Thought I would create a new thread for thoughts on these now that the discs are actually out (nearly!).
"It" sounds incredible. The remaster job on this is immediately apparent, particularly on "Joking Aside", "Boats & Trains", "Love Love" and "In Many Ways". Sounds like a really well produced, classy record!
"Freaks" and "Separations" are not quite so obvious in my opinion. Maybe a little less tape-hiss here and there and sounds like the bass has been whacked up a bit.
The packaging on all the CDs is great...particularly "Freaks".
What do we all think?
Picked up the first two today. Separations seems harder to track down!
Not listened yet, but the packaging is really beautiful. Freaks contains several unseen (by me) photos and an alernate cover that's evocative and tasteful and, well, lovely!
Liner notes aren't necessary but are well written and warm.
I think you should refrain from posting the photos for a little while. I do think Fire have done a nice job here and it'd be nice to think that a few of us were making the effort to get these.
Certainly upload the photos at some point, but I think the day after release is a little too early.
Yeah, I suspected as much. Thought maybe it had been the product of duff mastering on the original release, but I guess it must be there on the actual recordings.
__________________
"Yes I saw her in the chip shop / so I said get yer top off"
The packaging is great - Loving the photos in the Freaks booklet!
Strange thing I noticed on Seperations: The left and right channels seem to be the opposite way around to what I am used to.
(Previously I owned the blue 'Pulped' boxset from 1999 (Cook CD178), so these are the versions of these albums I am used to. All of the new remasters sound better, to varying degrees, with It being the most noticeable, but this left/right swap on Seperations is weird)
The swap is most noticeable on This House Is Condemned. The hi-hat comes in a 4 seconds on the left on the remaster, but on the right on my disc from the Pulped boxset.
Which is the correct version? I presume the new remaster... but you never know...
-- Edited by sbazb on Wednesday 15th of February 2012 10:18:25 PM
Good work sbazb. With a name like that you're not from the land of srpski jeb are you?!
He he he. No, nothing Serbian going on. I'm English. My initials are SB and I used to be in a band with Baz in the name, so I stuck it into the middle to make my online pseudonym ... That was 13 years ago, and its just stuck since then...
Had a look at Seperations in a wave editor. Thankfully there is no evidence of mega-compression going on, like a lot of other remastered albums these days, that have all the original dynamics screwed up just to make it louder. The volume on the remaster seems to be boosted a little (about 1-2db) but this may just be down to the slightly heavy-handed bass boost that has been slapped across the whole album. Swings and roundabouts.... I'd prefer a little more clarity in the treble, but the bass end did need boosting, compared to the old master. They can't please everyone's pedantic tastes! They've definitely done a sympathetic job across the range though.... Well done to Fire, for a change!
-- Edited by sbazb on Wednesday 15th of February 2012 11:05:07 PM
Thanks for posting those pics - looks like Fire have actually done a lovely job on these. So glad they managed to get hold of some more of Andy Gray's photos from the Freaks session (or maybe they had them all along) - I tried to get hold of him while we were putting the photos together for the book, to no avail. And keeping the misspelling of Steve's name from the original release of Separations is a nice bit of sort-of attention to detail! Speaking of which... "All songs written by Jarvis Cocker" on the Separations sleeve? Oh dear...
Anyone know which version of Manon they've used on Freaks?
__________________
"Yes I saw her in the chip shop / so I said get yer top off"
I don't think they do, not without the say-so from Jarvis anyway. A shame that stuff like There Was, Maureen and Rattlesnake will likely never get a proper release.
I'll definitely be getting these. I probably was before but the lack of unreleased stuff on Freaks and Seppy put me off a bit. But the packaging and remastering seem to have been done really well.
Listening to Seperations and comparing it to my old version.
The new remaster is definitely a lot more bassy, and there is less treble end. Mostly, this suits the tracks, especially Countdown, but it makes the end of Death II sound a bit odd (4mins55 onwards)... When the doubled up and delayed kick drum starts moving across the speakers things all get a bit muffled underneath! Would be ok in a club I guess, but its maybe a bit much on a home system or in headphones! Will be interesting to look at it all in a wave editor and see if this album has become victim to the dreaded 'loudness war'. That might be whats going on. I'll report back with what I find...
Thanks for posting those pics - looks like Fire have actually done a lovely job on these. So glad they managed to get hold of some more of Andy Gray's photos from the Freaks session (or maybe they had them all along) - I tried to get hold of him while we were putting the photos together for the book, to no avail. And keeping the misspelling of Steve's name from the original release of Separations is a nice bit of sort-of attention to detail! Speaking of which... "All songs written by Jarvis Cocker" on the Separations sleeve? Oh dear...
Anyone know which version of Manon they've used on Freaks?
