's the mix or clarity factor or both but the lead guitar
that was buried throughout the song is up front and most prevalent. I love
this version of Brown Sugar, for me it's a vast improvement.

The new Factory Girl is a sonic wonder. This new version is beyond great!
Factory Girl is the prime example of the great achievements ABKCO has made
with these remasters. The clarity of Factory Girl is like taking cotton out
of me ears for the first time while listing to it. The stereo separation is
beautiful. The fidelity is unbelievable! It's not just the range of highs
and low or over all clarity that makes it great but the sound of each
instrument. The tones of the guitars never sounded so rich. The percussion
of the wood that is struck during the song never sounded so much like wood.
Such great definition! The bass guitar is very clear like it is throughout
the sampler. The sound of each instrument is much better not because of some
studio wizardry but because we can now hear them much better. How can I say
the instruments never sound so good, so clear like we are now listing from
inside the studio instead of down the hall. For me it's like hearing a band
live at the sonicly perfect Tower Theatre than anywhere else. Like I said,
it's like were in the studio with the band!

Of course many fans have had copies of many excellent true stereo versions
of Honky Tonk Woman, Jumping Jack Flash and Satisfaction not to mention
Between the Buttons and Aftermath but the samples here show major
differences. So, don't part with those old CDs. These new sampler doesn't
feature any wide stereo versions like we have from some rare previous
official releases.

Satisfaction is in narrow stereo which is much different from the wide
stereo version from over a decade ago. I'll have to give this one a listen
some more. I'm not sure if the fuzz tone guitar is a sharp as it should be.
Also a round of "Hay, Hey, Hey" may be up too far in the mix. (I've only
played this sampler twice so far.)

We've had some great true stereo versions of Honky Tonk Woman before but
it's better here. This to the jam solo part and you'll hear more than ever
of what's going on.

2120 South Michigan is a beautiful version of the long rendition. It's All
Over Now sounds great too!

Miss Amanda Jones has an interesting mix. Much clearer. Playing it my car
some instruments
seem too far in the back ground. While playing the song on my home system
loudly, the mix sound cool. For general use I don't like it.

Dandelion may have a little too much clarity as I don't like this mix at my
initial listenings. It seems too separated. On the chorus you can distinctly
hear three different voices as opposed too one harmony. It's interesting but
I don't like it.

I Am Waiting is a nice improvement in sound.

Midnight Rambler from Get Yer YaYAs Out has a new better sound. The guitars
are more clear and forceful. Overall the instruments are slightly more
separated. It has better sound but other than those things I didn't notice
any major differences.


--------SFJ--------


08-13-02 11:51 AM
patioaintdry wondering if the playback was on CD player or SACD player.
08-13-02 08:17 PM
gotdablouse Skippy's a massive fan, but he's not known for his objectivity...unlike the great Nico Zentgraff !
08-14-02 12:40 AM
HardKnoxDurtySox I have read a lot of great reviews by people who have listened to them in the SACD format but I havn't heared much of anything at all about them in regular CD format. Lets hope there is a noticable difference from the originals in both.
08-14-02 12:58 AM
gotdablouse I don't know how much you know about the SACD format, but with the little I know, I can't think of a single good reason why it would sound any better than on CD ! Other than offering a sampling rate of 48khz/channel, there really isn't much to SACD. I don't see how old master tapes would even begin to max out the 22.05khz/channel sampling rate of CDs...
08-14-02 06:49 AM
egon seem to me this is just one of those endless discussions.

I like cd's; none of those annoying tics like you have on vinyl. that's the only reason!
I don't give a fuck about aad,add,ddd,double bit, triple bit, or holy bit. every remastered cd I致e ever listened to sounded the same as the normal one. (the only difference being that now I owned 2 copies of the same album and had less money in my wallet)

my stereo cost about usd 2000, in total, so don't think I値l hear the difference between the old cd's and the sacd once. (I bet the discs will be gold!)

but if you have spent pretty much every penny on your stereo, I知 sure you will hear the difference. (that is if you still have money left to buy them)

so it doesn't matter who says what, it's all personal taste or in what way you listen to music.

I知 only pissed off by the fact that they will put bonus tracks on these sacd cds, so in the end I値l still have to buy them.

08-14-02 08:29 AM
Sir Stonesalot >I知 only pissed off by the fact that they will put bonus tracks on these sacd cds, so in the end I値l still have to buy them.<

Where did you see that they will have bonus tracks? From what I read these albums will NOT have any extra tracks.
08-14-02 09:46 AM
Boomhauer It will be interesting to see the differences in remastering between the ABKCO stuff and the FORTY LICKS disc 1. I assume the STones are just gonna have it done with the latest technology, and not deal with the SACD.

I think Klein is just trying to make more money by selling a single disc for around a $19 list price.
08-14-02 10:35 AM
egon
quote:
Sir Stonesalot wrote:
Where did you see that they will have bonus tracks? From what I read these albums will NOT have any extra tracks.



i think right here on the board. wasn't it in the article from that guy of mtv? he was at the press thing for it.
the article explained that some songs were recorded to fast, so ended up on the album to slow and this was corrected. also beggers or bleed was originally ment to have no pauses between the songs and they would correct this as well. and it said something about putting extra songs on the album.
maybe it wasn't in this article, but i definitely read it somewhere. (doesn't necessarily mean it's true...)

hope i didn't get you too excited?

