![[hand]](/hs-pics/portraits/hands/morse7.jpg)
![[face]](/hs-pics/portraits/faces/mcbride5.jpg)
Montreux ’96 and ’06 on vinyl
Good news for all you vinyl junkies out there. Apparently both Montreux 1996 and 2006 shows have been released on vinyl at the end of last year. They quietly came out on a UK label Rock Classics, each as a double LP with gatefold sleeve.
Order it from a store near you:
- Live at Montreux 1996
- Live at Montreux 2006
Thanks to Axel Dauer for the info.
Unauthorized copying, while sometimes necessary, is never as good as the real thing
On the shelf at the store I work at in 180, $44.99 each.
January 17th, 2010 at 18:12What is 180?
A store?
An area code?
Or are you implying a 180 gr treatment?
January 17th, 2010 at 18:50Here is where I have drawn the ‘Collection Line’. I refuse to fork out that kind of money for the same exact recording just because it is on Vinyl. Remasters and Remixes are bad enough as far as the Capitalizing on collectors, but charging that much for what is now, a dinosaur recording method with clicks and pops is too much. Hell, they should put out some Cassette and 8-track versions too…..
I bought a couple of the Vinyl things that were done a few years back, but realized it was pointless and way too expensive. Why take a Digital Recording and reduce it Anologue and then charge 3 times as much????? Gouging that’s why…
Cheers
January 17th, 2010 at 20:36Is this really needed?
This is the antithesis of the previous posting on the re-release of the Blackmore’s Night back catalogue. Whereas the Blackmore’s Night re-releases address the continued availability of the product, the introduction of the above albums on vinyl at an exorbitant price is unnecessary–save for those who must have every album in ten different editions.
Tracy, I’m with you.
January 18th, 2010 at 02:44Tracy!
I thought I would never read anything critical from you!
I agree with your point that 3 times as much is way out of place.
The German mailorder company “Just for Kicks” lists the vinyl edition of Montreux 1996 for 17,99 €. No idea how far they are ready to ship.
I also agree with you on your general point – the politics of rereleasing the same stuff all over again (Wings of Russian Foxbat has seen its third overhaul recently). But that is something that definitely doesn’t only happen in the Purple camp. Seems like the record industry as a whole is in such a desperate state that they see no other way to earn money these day than to compile shiploads of “collectors’ boxes”, “remasters” and whatnot of the same handful of legendary bands.
But as things stand, “one man’s meat is the other guy’s lousy luck”. The same release that one collector calls pointless may be a long sought opportunity to fill a gap in his collection for another.
I also have to disagree with your assault on the “dinosaur” method vinyl. I have only recently rediscovered the fantastic realm of vinyl. When my first turntable fell to pieces I stopped listening to my old records and started buying CDs – allegedly the advanced technology.
I had to change my mind, when by chance I stumbled over a well-maintained Linn turntable. I was absolutely stoked by the sound that this machine generated – the warmth, the depth and the intensity of the music was breathtaking: it was simply in another league than anything that I could hear on CD. Old recordings from 1971 sprang to life as if the band was in my room. As a result, I started buying vinyl editions of CDs that I loved. For example I did that with “Bananas”. Only last week I made a comparative listen of CD and vinyl – not surprisingly the vinyl had much more texture and depth, the CD sounded flat in comparison.
Now of course not every rerelease on vinyl is executed with the same sort of diligence. A careless mastering of Digital sources onto analogue media will not yield the same quality and will be annoying to the collector who buys the vinyl just for that aforementioned effect. I have the impression that the vinyl edition of “Live in London” suffers from that sort of neglect.
January 18th, 2010 at 08:22Unfortunately the customers are often not informed about the nature of the remastering process – I daresay that misinformation happens on purpose. Reviews are also not very reliable as they depend too much on equipment and the qualitiy of the individual reference record and so buying rereleases/remixes on vinyl is always a hit and miss business.
And what about the cuts? I remember heavy cuts on the cd versions of both the ’96 gig (Speed King) and the ’06 one. I’d say that on a double vinyl there’s enough space per Perfect Strangers and the other bits left out. But nobody is saying anything so I assume they didn’t think about this…
January 18th, 2010 at 09:00People are strange, Tracy, you should know that.