The version of Manon is the same as on 'Masters of the Universe', except without the first 5-6 seconds of silence at the start that you get on 'Masters...'
I just discovered, that if you turn the volume right up you can hear a weird sound like mains hum and distortion before the vocals start. Odd! Anyway, it's not there on the remaster, which starts at the vocal, but is still detectable underneath the whole track. Dodgy noise reduction technology? Dodgy tape transfer? Maybe the only surviving version is on vinyl ...??
sbazb wrote: The version of Manon is the same as on 'Masters of the Universe', except without the first 5-6 seconds of silence at the start that you get on 'Masters...'
I just discovered, that if you turn the volume right up you can hear a weird sound like mains hum and distortion before the vocals start. Odd! Anyway, it's not there on the remaster, which starts at the vocal, but is still detectable underneath the whole track. Dodgy noise reduction technology? Dodgy tape transfer? Maybe the only surviving version is on vinyl ...??
Yeah, I noticed that on the old MOTU version of Manon. It wouldn't be vinyl sourced as the only vinyl release of that version was the Imminent 4 comp which didn't have that bit at the start. Doubt it was noise reduction either as there's still rather a lot of noise on there! Probably a bad tape transfer as you say.
Shame they used this version though - the version on the Master... 12" single is both much rarer and much better. I did tell them!
__________________
"Yes I saw her in the chip shop / so I said get yer top off"
Sorry, couldn't do it, went to HMV, couldn't bring myself to spend £10 on another version of It or Freaks (they didn't have Separations). There's so many brilliant albums out there, It and Freaks are not amongst them.
I don't notice that much difference there, actually. The guitar's still not (and never going to be) loud enough to drive the song on the off beat that it's meant to.
Btw Fred the 3rd, don't think of it as £10, think of it as three pints!
Mine hasn't arrived yet but here's some scans of the booklet for Freaks along with the sleevenotes if anyone's interested: http://www.acrylicafternoons.com/fireremastersfreaks.html
Bought mine from HMV today. Very nice packaging, haven't seen that Seppy centre spread before. Bit unsure about crediting all songs to Jarvis though, seems very strange. Sound wise they seem ok. Some of the Freaks tracks sound much better, Anorexic Beauty, some not at all, Don't You Know. Guess there's a limit to what you can do.
I've been listening to these at work. It might just be my slightly distracted/untrained ears but a lot of the tracks don't sound any different to what I already had (I have the Fire stuff on that Pulped compilation).
There's a few places where I can tell (mainly CD 2 of Freaks) - am I just being unobservant?
I've been listening on headphones a little bit and Anorexic Beauty was almost like a different song. There seemed so much more detail in the new remaster but Don't You Know sounded same as usual; shocking! The demo for that is so much better.
It might just be my slightly distracted/untrained ears but a lot of the tracks don't sound any different to what I already had (I have the Fire stuff on that Pulped compilation).
What??? The mastering on the "Pulped" box set is the worst I've ever heard done to anyone's material, ever! Play that and then play "Primal", "Countdown" or even one of the 1994 CD reissues and then you'll see what I mean.
I've not listened to them on headphones yet but just the beginning of 'Love is Blind' seems straight away more powerful and 3D (If that makes sense) than before. Is it just me though that the remastering on My Legendary Girlfriend highlights a quite high piercing keyboard sound in the chorus which distracted me from everything else. I'm not sure whether or not that was the case before hand - perhaps I am just noticing it now or maybe it's because I have it playing loud out of speakers when I am used to listening with headphones.
Still cannot find 'It', but in my opinion the reissues were successful and particularly like the inside of Seppy
-- Edited by Jazza on Thursday 23rd of February 2012 11:25:52 PM
Very cool, the Freaks remaster is a recommended album on Spotify this week. (as a matter of fact, it is the most highlighted recommended album, the first one you see. Take that, Cranberries).
A shame they didn't bother to upload the artwork though, it looks a bit silly..
I went around soho this morning and saw IT and Freaks on vinyl, but not Separations. I must admit the timing of the release is immaculate as Pink Floyd's The Wall is ther just above the others in the racks at HMV, Fopp and Sister Ray.
There are reviews of these in both Mojo and Record Collector this moth and both accompanied buy one of those godawful Jarvis, Saskia, Tim Allcard promo pics. RC gives It - **, Freaks - ** and Seppy - ***, Mojo only reviews Seppy and gives it *** (the highlight of the reissues to them is the extended Countdown!). I recommend you head straight to your local WH Smith and read them in the shop just like I did.
Just been listening to the Freaks samples on iTunes.
Forgot how much I actually used to like a lot of these songs. Still think it's too gloomy in places (I think Masters especially might haver taken me to a dark place in my formative years) but there seems to be a lightness about the songs now.