08-14-02 10:59 AM
egon
quote:
Sir Stonesalot wrote:
Where did you see that they will have bonus tracks? From what I read these albums will NOT have any extra tracks.



found it! look at the last line:



ROCKS OFF - The Rolling Stones Message Board: Remastered collection includes original U.K. versions and bonus tracks


Author Message
CS


Posted 06-29-02 05:38 PM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(The Rolling Stones Remastered collection 22 albums, including original U.K. versions and bonus tracks from back in the day will be released on August 20.)

The Stones Revealed (The Good Stuff) On Super CDs: Kurt Loder Reports
06.27.2002 12:00 PM EDT



The Rolling Stones
Photo: ABKCO Records


NEW YORK OK, this is weird. I'm standing in a ridiculously super-luxe reception hall on the fourth floor of the Russian Tea Room on West 57th Street. The place is a riot of red plush and Deco-to-the-max fireplaces and ... yes, those appear to be hand-carved bears holding up the mantelpieces. Seated before me on a velvety couch are four Boomer-type people, all sipping wine and politely jiggling their toes to the music issuing from an elaborate stereo rig about 25 feet in front of us.

We're listening to the Rolling Stones.

No, not the latter-day Rolling Stones of Steel Wheels and Bridges to Babylon the stuff you've probably passed over in utter bafflement, after hearing these guys over-hyped as legends for so long by your parents. (Grandparents?)

No, this is the Rolling Stones of the 1960s, when they could lay straight-faced claim to being one of the most monumental rock and roll bands in the world. Back when the late multi-instrumentalist Brian Jones (sitar! vibes!) and the indispensable bassist Bill Wyman were in the band. Back when they were doing blow-you-away albums like Aftermath, Between the Buttons, Let It Bleed, the unjustly underestimated psychedelic opus Their Satanic Majesties Request. The music that's a central source of inspiration for the garage-rock revival that's now threatening to kick major butt on today's constipated pop-music scene. (Check out these vintage press photos of the band).

But so what, you say all this old Stones stuff is still readily available, having long ago been converted into gleaming CD product.

Well, forget that. What we're listening to here is part of an ambitious reissue project called The Rolling Stones Remastered, for which ABKCO, the company that controls much of the band's classic material, has sought out the original, first-generation master recordings, and had them remastered using SACD (Super Audio Compact Disc) technology.

The SACD process features sound sampled at a much higher rate than that currently used in making CDs, and the result vividly evident on these revamped Rolling Stones records is vintage music that suddenly sounds as if it's had 35 years' worth of cobwebs blown off of it. I know this may seem an eye-rolling assertion, but it really is like being in the studio when the band laid down the tracks.

Like you, I suspect, I am not a high-end audio person. I know I'll never be in the market for a $65,000 pair of speakers or a $12,000 turntable. (These things actually exist.) I'm not on any audio company's freebie list, either. And while I realize these remastered Stones CDs naturally sound super-good being played on a $3,000 Sony SACD player routed through $7,000 Pass amplifiers and a $15,000 pair of Eggleston speakers, I'm relieved to learn that some SACD players are available at around $200. So I can actually get one. And hey, so can you. (Probably, right?)

And even if you can't, these new CDs as I learned when I tossed a sampler disc on my nothing-special home player still sound noticeably better on current equipment than any previous Rolling Stones releases. Maybe even the vinyl originals. (Ultra-picky, vinyl-loving high-end audio buffs appear to be unusually excited about SACDs, too.)

There are also some interesting factlets about these Stones reissues. For example, in the course of remastering, it was discovered that two of the group's early hits "Mother's Little Helper" and "Have You Seen Your Mother, Baby, Standing in the Shadow?" were originally recorded on a faulty tape deck, which resulted in a slightly slower-than-intended master. Now, decades later, this flaw has been rectified. And the celebrated 1969 album Let It Bleed, we learn, was originally intended by the Stones to run continuously without track-separating grooves of silence as a single, album-length composition. Now, at last, in remastered form, it does. (Although you can still program the separate tracks at home.)

I know: Here we go again. The ever-voracious record business is once again trying to compel us to re-buy all our old albums in a spiffy new form. (And in a reprise of the old VHS-versus-Beta video wars of the 1970s, there's a competing DVD-based audio format that also utilizes the new higher sampling rate.)

I much resent this sort of thing, too. But SACD is a quantum leap for digital sound, a revelation, really. Time takes an unavoidable toll, and I never imagined I'd ever be jazzed about another new Rolling Stones release. But remastered, these great old albums sound new all over again. And jazzed I am.

Kurt Loder

(The Rolling Stones Remastered collection 22 albums, including original U.K. versions and bonus tracks from back in the day will be released on August 20.)

08-15-02 05:50 AM
Yyteri Beach Well, this is just another conversation which never ends.

I myself like very much LP's and I don't even have many CD's.
I think those old original LP's have the perfect sound for the Stones - rough, dirty and irresistible :-)

Many remastered records are poor just because they have made the sound too clear. Like ZZTop's seventies records: in LP they sound marvelous but in CD they sound too clean.

But this is just my opinion. You who read this might disagree - and I don't give a f**k ;-)
08-15-02 10:15 AM
T&A maybe a voice of reason needs to chime in:

What the hell is wrong with the discs we already own? They sound great! I'm not planning on buying these regardless of whether the sound has been upgraded. I love the ones I've got...I love the LPs, too.


On June 16, 2001 the hit counter of the WET page was inserted here, it had 174,489 hits. Now the hit counter is for both the page and the board. The hit counter of the ITW board had 1,127,645 hits when it was closed and the Coolboard didn't have hit counter but was on line only two months and a half.
Rolling Stones tour 2002 - Rolling Stones World Tour - Rolling Stones on the road