3rd Album Deluxe - Bill Levenson drops a hint?

[bobbydriver]

Mono-mania!

1) We don?t know for sure yet whether the mono mix is a contemporary fold-down. There is still a possibility that they found a proper mono mix in the archives.
2) How about this for a justification regardless? Anyone who heard the (stereo mix of the) album on AM radio in 1969 would have been hearing a mono mix, so in some ways, regardless of when the mono mix was created ? it could be considered an ?authentic 1960?s listening experience?

[bleach]

The promo press push has started - 'Guardian' (UK)

"The Velvet Underground's classic third album gets a 45th anniversary reissue
Including new and reworked versions of their self-produced third album, as well as live footage from San Francisco?s The Matrix, the 1969 LP gets a bumper six CD release"

http://www.theguardian.com/music/2014/o ... ry-reissue

[Elvis Plebsley]

I don't think that Steve Nelson "owns" the Professor recordings. I understand the master tapes have been with Universal for a long time, and were even remastered ready for release some years ago

That rather drives a coach and horses through that theory. The point still stands that just because someone says that this or that recording of the band is the best, it ain't necessarily so.

As you say, would like to see that footage

[rnranimal]

Mono-mania!

1) We don?t know for sure yet whether the mono mix is a contemporary fold-down. There is still a possibility that they found a proper mono mix in the archives.
2) How about this for a justification regardless? Anyone who heard the (stereo mix of the) album on AM radio in 1969 would have been hearing a mono mix, so in some ways, regardless of when the mono mix was created ? it could be considered an ?authentic 1960?s listening experience?

1) No, we can't know with 100% certainty until release, but there's no indication they've all the sudden found a true mono mix in the archives after having used a fold down for the LP set. That's very wishful thinking.
2) So push the mono button on your amp. By this logic, every 60s stereo album that doesn't have a proper mono mix should be released as a fold down. How about making it sound real crappy like AM radio, too? Not to mention that unlike, say the Stones or the Beatles, I think almost everyone who heard the VU album in '69 did so in stereo on a turntable. How many stations do you think even played the single, let alone the album? People can create their own "authentic 1960's listening experience" if they want to degrade the way they listen to music, but it shouldn't be sold in that inferior state.

[bobbydriver]

Hey I?m just playing devil?s advocate here, as I can?t quite grasp why people are so upset that a (probably new) mono mix is being included. The implication being that if it were an authentic vintage mono mix that had actually been released then it would be in some way ?better??

[Kill Mick]

Hey I?m just playing devil?s advocate here, as I can?t quite grasp why people are so upset that a (probably new) mono mix is being included. The implication being that if it were an authentic vintage mono mix that had actually been released then it would be in some way ?better??

I think you've answered your own question with the use of that word - I think "authentic" = "better", fake = crap. I'm not upset by the mono mix, I just don't see the point of it. You could create mono mixes of every track the band ever recorded, it wouldn't make them worthwhile.

[rnranimal]

Hey I?m just playing devil?s advocate here, as I can?t quite grasp why people are so upset that a (probably new) mono mix is being included. The implication being that if it were an authentic vintage mono mix that had actually been released then it would be in some way ?better??

I know, I was just giving a response, sorry if it had a rude tone.

People are upset because most likely we aren't getting a mono mix, it's most likely the same thing as the Sundazed LP which is a fake mono version created from the stereo mix. And yes, we feel that an authentic vintage mono mix would be acceptable, but one does not seem to exist.

It sounds like you are under the impression that the CD set will include a new true mono mixing. That's not likely what will be included. I would be less unhappy with that, but still think it was pointless. Again, we could just make new mono mixes of every album that was never released that way originally. I see Kill Mick just made that point above.

[Kill Mick]

DISC SIX: LIVE AT THE MATRIX

November 26 & 27, 1969 (Part 2)

1. SISTER RAY ***

2. HEROIN *

3. WHITE LIGHT/WHITE HEAT **

4. I?M SET FREE *

5. AFTER HOURS *

6. SWEET JANE **



All mixes previously unreleased.

* previously unreleased performance

** different source mix of this performance appears on 1969: The Velvet Underground Live

*** different source mix of this performance appears on The Quine Tapes Box Set

I've been trying to figure out what "different source mix" actually means? Are these from a different source, i.e. a different recording, to either the '1969 Live' or 'Quine Tapes' tracks? The Quine Tapes are audience recording, and I thought all the 'official' tracks were from one source? Is there a third recording that these are from? Or am I just interpreting it wrong?

[rnranimal]

DISC SIX: LIVE AT THE MATRIX

November 26 & 27, 1969 (Part 2)

1. SISTER RAY ***

2. HEROIN *

3. WHITE LIGHT/WHITE HEAT **

4. I?M SET FREE *

5. AFTER HOURS *

6. SWEET JANE **



All mixes previously unreleased.

* previously unreleased performance

** different source mix of this performance appears on 1969: The Velvet Underground Live

*** different source mix of this performance appears on The Quine Tapes Box Set

I've been trying to figure out what "different source mix" actually means? Are these from a different source, i.e. a different recording, to either the '1969 Live' or 'Quine Tapes' tracks? The Quine Tapes are audience recording, and I thought all the 'official' tracks were from one source? Is there a third recording that these are from? Or am I just interpreting it wrong?

They worded it oddly. Basically, The Quine Tapes are a different (audience) recording and the 1969 Live tracks are a different mix. The 1969 Live and Matrix tapes source from the same 4-track recordings, but the 1969 Live tracks were rough mixes done at the time and the deluxe set will feature new stereo mixes along the lines of the leaked versions. I believe the 1969 Live tracks had a cassette generation and are quite inferior sounding.

[Kill Mick]

DISC SIX: LIVE AT THE MATRIX

November 26 & 27, 1969 (Part 2)

1. SISTER RAY ***

2. HEROIN *

3. WHITE LIGHT/WHITE HEAT **

4. I?M SET FREE *

5. AFTER HOURS *

6. SWEET JANE **



All mixes previously unreleased.

* previously unreleased performance

** different source mix of this performance appears on 1969: The Velvet Underground Live

*** different source mix of this performance appears on The Quine Tapes Box Set

I've been trying to figure out what "different source mix" actually means? Are these from a different source, i.e. a different recording, to either the '1969 Live' or 'Quine Tapes' tracks? The Quine Tapes are audience recording, and I thought all the 'official' tracks were from one source? Is there a third recording that these are from? Or am I just interpreting it wrong?

They worded it oddly. Basically, The Quine Tapes are a different (audience) recording and the 1969 Live tracks are a different mix. The 1969 Live and Matrix tapes source from the same 4-track recordings, but the 1969 Live tracks were rough mixes done at the time and the deluxe set will feature new stereo mixes along the lines of the leaked versions. I believe the 1969 Live tracks had a cassette generation and are quite inferior sounding.

Ah, I get it! Thanks for the explanation. So really it should read:
** same source different mix appears on 1969 Live
*** different source different mix appears on Quine Tapes?