Having the characteristics of a vinyl buff and not exactly liking the Morse era and yet still almost triggered to buy this one….
I dont know if vinyl re issues are too expensive considering the low numbers they come with usually.
As far as I am concerned lots of things are too expensive, but that is practice nowadays and the main trait of capitalism.
Selling is cheating because if you want to make a profit you have to sell above the actual costs.
I m just a worm in this big mad world, so who am I wanna change that?!
January 18th, 2010 at 14:43Yes they’re 180 gram. Whats the difference between merchants, I’m sure the price is in the same ball park. The store is but a place where both the music and the people still matter, I’ll give it another 20 years tops before there aren’t any left whatsoever.
ROTD on vinyl I can say is an entirely better listening experience, its killer! But anyway, I draw my line on the gigs, neither one of them is stunning enough for me to purchase them on vinyl after already having them on CD and DVD and hardly ever returning to listen to or watch them, my 96 CD is still sealed. For one, 2006 is in HD on the DVD, I doubt the vinyl sounds any better to the human ear but might be better from a lineage stand point, and some might prefere it simply because of that, as thats how they are and can’t be convinced otherwise.
Good import quality and packaging are likely where the price comes in. One thing I can believe is that if these were not official releases and bootleg CD’s were what bootleg vinyl used to be in terms of prices and you wanted to hear these gigs and it was the only way, as a collector you’d be paying $40 to $60 back in the day anyway… tell me you wouldn’t, I’m pretty sure I would. The price is hardly the be all to end all reason not to buy these. They look nice too, but I still find them obsolete for the most part as a collector. Put them out on vinyl first, before the other formats and my chain might be jerked, lol! But that would be an example of genius marketing, and I’m pretty certain that is a rare commodity or they would be using us for such ideas.lol!
January 18th, 2010 at 17:52Im not sure of the benefits of vinyl………
Aware of the continuous degradation on each play I would recommend taking a first time recording and burn to cd………….Or just buy the cd!!
Surely quality of the recording depends of the master regardless of which format? Isnt their an inherent noise level with vinyl?
And lets face it, if you own one of the crappy vinyl / cd players that are sold in their millions, you wouldnt ever know!
I cant see the point in these vinyl offerings..
Anyway im just waiting for my tube amp to warm up, lets give ‘Fireball’ a spin…………….
January 19th, 2010 at 10:32Again, I m not a Morse era man, but sometimes I like to buy something WORTHY.
Wasnt the Montreux 1996 the best show of that era on a released format ?
18 E sounds quite reasonable.
Compared to other vinyls I bought since around 1995, that is.
I do own the DVD.
Dunno if thats a complete or incomplete setlist compared to whats on the VINYL version.
I NEVER play the vinyls since 1995.
So yet I do not have the experience of LISTENING to editions of Bananas, ROTD, Live in London and so on……
I do not own a 5.1 system as well.
I do not own a player for SACD as well, just a mediocre DVD player.
So, I do not know what I m missing out on(…….)
Although I feel frustrated because for a long time now I have not been able to USE my old equaliser to BOOST sounds the way I want……
After a few minutes I get into the music, well…..not all…., and forget about it.
Inbetween I find myself buying VINYL sometimes for the future, hahaha
So,….
1 I do not own a decent turntable
2 Even though I m very frustratingly aware that CD s DO damage unlike what was told in the beginning of the CD craze since the 90 s, VINYLS still have the tendency to show damage after careful using, so……..
I dont know if that has to be the case with all equipment?????
Its difficult.
IMHO Stormbringer and BURN remasters were not the improvement I hoped for.
I like the remixes of Roger but have problem with the Machine head one.To me WITHOUT proper eq it still sounds thin and cold.
With the IN ROCK and FIREBALL ones I do NOT have that problem.
I prefer the remixes on those.
The triple Live In Japan is still the most excellent rerelease IMHPO.
By now the left outs could be put on a box?
I never had problem with the originals of WDWTWA and CTTB.
So a remix or remastering did not do much for me.
I do like a few remixes on WDWTWA though.
The intro of the remix of When a blind man cries I dont like, to me it sounds influenced by the Morse sound….
BTW.
