james said:

The mastering on The Black Album is so bad it's almost like it was never really intended for release..................

.

I was going to mention The Black Album and SOTT as the main two (to me) that need remastering.

Most of the other ones are not too bad.

jazzz said:

Probably the only way to make a good sounding version of the Black Album would be a new mix from the multitrack tapes by Susan R and Sheila E!

.

Can we please start a petition to get that done?

If we're purely speculating, Prince probably wanted to do a real remaster of Purple Rain. I am going to speculate that because of HOW Purple Rain was recorded, that Prince would have had re-play parts or the current mastering technology altered the original composition too much for his liking. At that point, I thin Prince just decided to turn up the frequencies and sent it to Warners. I don't think people quite understand that analog doesn't jibe well with today's studio's and only very few people can handle tape machines and know how to keep the vitality of the original source. Listen to Sade's remaster, very little change musically in the spectrum just LOUDER. The artists would rather not alter the original.

kingricefan said:

The Black Album most definately needs remastered. Get rid of the 'hiss' that's on it!

JoeyCococo said:

Mastering is absolutely required, especially Sign O The Times, Around the World In A Day and The Black Album.

Many 80s CD transfers are terrible and i have read this b/c the technology was new to many doing those transfers. So, if a complete remaster is not possible, a better transfer is...not like what they did to Purple Rain. That was just much louder...nothing more.

To me, the sound on the Purple Rain Deluxe is actualy disc 3 for the edits. I am positive I have never heard Erotic city sound that good before...I am not clear who did that mastering job but that was good.

tx

Somebody did some magic changes to the sound quality of some of the Black Album tracks on Youtube. Now, if we could only get a remastered release that sounds that good on CD!

Search them out.

jjam said:

Those Prince albums aren't audiophile experiences, you know. Not much can be done if the engineering wasn't great.

I'm sorry, what?

I never understand this theory that claims everything was recorded in such a rush that it could have been better.
Better than what? I like Susan Rogers, but can we finally agree that she's full of shit with her "rush" statement?

Fans that came to revelation in the nineties and over, you may never know how insanely good Prince sounded in a full analogic world.
MP3 and electronic circuits will give you an idea of Prince's music, but you get the 4:3 version, and the colors are all washed out.

I heard Prince on vinyl, K7 on lots of different equipments. With a top notch audio chain,
Bruce Swieden can kiss SKipper's purple ass for most of his eighties production.

I simply don't get the debate. Either some people didn't spend enough time with their walkman (or their shitty plastic micro-chipped joke of a music player from Jobs) listening with headphones, either their ears were trained on some lousy equipment in their childhood, and whenever a bozo like Sting records in Peter Gabriel's studio, they shit their pants in awe at the first Lexicon preset you serve them.

Again, lesser than what? What exactly has been so poorly engineered?


P.S. : Older than the first walkman? Craving to get your adolescent thrills back? It's not too late.
Adjust your EQ to your un... hear loss.
Oh my, good to hear you 16K, where have you been?

[Edited 11/6/17 17:49pm]

kingricefan said:

The Black Album most definately needs remastered. Get rid of the 'hiss' that's on it!

JoeyCococo said:

Mastering is absolutely required, especially Sign O The Times, Around the World In A Day and The Black Album.

Many 80s CD transfers are terrible and i have read this b/c the technology was new to many doing those transfers. So, if a complete remaster is not possible, a better transfer is...not like what they did to Purple Rain. That was just much louder...nothing more.

To me, the sound on the Purple Rain Deluxe is actualy disc 3 for the edits. I am positive I have never heard Erotic city sound that good before...I am not clear who did that mastering job but that was good.

tx

No hiss on my TBA... Where did you get yours?

I do not have a technical answer, I wont pretend to know a thing about acoustics.

In this life, I really know one thing: PRINCE's MUSIC.

And I can honestly say - WITHOUT A DOUBT - I am STILL discovering new sounds on the Dirty Mind remastered vinyl. I have had it for months and I am still hearing sounds, layers, voices that never ever came through in the last nearly 35 years of owning and loving that album.

I also cannot say that I am discovering the same types of surprises on the SOTT and Parade reissues... but I think Dirty Mind was 'remastered' and Parade and SOTT were not.. just reissued...

So - in my opinion... YES please - I hear a huge difference.

Mine sounds like it was re-recorded off of a vinyl record- there's a slight hiss throughout. Got it at the wrecka sto!

bonatoc said:

kingricefan said:

The Black Album most definately needs remastered. Get rid of the 'hiss' that's on it!