Also I've just heard lyrics I'd never made out before, maybe because of muddy production.
Some choice lyrics I'd never been able to make out in the past even though I listened to Freaks A LOT!
"The master masterbates alone in the corner of your room"
and
"and that's mercy, and that's compassion, and that's being good friends in a crisis. What's one corpse between friends?"
Although they can be heard in the originals, I mustn't have been paying attention.
Am tempted to buy them now...
Just annoyed that I just bought Separations on CD for the first time just a few months ago.
I decided I couldn't wait till my birthday and used the fact I won a tenner checking my lucky numbers the night Pulp performed Misshapes at the NME Awards to order them all!
Remember that in the Seppy booklet all songwriting credits are 'Jarvis Cocker' rather than 'Pulp' so it seems to be that reissue in particular the the Fire fairies have done their worst on.
-- Edited by saw119 on Wednesday 7th of March 2012 04:11:02 PM
Got them all now, and haven't listened to them yet, but a quick question: have they got the tracklisting on Seperations wrong? They list track 11 as Is This House? but on Pulp Goes to the Disco, where I previously had this track, this is actually This House Is Condemned (remix), with the other version called Is This House?. Pulpwiki seems to back me up as well going on the running time. Does what I've just said make any sense?!
Without having the cds to hand, I would imagine the names on the MLG single are correct.
I'll check when I get home if nobody else has by the time I do!
I wouldn't bet on it. Isn't the Countdown CD single mislabelled, with the radio edit and extended version swapping places?
-- Edited by sbazb on Wednesday 7th of March 2012 04:21:36 PM
Got them all now, and haven't listened to them yet, but a quick question: have they got the tracklisting on Seperations wrong? They list track 11 as Is This House? but on Pulp Goes to the Disco, where I previously had this track, this is actually This House Is Condemned (remix), with the other version called Is This House?. Pulpwiki seems to back me up as well going on the running time. Does what I've just said make any sense?!
They list track 11 as Is This House? but on Pulp Goes to the Disco, where I previously had this track, this is actually This House Is Condemned (remix),
You are correct. Oddly enough, I was going to post the same thing!
I noticed that too. A bit odd. Chances are that the listings on the remaster is wrong, but I suppose it could have always been wrong - until now...
Does anyone have any offical line on this?
Also, when I first listened to the Seperations remaster, I realised that the left and right channels are the opposite way around to what I am used to! I previously had Seperations as part of the Pulped boxset, so this is the version I am used to hearing. The remaster sounds great, but have the channels being swapped by accident, or is this how it should be, according to the original tapes?
Got them all now, and haven't listened to them yet, but a quick question: have they got the tracklisting on Seperations wrong? They list track 11 as Is This House? but on Pulp Goes to the Disco, where I previously had this track, this is actually This House Is Condemned (remix), with the other version called Is This House?. Pulpwiki seems to back me up as well going on the running time. Does what I've just said make any sense?!
Without having the cds to hand, I would imagine the names on the MLG single are correct.
I'll check when I get home if nobody else has by the time I do!
Without having the cds to hand, I would imagine the names on the MLG single are correct.
I've got the 12" and CD. The one that is labelled as "Is This House?" has those words repeated over and over so I can only assume that it is "Is This House?" and the other has the full lyrics in some crappy robotic voice so I can only assume that it is the remix of "This House is Condemned". Therefore, it seems like the tracklisting on the Fire reissue is definitely incorrect, stating that it is "Is This House?" when it is in fact the remix.
I'm more annoyed about them getting the stereo channels wrong now, if that is the case! How can they do such a good job in other areas and get something that simple wrong?!
I wouldn't bet on it. Isn't the Countdown CD single mislabelled, with the radio edit and extended version swapping places?
The tracks are in the right order on the 12" version of single, but on the CD they are reversed. As a result, most discography sites list the 8 minute version as the radio edit, which is obviously silly.
What are the booklets like inside the vinyl editions? Are they blown up versions or just the CD sized versions? I saw a copy of both Freaks and It in a record shop near me today, but I couldn't bring myself to buy them AGAIN.
-- Edited by LeoVK on Thursday 8th of March 2012 05:52:33 PM
I'm more annoyed about them getting the stereo channels wrong now, if that is the case! How can they do such a good job in other areas and get something that simple wrong?!
I have it on resonably good authority that the remastering process was suprvised by Jarvis himself. Maybe the channels were the wrong way round in the first place!
__________________
"Yes I saw her in the chip shop / so I said get yer top off"
I'm more annoyed about them getting the stereo channels wrong now, if that is the case! How can they do such a good job in other areas and get something that simple wrong?!