I still need that WDWTA VINYL version of the anniversary disc!!!!
Make it a DOUBLE with added remixes of amongst others Mary Long, on the box now, and what about an extension of PLACE IN LINE?
And there must be more, not only Smelly Botty and Show me the way to go home……
Gotta run now……
Rob a bank or something….
January 19th, 2010 at 13:12Thats one detail some miss, vinyl only lasts if you keep the dust off and replace your needles when needed. You have to take care with any format though, or it will perish. So out of the all the formats vinyl is the most durable if kept right. The recording is also embedded into the material, as where with CD’s its transfered onto a flat surface, you tell me which is better for wear and tear. I know nothing about ‘inherent noise’ but anythings possible. Myself I use both analog and digital, just like most artists do to record, simply because I both like to and have to because of my consumer preferences. I’m back in record sales because I just gravitate toward my element when I absolutely can’t stand it anymore. This past year helped with that, and this new year will reflect the opposite, hopefully.
January 19th, 2010 at 17:21Problems obviously exist with all formats.
With CD the sampling rates obviously have to be taken into account, distortion is a consideration with this format.
Vinyl on the other will degrade each time its played.
Can the human ear detect any of the above? Probably some can if played on the right equipment………..
January 20th, 2010 at 09:22The Main difference is the Pops and Clicks on the Vinyl. Now that the digital realm has been upgraded and as long as proper methods are used, I find it hard to believe anybody would prefer the Vinyl. I was a long time opponent to the CD digital conversion. I have thousands of vinyl lps. All of my Purple collection consists of import, domestic and alternate cover versions. I loved the Jap Vinyl. It definitely was better quality than the US versions. Especially the packaging. But I have succumbed to the digital generation and love the convenience of being able to quickly click from one track to the next when searching for a particular tune.
The Human Ear is only capable of hearing so much. That is why it is actually not necessary to save MP3 files of higher than 192 kbps. In most circumstances, you will never be able to detect any difference in the higher quality modes, so it is a waste of space you are using let’s say in an MP3 player with limited storage. As long as you keep the level at 192 kbps, you will be hearing everything there is to hear, thereby also allowing for more tunes to be stored.
Cheers
January 21st, 2010 at 21:50@ 3 and @12
Hmmm….it seems like some people have not moved on since 1993!!
Comments such as these were all the rage 16 or 17 years ago when ‘pro-digital nerds’ were saying “vinyl is dead”.
Instead it is CD which is now heading for extinction in an age of Mp3s and lossless downloads, while records are seen by music lovers as the ‘genuine article’. There have been many, many converts to vinyl over the past few years, lots of new turntables made by companies such as Project, and a ton of new vinyl releases to buy.
The quality of these vinyl pressings is likely to be very good – 180g – which will mean much less record wear, and significantly less distortion and surface noise, and I welcome them even though I’m not the biggest fan of the Morse era (to say the least).
I think Purpendicular would sound good on 45 RPM like many audiophile releases are made these days.
Vinyl is clearly the best format to listen to DP, regardless of era – my In Rock, Deepest Purple and Burn LPs and Perfect Strangers 12″ being great examples. Ever remember what Mr. Gillan had to say about CDs?!?
A decent hi-fi turntable fitted with a good cartridge like an Audio Technica or Ortofon will blow you away with its detail, dynamics and transparency, and tracking at 1 to 1.5 grams record wear will be very, very low as long as the stylus is replaced before it wears out!
Personally I prefer quartz-locked direct drive turntables because wow and flutter is non-existant and tracking errors (which lead to end-of-side distortion) very neglible too.
Cheers
January 21st, 2010 at 22:17Truts.
I read about the decline of NAKAMICHI years ago.
But I also remember a strong recommendation for their cassette decks.
Maybe I should track down one on e bay?
Good quality tapes gave warm analog sound but I never got to upgrading my system to brands like this.
I still feel that cd s are unemotional pieces of cold commercialism.
The vinyls still give that old romantic connection where one feels owing something of WORTH made out of love and dedication.
Cds are a symbol of nowadays throwaway capaitalism in that sense that things have been produced more and more to fade away quickly so that one HAS to buy a new one instead of holding it for a life time.