No hiss on my TBA... Where did you get yours?

bonatoc said:

jjam said:

Those Prince albums aren't audiophile experiences, you know. Not much can be done if the engineering wasn't great.

I'm sorry, what?

I never understand this theory that claims everything was recorded in such a rush that it could have been better.
Better than what? I like Susan Rogers, but can we finally agree that she's full of shit with her "rush" statement?

Fans that came to revelation in the nineties and over, you may never know how insanely good Prince sounded in a full analogic world.
MP3 and electronic circuits will give you an idea of Prince's music, but you get the 4:3 version, and the colors are all washed out.

I heard Prince on vinyl, K7 on lots of different equipments. With a top notch audio chain,
Bruce Swieden can kiss SKipper's purple ass for most of his eighties production.

I simply don't get the debate. Either some people didn't spend enough time with their walkman (or their shitty plastic micro-chipped joke of a music player from Jobs) listening with headphones, either their ears were trained on some lousy equipment in their childhood, and whenever a bozo like Sting records in Peter Gabriel's studio, they shit their pants in awe at the first Lexicon preset you serve them.

Again, lesser than what? What exactly has been so poorly engineered?


P.S. : Older than the first walkman? Craving to get your adolescent thrills back? It's not too late.
Adjust your EQ to your un... hear loss.
Oh my, good to hear you 16K, where have you been?

[Edited 11/6/17 17:49pm]

Sorry, you're right, Dirty Mind is the most exquisitely engineered album ever.

Nuernberg72 said:

prince wanted the music to sound like it was recorded. and i want what prince wanted!

What does that even mean?

rdhull said:

Nuernberg72 said:

prince wanted the music to sound like it was recorded. and i want what prince wanted!

What does that even mean?

.

recording is a different thing than reproducing.

rdhull said:

Nuernberg72 said:

prince wanted the music to sound like it was recorded. and i want what prince wanted!

What does that even mean?

I think Prince without Prince is a hard thing;)

bonatoc said:

I'm sorry, what?

I never understand this theory that claims everything was recorded in such a rush that it could have been better.
Better than what? I like Susan Rogers, but can we finally agree that she's full of shit with her "rush" statement?

Fans that came to revelation in the nineties and over, you may never know how insanely good Prince sounded in a full analogic world.
MP3 and electronic circuits will give you an idea of Prince's music, but you get the 4:3 version, and the colors are all washed out.

I heard Prince on vinyl, K7 on lots of different equipments. With a top notch audio chain,
Bruce Swieden can kiss SKipper's purple ass for most of his eighties production.

I simply don't get the debate. Either some people didn't spend enough time with their walkman (or their shitty plastic micro-chipped joke of a music player from Jobs) listening with headphones, either their ears were trained on some lousy equipment in their childhood, and whenever a bozo like Sting records in Peter Gabriel's studio, they shit their pants in awe at the first Lexicon preset you serve them.

Again, lesser than what? What exactly has been so poorly engineered?


P.S. : Older than the first walkman? Craving to get your adolescent thrills back? It's not too late.
Adjust your EQ to your un... hear loss.
Oh my, good to hear you 16K, where have you been?

[Edited 11/6/17 17:49pm]

No, I can't agree with that. I think it's pretty clear that they were recorded pretty quick, as ideas were pouring out. That was the sound Prince wanted and it's what he got. I agree that his records sounds insanely good but that still doesn't mean he sounds like Steely Dan or someone else who would spend 3 weeks in the studio just getting a good rhythm guitar tone for a track. Compared to other artists his tracks were recorded in a rush, most of his songs don't even have demos.

The mastering process later on seems to have been done as slowly and deliberately as any other major artist in the 80's but I'd believe Susan Rogers about the recording process.

I have very recently just got my first record player in over 25 years as I used to love the listening process of the album and I have got a few Prince records, most notibly 1999 and Lovesexy and the vinyl compared to both the cd and itunes (i of course have all!) sounds so much different in its presentation.

There is a warm about it and even my good Mrs who has no clue about sounds or technology just agreed with me that 1999 just sounds better.

I then played here her favourite album, the Floyd's Dark side of the Moon, which is the 180g remaster and she felt that she was hearing things that even over the course of her listening to it over 30 years, she'd nver heard before.

I would love for a sympathetic remastering of P's albums as the "just tune up the volume" will not be worth it at all

Yes, they desparately need remastering, particularly the '80s output. The only reason why I've spent hundreds on vintage B&O hi-fi equipment is to listen to Prince on vinyl, as it sounds miles better than the CDs. It'd be nice to not have to go to all this effort every time I want the true Prince experience.