I have it on resonably good authority that the remastering process was suprvised by Jarvis himself.
Really? A pity he couldn't be arsed to write some liner notes or provide them with more rarities.
I'm more annoyed about them getting the stereo channels wrong now, if that is the case! How can they do such a good job in other areas and get something that simple wrong?!
I have it on resonably good authority that the remastering process was suprvised by Jarvis himself.
Really? A pity he couldn't be arsed to write some liner notes or provide them with more rarities.
Unless you're listening to something like irreplaceable by Beyonce "to the left to the left, to the right to the right" etc why does it matter which way round the stereo is? I never pay much attention to the little L and R on headphones and it doesn't seem to affect listening if they're the wrong way round?
If something is remastered and you're paying money for something you already own, you want it to be better than the one you bought first and you want it done right.
I can appreciate a good bit of stereo. Feelingcalledlove probably the most obvious example. But supposing you heard a song for the first time and the stereo was the wrong way round: would you be able to tell? I'm genuinely curious. I agree they should have done it as originally recorded none-the-less.
I agree with Fred/ Dominic - just because you have got used to having the channels that way round, doesn't mean it's 'right', and I'm not too fussed that they have changed as I will similarly get used to having them this way round - just sightly annoyed that fire have messed up again...
The one situation I can think of where you'd perhaps notice if the left and right channels were switched in a recording (and this is a real drum geek's thing) would be if the drums were panned in a way that was converse to the way they would normally be set up - ie if there's a roll across the kit, it starts with the snare on the left and finishes with the floor tom on the right. Unless it's a left handed drummer of course!
__________________
"Yes I saw her in the chip shop / so I said get yer top off"
I was with you there. I was thinking "oh there is a genuine reason for the L and R on headphones", then you mentioned left-handed drummers and shattered the argument.
I can imagine if you were listening to an audiobook or a radio play there might be occasions when it made the difference...
I think that the placement of the stereo channels does matter.
As mentioned previously, a drum kit is normally spread across the stereo field as if it is set up in front of you, with the toms spread high to low, from left to right. Granted, that's if you are a right handed drummer, but flowing left to right seems more natural to the ears anyway. My band has a left-handed drummer but he still plays drums set-up and stereo panned in the right-handed way, because he feels it sounds better.
Pianos are also something that I feel have to be panned across the stereo field in the correct way, again because it should represent the instrument as it sounds it you were sitting in front of it, playing yourself. The piano sound spread across the stereo field has more resonance of the low notes on the left and the high notes on the right. It just seems to make sense to the brain for it to be that way around - well, for me anyway...
The Sunday Times today gave a nice write-up of Separations in the ''Must-have Reissue'' in their music section. For those who don't believe in Gita or Rupert here is the review:
Most of us know the second half of the Pulp story, including their success in the Britpop years and Jarvis Cocker's rapid disenchantment with fame. For those who may be less aware of the lengthy back story of the band, Fire have just reissued their first three albums. It (1983) and Freaks (1987) are probably best left to the committed completists, but 1992's Separations is recognisably the work of the Pulp we know and love. It kicks off brilliantly with Love Is Blind - Jarvis doing Iggy doing China Girl - before exploring the Scott Walker side of Cocker's sensibility. Then everything changes again, with house beats, squelchy bass lines, staccato synths and even wah-wah guitars. It's obvious that we're at the start of something big.
Found a copy of "Separations" on vinyl today. Interestingly enough, it is the only one of the three reissues where the bonus tracks aren't included on the record itself, but instead comes with a download code to get the bonus tracks online.
I guess "It" was short enough to fit the bonus tracks on and, for some reason, they were prepared to go the whole hog and make a double vinyl edition for "Freaks". A 7" EP included with the "Separations" vinyl would have been nice maybe...? Ah well.
The only important thing not included on the vinyl is Death Comes To Town. Can anyone last through a whole listen of ...Goes To The Disco, Is This House? and extended Countdown more than once?!
Although do I remember someone saying that the track that is listed as "Is This House?" in fact the remix that is simply titled, confusingly enough, "This House Is Condemned" on the My Legendary Girlfriend single?
Absolutely adore "...Goes To The Disco" and "Countdown"
I still remember getting the Countdown comp back in Mar(?) '96 and listening to it far, far too much. Absolutely adored getting the full whack of Countdown time after time. As for 'Disco'...it's since been superseded by hearing the gorgeous original of 'Comes to Town', but for fifteen years or more this was the only version that I had, so it'll always be special.
The 'House is Condemned' remixes are, and always will be, horrible!
Got to agree with what Stephen says here, the full version of Countdown is THE version in my eyes. And I liked Death Goes To The Disco. Only just heard Death Comes To Town last week and love it