January 22nd, 2010 at 11:19You can’t have any one without another, its become a multi format world and technology has to keep up with itself, let alone us with it.
January 23rd, 2010 at 02:29@Crazy Horst:
As a result, I started buying vinyl editions of CDs that I loved. For example I did that with “Bananas”. Only last week I made a comparative listen of CD and vinyl – not surprisingly the vinyl had much more texture and depth, the CD sounded flat in comparison.
Not the best eample though, as the Bananas CD has some serious problems with it. It’s mastered at too high a level so that much of the sound is clipped. In situations like that, the vinyl is usually your best bet for sound quality.
January 23rd, 2010 at 23:24How about releasing the shows from 2000 (it deserves it’s own release), 2004 and then 2008, all of which were at least good performances.
January 24th, 2010 at 11:15@ 14
Although I do not really grasp the technical side of things, which is frustrating to say the least…….
I read Good Avice on this matter on this board I think.
But what to do with them?
I d like to upgrade my system through combining different advices and so on but……
Unfortunately I m YET not in the position to spend a lot of money.
I do have other priorities as well.
I felt strongly inclined to buy NEW vinyl like the rereleased Jon Lord album Gemini Suite but decided against it.
The same with certain gigs……
If one wants to do everything one likes, MY INTERESTS ARE IMMENSE…….,
Its impossible, thats MY fact.
So for the time being I have to get at peace skipping spendings to keep my economy alive.
Sad words on a sunday…..
What can I say…..?
Envy people with enough cash to chase their dreams…..
Cheers
January 24th, 2010 at 11:49@4
“the introduction of the above albums on vinyl at an exorbitant price is unnecessary–save for those who must have every album in ten different editions.”
With all due respect, it almost sounds like you’re saying its wrong. A collector follows his or her own reasoning for collecting what they collect. If I want to collect every single pressing by the territory its released in because that’s how I roll, who’s to say it shouldn’t have been released in so many territories because some poor avid collector might be sucked into buying yet another edition?
January 25th, 2010 at 08:08I notice no put down, but why mention it at all if there isn’t one hiding in their somewhere? I see a release as something up to the consumer to either buy or not, and there are different items for different consumers. You make it sound like anyone who collects for reasons you don’t are somehow beneath your choices. Its like saying everything you choose not to buy is a rip off and that’s why you don’t buy it and nobody else should. More than a slightly prejudice comment if you ask me, or perhaps a lack of better wording?
Someone send me spell check.lol!
January 25th, 2010 at 08:11Just something more about the clicks and pops.
It’s a prejudice that only vinyl suffers from sound impurity. My CD of the 25 anniversary edition of “IR” conveys audible hisses or clicks in some of the songs.
And they are much more distracting from the overall sound than the crackle of the vinyl.
How much of those clicks you can hear on vinyl is also influenced by the quality of the equipment. Before I bought my turntable, I listened to 4 different ones at that store. The guy left the general setup unchanged and just changed the plugs for the turntables. The clicks were about equally loud, but the music got louder and louder as the price of the machine increased. It was as if you were walking from one room into another, always getting closer to the band. The last one – which was for sale for 12000 Euro – was so loud it was almost painful to listen to. I am just talking about the relation between crackle and actual music here but also in every other aspect of the music this was an earopening experience!
I went for the one that cost 800 Euro – really not peanuts if you consider that the rest of my HIFI amounted to basically the same sum. You could of course now make the valid claim that a comparison between a 150 euro CD player and an 800 euro turntable is an unfair competition, but with a CD player I see much more danger of it falling into disrepair so I saved my money there (or for the next digital craze format).
I’d also like to contend the argument of the limited perception of the human ear. Reducing this on frequencies is as if you said that the tasting of food is restricted to soandsomanythousand tastebuds and that the touch, texture, colour and arrangement of the food doesn’t have any influence on how we like it. Not everything you cannot hear is also unperceptible to the soul.
Even if I can only hear 192 kpbs, I want to make sure I hear the right bits and not a random selection carried out by a programme.
I don’t want to go into the problem of overcompression that the CD allows much more than the LP. But even “if proper methods” are used in the mastering the standard CD remains a 30 year old format, a quite infant digital system or am I mistaken? That means all the upgrades in the digital realm just don’t translate properly onto this oldfashioned format.
