Boards
Sound quality on vinyl represses? Music on Vinyl/Plain recordings etc Kevin Shields not happy etc
it's somewhat of a daunting task but i'm slowly starting to add a few of my 90s faves to my vinyl collection which for the original pressings is shaping up to be pretty fucking expensive.
for example i've got 'Pulp - His n Hers' on the 2012 'music-on-vinyl' pressing and i'm absolutely delighted with it. Seems fully endorsed by Jarvis with an 8 page booklet worded by the man himself and a second lp of b-sides and live versions
on the flip side was just about to buy 'Spiritulaized-Ladies & Gentlemen...' repress on 'Plain recordings' and a quick glance at the discogs feedback is pretty negative
i didn't realise my copy of MBV- Loveless was alo on Plain recordsing til i just checked and this was Kevin Shields reaction
"Ownership and control is important, because if you don't own what you do, all sorts of stupid stuff happens to it, and people spend good money on garbage. For example, in America, Warner Bros. licensed Loveless and Isn't Anything to Plain Records, and they basically just ripped [the audio] off the CD and put it on vinyl [in 2003]. They did an awful, terrible job. It was done without my permission, and the sound quality was 100% wrong. It was a rip off to anyone who bought it. But I didn't know anything about it until they were in the shops. We actually got an injunction against it being imported into the UK at the time because it was technically a bootleg but, in America, Warners operate under their own law, so it might have been slightly legal in the United States."
I mean i'm no technical sound junkie but at the same time i don't just want a cd rip shoved onto a vinyl thats just pretty shite all round
anyway anybody else got any opinions on this?
I have the 'Music on Vinyl' reissue of Different Class which sounds
beautiful. I have picked up a couple of dodgy ones in the past including an awful bootleg of a Nick Cave LP.
Yeah it sucks when it happens, should at least be pressed from some kind of original master. Not much else to it.
just read discogs reviews
nerds on there are pretty right on
it's very hit and miss in general
Quality is very dependant on the label in charge of the reissue. Here are a couple of examples that come to mind :
Usually Very Good :
Music on Vinyl
Rhino
Light in the Attic
Numero Group
Average to Good :
Back to Black
Major label reissues
Usually Very Poor :
Plain Recordings
4 Men with Beards
Back on Black
some labels can be inconsistent though
Sundazed comes to mind
aye never buying from back on black again
they're terrible
bottom of my list for sure. I feel bad for Back "TO" Black (Universal Music related) which get easily confused with them.
Plain recordings and 4MWB are pretty piss-poor too.
sure i've made that mistake
was really excited by Emperor represses and bought a bunch and they're all complete shit
I've always been amazed at how many people are perfectly okay with buying vinyl copies of digital rips.
I mean, for fuck's sake, the artists aren't going to get any money anyway so you might as well just download the album off soulseek and save yourself $20 for the exact same thing (less surface noise)
I've always been amazed how many people buy really expensive vinyl full stop.
Especially when, as this thread exposes, a lot of it is crap. Why? Some people have more money than sense IMV. Out of interest, can anyone tell me the exact year that vinyl became more expensive than CD?
Most of my vinyl goes unplayed, doesn't really matter what it sounds like
I have that Loveless on Plain
Sounds alright. I have a feeling it was around £7 in Fopp back when Fopp was actually cheap for vinyl and I didn't have a CD copy (or a proper CD player) so I am not too bothered. If I had paid £20 expecting it to sound ten times better than the CD version I would be pissed off though.
I do actually have the original Isn't Anything
I shall sit and have a proper headphones listen at some point and see how it stands up to the CD / mp3.