JoeyCococo said:

jjam said:

Those Prince albums aren't audiophile experiences, you know. Not much can be done if the engineering wasn't great.

Mastering is absolutely required, especially Sign O The Times, Around the World In A Day and The Black Album.

Many 80s CD transfers are terrible and i have read this b/c the technology was new to many doing those transfers. So, if a complete remaster is not possible, a better transfer is...not like what they did to Purple Rain. That was just much louder...nothing more.

To me, the sound on the Purple Rain Deluxe is actualy disc 3 for the edits. I am positive I have never heard Erotic city sound that good before...I am not clear who did that mastering job but that was good.

tx

That was Prince and Josh who did Disc 3 as well.

bonatoc said:

jjam said:

Those Prince albums aren't audiophile experiences, you know. Not much can be done if the engineering wasn't great.

I'm sorry, what?

I never understand this theory that claims everything was recorded in such a rush that it could have been better.
Better than what? I like Susan Rogers, but can we finally agree that she's full of shit with her "rush" statement?

Fans that came to revelation in the nineties and over, you may never know how insanely good Prince sounded in a full analogic world.
MP3 and electronic circuits will give you an idea of Prince's music, but you get the 4:3 version, and the colors are all washed out.

I heard Prince on vinyl, K7 on lots of different equipments. With a top notch audio chain,
Bruce Swieden can kiss SKipper's purple ass for most of his eighties production.

I simply don't get the debate. Either some people didn't spend enough time with their walkman (or their shitty plastic micro-chipped joke of a music player from Jobs) listening with headphones, either their ears were trained on some lousy equipment in their childhood, and whenever a bozo like Sting records in Peter Gabriel's studio, they shit their pants in awe at the first Lexicon preset you serve them.

Again, lesser than what? What exactly has been so poorly engineered?


P.S. : Older than the first walkman? Craving to get your adolescent thrills back? It's not too late.
Adjust your EQ to your un... hear loss.
Oh my, good to hear you 16K, where have you been?

[Edited 11/6/17 17:49pm]

Tell that. Especially if a DJ is playing Prince and has a mediocre file they are mixing with that doesnt match others...smh

Depends on the era.

The 'vinyl-era' albums from '78-'90 sound better on vinyl already because they were recorded with vinyl in mind - the sound is meant to 'come at you'. Do It All Night practically jumps out of the speakers, but the CD version doesn't. The 'CD-era' releases are recorded much more cleanly with each instrument having its own place in the mix.

I would like the vinyl era albums remastered but, personally, I would only buy them if they somehow capture the spirit of the vinyl versions. The Beatles re-masters did it so I think Prince's albums can do the same.

YES.

If we define 'remaster' as a fresh, new iteration of the mastering process with current equipment without compressing the dynamics significantly, while paying attention and giving care to the intentions of the artist(s) then yes...

laurarichardson said:

jaawwnn said:

Fair point, I wouldn't have wished that job on anyone.

It will have no impact on sales at all so therefore, it is not important. The average person could care less about it.

.

Well gee whiz, Laura has spoken - case closed.

.

Because after all, mass sales is the ONLY important thing, right? Who gives a rat's f'n ass about presenting Prince's music in the greatest fidelity possible - because THE AVERAGE PERSON (the only people worth considering in this argument, obviously) can't hear the difference.

.

I got an idea -- WB should dump all the reissues out there on CASSETTE tape, and better yet they could be mastered using 2nd or 3rd generation cassette dubs that have been sitting around in a shoebox in someone's basement for 30 years.

.

After all - it'll have no impact on sales and the mass public won't be able to tell.

paisleypark4 said:

JoeyCococo said:

Mastering is absolutely required, especially Sign O The Times, Around the World In A Day and The Black Album.

Many 80s CD transfers are terrible and i have read this b/c the technology was new to many doing those transfers. So, if a complete remaster is not possible, a better transfer is...not like what they did to Purple Rain. That was just much louder...nothing more.

To me, the sound on the Purple Rain Deluxe is actualy disc 3 for the edits. I am positive I have never heard Erotic city sound that good before...I am not clear who did that mastering job but that was good.

tx

That was Prince and Josh who did Disc 3 as well.

Bernie Grundman mastered Disc 3.

bonatoc said:

jjam said:

Those Prince albums aren't audiophile experiences, you know. Not much can be done if the engineering wasn't great.

I'm sorry, what?

I never understand this theory that claims everything was recorded in such a rush that it could have been better.
Better than what? I like Susan Rogers, but can we finally agree that she's full of shit with her "rush" statement?