I daresay that the CD came at a time when studio technology was only starting to realise the full potential of the vinyl.
I’m sorry if I raise the ghosts of longfought battles here. I’m not a vinyl fanatic.
January 26th, 2010 at 21:25As a general rule I’d say, the more natural the sound is, the more you want to focus on the expression of several musicians (i.e. mainly in a blues/jazz/funk context) the more advantages the vinyl format has. Which might also speak for buying live releases. And of course recordings that originally aimed at being a vinyl release in the first place make also more sense on vinyl. That would apply for most of the stuff pre 1980.
If you go for very modern productions with very produced and powerful sounds – productions that also embrace digital technology from the word go, the less important it is if you buy a CD.
Hi Mister Horst
Enjoyed your part in this discussion.
It also reminded me of the advice I got 10(….)ago.
That man said I should turn out about 4000 Guilders, which was then around 2000Dollar I think. Now it would be around 1700 Euro, I think.
Did excellent turntables the man proposed got cheaper in 10 years and in that sense comparable to the 800 E one you mentioned, you think?
A turntable of 12.000 Euro, wow, thats a lot pain, man.
I always thought that your general rule was and is quite accurate.
Unfortunately , hyped up by the cd introduction way back in the mid 80 s, I wasted lots of money exchanging my lp s for on cd s with poor quality.
Later on I thought remastering or remixing did help.
Think of the Triple Live In Japan for example, the way to go IMO!!!!
I dont know if Perfect Strangers and HOBL could benefit from a make over.
Last year could have been the 25 th Anniversary of the great reunion album.
A MISSED OPPORTUNITY.
HOBL could benefit from ditching the 80 s production with a remix?
I also whish Lordy could pour some more excellent Hammond over this potentially great album instead of that horrible and blasphemous synthesizers.
Paicey could throw in some old fashioned 70 s style drumming instead of , aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaarrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrghhhhhhhhhhhh, drumcomputers and bad drumming from himself?
What about the 40 TH ANNIVERSARY of IN ROCK?????!!!!!
Options a plenty thinking about a new released IN ROCK with extra s all over the place.
And are we really going to suffer again a wrong line up with a greatest hits package?
I BET it will be for about 80 percent or more.
And even if they will drop in new tracks from a line up which is NOT really Deep Purple it will soon change again in a 90 percent gretaest hits package……
EVERYONE knows by now after 16 horrible years that this without certain people they dont have it in them to deliver classic purple.
Cheers.
January 27th, 2010 at 13:13Spend what you want on a cd or turntable, but if you aint putting it through a decent amplifer (you dont want any crossover distortion) it hardly matters……not to mention speakers…
And then of course you need to impedance match them all.
Set a budget of $5000 – $10000 you might get a worthwhile amp……..
January 28th, 2010 at 09:02Mass digital processing causes a colder and hollower sound, period. Its a fact. Anolog recordng keeps warm sound intact.
January 28th, 2010 at 16:33@24
Right on! But you have to start with the source.
After you have carried out the upgrades you suggested you will want to exchange the material of your chinchplugs (gold!) or buy cables with a gold core right away.
Once you’ve done that you will probably want to give the whole electric system of your complete dwelling a makeover because you can almost sense that the irregularities in the circuit affect your listening experience.
By that time your ears will have become so oversensitive that you will find it impossible to enjoy a liveconcert. Not only because of the inferior sound but also because someone might steal your equipment while you’re out.
Chances are that on one fine day you will be struck by the magnificient sound of a 15,99 cdradio player on the supermarket shelf and you will reluctantly have to admit that it sounds better than the audiophility in your home that you spent half your lifetime to compile. That is probably when you want to commit suicide.
January 28th, 2010 at 23:52I still use my old Philips amp since 1987
I do have an ONKYO on a shelve from a friend. Bought it from him because he wanted to upgrade his system again.
I shelved it because I had other things on my mind.
It never got of the shelve……
Is it any good?
Possibly not….
I use Magnat Zero 5 speakers.
January 29th, 2010 at 00:45Re: #20
“the introduction of the above albums on vinyl at an exorbitant price is unnecessary–save for those who must have every album in ten different editions.”
