iaredatsun wrote:I can't hear any 'diginoise' in Heroin nor see anything obvious in the spectral analysis. At what time does it occur? I can hear a few tape glitches towards the end of both versions of Move Back and 45th. I haven't listened to 1966 version all the way to the end.
It's from approx 5.43 to 5.55 on the 45th version. Might not be digital (tape deterioration maybe?), but the equivalent portion of the song on 1966 is clean.
1966 does have the "this is called Heroin" introduction, but it's on the end of the previous track, IWFTM. It doesn't have the bit of tuning afterward though.
Seems to me like the ultimate version of the Columbus show, based on the sources we have, would be a speed-corrected version of 1966 with the missing snippets between tracks patched in from Move Back.
It's kind of frustrating that there hasn't been a better transfer of this show since 1996/7 (and UMG clearly HAVE just used Move Back with a few little edits and light remastering). Presuming the tape hasn't fallen to pieces by now, techniques of transferring analogue tapes to the digital domain have come a long way since then, and we could have a much nicer-sounding version at this point if they'd bothered to go back to the master.
re. Heroin. I just hear tape deterioration in the analogue domain. I think I hear it on both versions.
My theory is that the original 1966 LP was pressed from a tape copy maybe made sometime in the 70s. Then much later the original tape was given or lent to UMG and digitised ? and it was at this point that problems were found in the tape - and so patched (bad sections edited out). This same new digitised version got bootlegged for Move Back whilst UMG sat on it waiting for go ahead to make a release. The 1966 CD was then remastered from the 70s copy of the tape which was analogue and mastered at the wrong speed. Hence 1966 CD was made from an inferior sounding but intact tape running at the wrong speed. Move Back and 45th were both made from a digitised version of the original but, by now, compromised tape. Hence both 45th and Move Back sound much the same, have the exact same tape glitches and edits but small differences in sound quality were introduced when they were mastered for CD. This would explain all the evidence without suggesting that UMG copied and released an illegal bootleg CD or that they deliberately and mysteriously made arbitrary edits to the tape.
I agree that '1966' is inferior in both sound quality and being at the wrong speed - it's therefore extremely frustrating that it's the most complete!
I'm sure I read somewhere (but don't ask me where!) that UMG transferred/mastered the gig when 'Peel Slowly And See' was being compiled (i.e. when the edited version of "Melody Laughter" was created) and, having not been used, that version then fell into the hands of bootleggers and was used for 'Move Back'. That would support Iaredatsun's theory about the lineage.
The only problem with Mr Datsun's theory is that the track timings on Move Back and 45th are identical (with the exception of the bits where portions between songs are cut). They come in at the same time and go out at the same time. That's a hell of a coincidence.
It wouldn't surprise me at all if UMG resorted to a bootleg for the source. Why not, if the masters weren't immediately available and they honestly believed it to be the best quality version out there? Never overestimate major record companies - the volume jumps on the WLWH Gymnasium disc show how lazy and shoddy they can be.
Speed differences aside (which can be easily fixed), is 1966 really lower quality than Move Back? I'm not sure myself.
Mark wrote:The only problem with Mr Datsun's theory is that the track timings on Move Back and 45th are identical (with the exception of the bits where portions between songs are cut). They come in at the same time and go out at the same time. That's a hell of a coincidence.
It wouldn't surprise me at all if UMG resorted to a bootleg for the source. Why not, if the masters weren't immediately available and they honestly believed it to be the best quality version out there? Never overestimate major record companies - the volume jumps on the WLWH Gymnasium disc show how lazy and shoddy they can be.
Speed differences aside (which can be easily fixed), is 1966 really lower quality than Move Back? I'm not sure myself.
Mark, I don't understand what you mean by CD track timings. They are not the same at any point. If you mean that the actual lengths of the song performances are the same then that equally supports the theory that they are both from the same digitised source.
If UMG don't have access to the tape or a digital version of it then what would they be doing releasing it? I just can't see them having to resort to using a bootleg. And would that be legal? They must have permission from the tape owner and you would think access to the best version.