Fans that came to revelation in the nineties and over, you may never know how insanely good Prince sounded in a full analogic world.
MP3 and electronic circuits will give you an idea of Prince's music, but you get the 4:3 version, and the colors are all washed out.

I heard Prince on vinyl, K7 on lots of different equipments. With a top notch audio chain,
Bruce Swieden can kiss SKipper's purple ass for most of his eighties production.

I simply don't get the debate. Either some people didn't spend enough time with their walkman (or their shitty plastic micro-chipped joke of a music player from Jobs) listening with headphones, either their ears were trained on some lousy equipment in their childhood, and whenever a bozo like Sting records in Peter Gabriel's studio, they shit their pants in awe at the first Lexicon preset you serve them.

Again, lesser than what? What exactly has been so poorly engineered?


P.S. : Older than the first walkman? Craving to get your adolescent thrills back? It's not too late.
Adjust your EQ to your un... hear loss.
Oh my, good to hear you 16K, where have you been?

[Edited 11/6/17 17:49pm]

*

My ears must be as old as yours, if not older, because I completely agree with you.

smokeverbs said:

My Prince library has always been a mix of CDs and vinyl, so I can't comment on ATWAID on CD, for example, but I thought it was common knowledge that SOTT on CD used the wrong tapes, and has always needed a new CD master. Unfortunately, this should have happened years ago, and any forthcoming new remaster of SOTT is likely to be brickwalled, which defeats the purpose. Maybe someday Prince's catalogue will get the same amount of love as the Beatles and Zappa - the most recent masterings of their catalogues are FANTASTIC and prime examples of Remasters Done Right.

That was going to be my question, I was looking for an example where a Re-Mastered Album/Recording....has been done and released and it was just glaringly, no questions asked, better in every way.

There are a few Elton John Albums that are "Re-Mastered" and I didnt really notice that big of a difference. 'Captain Fantastic', 'Goodbye Yellow Brick Road' then again I do NOT own a High Priced, High Quality System. Then again, it isnt the biggest piece either.

1725topp said:

bonatoc said:

I'm sorry, what?

I never understand this theory that claims everything was recorded in such a rush that it could have been better.
Better than what? I like Susan Rogers, but can we finally agree that she's full of shit with her "rush" statement?

Fans that came to revelation in the nineties and over, you may never know how insanely good Prince sounded in a full analogic world.
MP3 and electronic circuits will give you an idea of Prince's music, but you get the 4:3 version, and the colors are all washed out.

I heard Prince on vinyl, K7 on lots of different equipments. With a top notch audio chain,
Bruce Swieden can kiss SKipper's purple ass for most of his eighties production.

I simply don't get the debate. Either some people didn't spend enough time with their walkman (or their shitty plastic micro-chipped joke of a music player from Jobs) listening with headphones, either their ears were trained on some lousy equipment in their childhood, and whenever a bozo like Sting records in Peter Gabriel's studio, they shit their pants in awe at the first Lexicon preset you serve them.

Again, lesser than what? What exactly has been so poorly engineered?


P.S. : Older than the first walkman? Craving to get your adolescent thrills back? It's not too late.
Adjust your EQ to your un... hear loss.
Oh my, good to hear you 16K, where have you been?

[Edited 11/6/17 17:49pm]

*

My ears must be as old as yours, if not older, because I completely agree with you.

Well they do say that the older u get, the worse your hearing becomes...as does your memory. Thats all im gonna say lol

paisleypark4 said:

JoeyCococo said:

Mastering is absolutely required, especially Sign O The Times, Around the World In A Day and The Black Album.

Many 80s CD transfers are terrible and i have read this b/c the technology was new to many doing those transfers. So, if a complete remaster is not possible, a better transfer is...not like what they did to Purple Rain. That was just much louder...nothing more.

To me, the sound on the Purple Rain Deluxe is actualy disc 3 for the edits. I am positive I have never heard Erotic city sound that good before...I am not clear who did that mastering job but that was good.

tx

That was Prince and Josh who did Disc 3 as well.

.

Is reading the bloody credits that hard?

bergowitz said:

Depends on the era.

The 'vinyl-era' albums from '78-'90 sound better on vinyl already because they were recorded with vinyl in mind - the sound is meant to 'come at you'. Do It All Night practically jumps out of the speakers, but the CD version doesn't.

.

Because it isn't properly mastered.

Revolution81 said:

1725topp said:

*

My ears must be as old as yours, if not older, because I completely agree with you.

Well they do say that the older u get, the worse your hearing becomes...as does your memory. Thats all im gonna say lol

Now, why you little...

Don't grin too hard, did you check your +16kHz 2day?