That’s exactly what I meant to say. It speaks for itself.
January 29th, 2010 at 03:07But you all too clearly indicate that the former logically outweighs the latter, by way of order in the statement anyway. And it just may be the superior format so therefore would provide the ultimate purchase, regardless of preference or weather or not everyone has a turntable. You do like to repeat yourself it seems, as a means of reply, but its not always properly concluding. Oh well, nobody’s perfect.
January 30th, 2010 at 01:49@23/27
Seems I opened a veritable can of worms. Which I didn’t intend.
If you want to do something about your stereosystem, there’s a lot of advice you can get in several forums in the internet. You can get just as nerdy about that topic as we get about collecting DP.
As buying every album in ten different editions this audiophility is also indulgence in sheer luxury and it depends on your preferences, standards and financial means how far you will venture down that path. And hopefully you get other things on your mind every now and then.
Some audiophiles may tell you that the Onkyo idea is crap, and if only for the reason that sitting on a shelf for years isn’t very becoming to a turntable and before you spend money on a new needle you’d be better of buying a Pro-Ject for roundabout 200 Euro.
January 31st, 2010 at 15:04On the other hand this might be a viable provisorium to resurrect your vinyl collection from oblivion.
The true waste of money is an unused LP collection after all.
Thanks Mister Horst
I was talking about an amplifier concering the ONKYO on the shelve, You almost made me feel guilty I have it there for years……slik……., NOT a turntable.
Does it really HURT not using equipment for many years?
It might be a stupid question……
Interesting experience today …..
Went in De Plaatboef at De Nieuwe Binnen weg in my hometown this afternoon.
Went through some 2nd hand vinyl.
Just interested in the developments of prices.
I saw a regular ordinairy BOOK OF TALISYN for 20 Euro!!!!!!
January 31st, 2010 at 20:27Aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaagggggggggggggggghhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh!
@24
Not neccessarily, IMO.
Yes, years back I had equipment in that price range (Linn LP12, Naim Amps and Speakers)very satisfying and awesome it was too (although you did need really good pressings too).
But after ‘downsizing’ for financial reasons and realising that I would have to try budget or mid-priced separates a try or maybe give up on hi-fi altogether (and just get a ghetto blaster)I have managed to get a sound that I really enjoy listening to and don’t tire of quickly(like ye olde days)
Currently I am using (to play vinyl):
1)Akai AP307 Quartz Locked Turntable from 1979 (45 gbp from ebay) fitted with a Pickering V-15 MM cartridge (40 gbp)
2) Sony 70w Integrated amp with remote control (very useful!) (not AV) bought new, 120gbp.
3) Art DJII Phono Pre-amp, new 40 gbp.
4) B & W DM110 speakers from 1988 (when then cost over 500 gbp), 20 gbp from ebay and 79 strand speaker cable, 5 gbp for a 10m roll.
Truts.
p.s. I would like to add that a phono pre-amp (like the one I’ve mentioned above) which allows you to adjust capitance is totally essential to getting a substantial and accurate sound from LP.
Also you do definitely need tone controls on your amp, don’t let anyone tell you otherwise (I’ve got a 10-band EQ, but I took it out of the rig – I was messing with it too much, every disc seemed to need a different setting).
p.p.s. mp3s are great, I love ’em. I got all my CDs ripped to 160 kbps and even 128 kbps (for the recent, mastered-way-too-loud ones) and prefer both the sound and convenience of them to the original ‘digital masters’.
February 1st, 2010 at 00:25I have also been making awesome sounding 192 kbps mp3s from my records and cassettes (using Nakamichi CR-1) using my Behringer USB soundcard (around 30 gbp) and Record Pad/Wave Pad software.
Hi Truth Hurts!
Nice read.
Unfortunately some bits I ll not be able to use them to my advantage YET but its a nice refresher of the mind about this subject.
I could relate to your so called TOO LOUD remastered cds, possibly BURN……Thanx Mister Coverdale…….Not!
Are there more people who, like me exhanged left and right speakers because he had to listen to Made In Japan but with Jon and Ritchie in the right position?
I hoped it would get better with the remasters.
The TRIPLE is great but the black Made In Japan edition is a mind fuck.