With regards to the recordings not having been remastered since PSAS, the dynamics of the PSAS Melody Laughter are different - with the new version having better local dynamics (when seen as a wave form) and also a different frequency response overall (see below). Supports the idea that the tape was remastered for the 45th anniversary set.
With the inherently low quality recording, I don't think it would be possible to know whether it was remastered or if it was just a modulated version of the 'Move Back' version.
One thing that supports your view is that it's less likely that that 15 sec. edit would have been introduced by the bootleggers.
I would be surprised if the 45th set was copied from 'Move Back' (although wouldn't say it's impossible), I just think it's more likely they were both from the same original source but independent copies, if that makes sense.
I haven't done any wave form, EAC, etc. analysis as ultimately the only thing I care about is how the tracks actually sound, not how they look on a computer screen, and to my ears '1966' doesn't sound as good as 'Move Back' or the 45th. Ultimately I agree with feelingfresh though, with recordings of this quality there isn't much in it really. At this stage beauty is in the ear of the beholder.
feelingfresh wrote:With the inherently low quality recording, I don't think it would be possible to know whether it was remastered or if it was just a modulated version of the 'Move Back' version.
One thing that supports your view is that it's less likely that that 15 sec. edit would have been introduced by the bootleggers.
You can also see a greater dynamic range in the waveform. Unless they compressed the PSAS signal in the 90s it does suggest a better transfer was used. For sure we don't know, but the subtext was to question an assumption that UMG have not bothered to make a better transfer of the Valleydale recording since 1996.
You seem to suggest the bootleggers are less likely to edit than record companies. I'm not sure why that would be the case. There's no real evidence to suggest that bootleggers are better archivalists than record companies.
feelingfresh wrote:With the inherently low quality recording, I don't think it would be possible to know whether it was remastered or if it was just a modulated version of the 'Move Back' version.
One thing that supports your view is that it's less likely that that 15 sec. edit would have been introduced by the bootleggers.
You can also see a greater dynamic range in the waveform. Unless they compressed the PSAS signal in the 90s it does suggest a better transfer was used. For sure we don't know, but the subtext was to question an assumption that UMG have not bothered to make a better transfer of the Valleydale recording since 1996.
You seem to suggest the bootleggers are less likely to edit than record companies. I'm not sure why that would be the case. There's no real evidence to suggest that bootleggers are better archivalists than record companies.
I think he was actually suggesting the opposite - that bootleggers would be less likely to make the cut for aesthetic reasons, assuming that's why it was done. But really, who knows?
schnittstelle wrote:Thank you very much for the great research!
Speaking of speed correction: Did anyone ever notice that the Live Max's Kansas City LP ran too fast?
Someone made a speed correction of the LP and it sounds more natural to me. Have a listen at https://archive.org/details/Max1970_172
From another discussion I've read that even the deluxe CD may not be at the correct speed.
Yes the Max's deluxe version sounds too fast to me, that's why I dont listen to it. Thanks for the pointer to the speed corrected vinyl..........
On the 1966 show sound issue I don't understand why everyone cant hear that the 45th anniversary edition is the best sounding. Listen to the drones in the first track on a good sound system - when I first heard the 45th anniversary version after years of listening to move back it was amazing. You can see from every spectral analysis/waveform/graph that's been put up in this thread that the 45th version is mastered at a lower volume, with no clipping unlike move back, the spectral analysis shows that move back has been processed and is lossier to some extent, it shows that the super deluxe version has a sharper more defined image which reflects the improved audio when you listen - this shows visually a more clearly defined audio, as discussed by iaredatsun there is better frequency response, etc
I agree that the cuts mentioned are likely to be cuts deemed necessary due to tape deterioration. The cuts in between tracks are annoying - I don't understand why they couldn't just give us the whole tape like on move back - there was enough room on the cds.
nick257 wrote:Yes the Max's deluxe version sounds too fast to me, that's why I dont listen to it. Thanks for the pointer to the speed corrected vinyl..........
Someone did a speed correction of the deluxe CDs. CD1 was slowed down by 4.1% and CD2 by 2.3% which made them sound right.