How did they succeed in not only fading even when it was not needed but more important why is one disc like it should be, concerning RB s and Jons positions, and the other is not????!!!
There are so many mind fucks in DP s history…..
Just a few examples….
1 Why did they not shoot several or at least one DVD of the PS and HOBL tours?
2 Why are not all Anniversary Vinyls in the colour purple?
3 Why are not all the Anniversaries ON VINYL at all?
Considering the NOW FOR A FACT returning vinyl market its a fuck up again.
4 Who does make these decisions?
I remember Ian Gillan being pissed off because he had to correct a liar in the organisation the UK at the time of the release of NEVER BEFORE on single.
He noticed that adverts were not being done as told.
In the beginning I thought that song was a filler but only recently I understood the band thought much of it way back!!!!
So in that light it must have been very frustrating to see that song poorly advertised when needed…..
Since the reunion in 84 many choices were not or badly made.
Still they seem to be very happy with Bruce Payne.
But ofcourse I am not in the position or judge.
Or am I?
Hopefully there will be some more REAL valuable releases of unreleased stuff from the guys.
Where did RB stash all that extra stuff?
Did he put in a damp shed or burn it?
In the meantime fiddling and singing with Candice , glazing romantically into the fire~?
Its not only him who s stopping things being released.
The others seem to have good stuff too.
Can somebody explain why things like this happens?
Dont repeat Rogers answer please.
he said….
Because this is Deep Purple(……)
February 1st, 2010 at 15:47I saw it today at HMV in Oxford Street, London for £15 (Live at Montreaux 1996).
Not a bad price for an audiophile double LP (Red Hot Chilli Peppers’ Californication which is also 2 LPs, is selling for £32!!)
I’m tempted, it cost me half that for my usual brunch at Starbucks (soya latte, falafel panini and sea salt flavoured crisps (you call ’em chips in the US).
Truts.
February 1st, 2010 at 17:54@ 34
Do you call that a brunch?!
How aold are you?
Be eat some decent food Bro!
Or are you a sister…..?
15 POUNDS for a double vinyl is about how much euro?
It sounds expensive…..
How does the artwork look?
February 1st, 2010 at 23:12Is it any special?
@32
Shame you are running a cheap Pickering V-15 MM cartridge, and a cheap Sony amp into ‘quite decent’ B&W DM110 speakers……..
Happy with just the amps broad band ‘bass & treble’ controls………….Maybe if you were using optimal equipment I would agree………
I can only conclude that it all comes down how discerning your ears may be. If your happy with your lot……………….thats all that matters!
February 2nd, 2010 at 10:30@32
Weird abbreviatons. What are gbp? Gallons of British Petrol? Lol!!
I would very much support your advice of using amplifiers that do allow tone control. Purists always argue that you must listen to the music the way it is intended without manipulations of an EQ.
But after 25 years of listening to music I daresay that I’m in a position to doubt some of the intentions of the sound people, let alone all the misfortune that can occur in the mastering and pressing process.
I don’t have to go as far as the horrible “HOBL” to prove my point (on this misguided production everything that isn’t remixing it all over will be futile).
If I listen to my – admittedly wellworn – copy of Rainbow Rising there’s almost no bass in it, I have to reduce treble and boost the lower frequencies.
With my copy of Ritchie Blackmores Rainbow, which I bought new, it’s practically the other way round. Should I sit there and accept this just for the sake of purity? We’re not listening to karajan after all.
As your nickname suggests, truth hurts. The more expensive your hifi system becomes, the more truly it can reproduce the original sound and the magnitude of the genius, but the more mercilessly it will also reveal shortcomings in the playing, in the recording or in the mastering. And I would claim that listening to music should not hurt.
Some more analogy to the realm of food. The less seasoning you use, the closer you get to the natural taste. Plain bread, raw mussels, fish carpaccio or steak almost raw on the inside (in German cuisine this is called “English”) are supreme experiences if you use good quality. If you don’t, you will need some additives to your food. Seasoning, Sauces, etc. Who would expect you to enjoy a bare slice of toast? The other point to be made are your individual taste experiences and expectations. If your diet contains the regular use of ketchup and other taste enhancers you will definitely find a steamed halibutt filet somehow boring, missing in your familiar categories of “tasty”. And the other way round.
That’s why it is not the best idea, to upgrade your system in too big steps – you have to adjust your listening habits gradually.
The fashionable overcompression of music is definitely ketchup for my ears, faking importance where there is none and drowning everything that could be interesting in a sea of uniform noise.
February 2nd, 2010 at 12:36But on the other hand I have to admit that I like a decent boom from my speakers and find most recordings pre 1970 quite flat.
@ purplepriest
you seem to despair at the same points as I do.
HOBL:
The epitome of a crap recording. If you listen to it in one go your love for the band will somehow wrench some positive moments out of it (taking blood from a stone). But make this experiment:
Listen to one song from Fireball or Made in Japan, and then switch to “Bad Attitude” or any other song. It will show you how dead this music is.
In my mind the only remaster that could make sense for HOBL (apart from completely rerecording it as you suggested) would be a DVD that includes ALL the tracks (didn’t they use a 64 track at that time??) that were recorded at the time plus some studio software, so that you can mix it the way you like it.
No good DVD releases of the 1980s.
You will know that they recorded a full show in Paris in 1985 for the German Rockpalast and another for Australian TV in December 1984. Both seem to be withheld for contractual reasons. The Paris bits can all be found on You Tube – Gillan was severely handicapped there, which is a severe drawback of that concert. The Australian show must have been stunning, so that could be worthwhile releasing. There’s also an excellent clip of “Nobody’s home” which is from Providence 1985 – don’t know if there’s more from that show.
The same contractual problems seem to apply to the Satriani shows which were reportedly all very good with especially Gillan returning to top form.
The guys themselves sitting on stuff:
That seems to be the case for the material of the Bananas tour. The bonus DVD of´Ian Gillan’ s “Highway Star.A Journey in Rock” offers excellent recordings from that tour – from 4 different shows!! Unfortunately the tracks you do get are the all familiar ones (3 times SOTW, 2 times HS, etc etc) except incomplete versions of “Silver Tongue” and “Bananas”. So there must be a wealth of material sitting on some shelf. Inquiry at the HS and DP revealed that there are no intentions of releasing the lot as a whole. Which is only more annoying because the Bananas tour had 6-8 songs from the new record, which were abandoned on the ROTD tour.
I think the inner workings of record companies and band managements are quite intricate. To me it is also hardly understandable why they don’t put more weight behind releasing what is reportedly excellent stuff, why they don’t show more dilligence in existing releases etc.
I mean “40 years of In Rock” could be a good reason to put out some more Purple stuff. I can’t imagine that DP will see its 50th anniversary as a touring and recording band – so if the stuff isn’t released in the near future it will be lost forever.
But as things go, DP is a minor number despite its status, and the managements probably time the releases in a way that they don’t interfere too much with one another. So Ian Gillan releasing old Purple numbers on “Gillan’s Inn” and on “Highway Star” will pretty much kill the market for other related releases, last year saw the rerelease of “Stormbringer” and the “HHH” DVD etc. etc.
February 2nd, 2010 at 13:37Bad for the fan, but business logic has always been like this.
@34
It’s a vegan brunch.
Sadly my favourite restaurant in London called “Eat And Two Veg” closed down recently, they did an awesome vegan breakfast of tofu, spinach, potatoes and baked beans with toast, juice and some nice black coffee, so instead I’m having to ‘downsize’ to Starbucks instead (a bit like the hi-fi thing, you could say)
Vegan food is usually lighter and digests very quickly which means you can get what you need – protein, carbs, calcium, unsaturated fat etc.etc. – very quickly.
Probably because of this, there are more male vegans than female, e.g. Carl Lewis, Geezer Butler, Woody Harrelson, Prince…….
Sad to say that the Euro and Great British pound are virtually 1 for 1 in these gloomy recession days.
The LP was sealed…it does look (and feel) substantial though.
@36
Almost all hi-fi cartridges that are currently available with elliptical stylii and have a treble frequency response of at least 20k will perform well – the crappy ones have died!
Believe it or not I am getting more consistent results now from my LPs than my Linn LP12/Naim Aro tonearm/Troica MC days – which often mistracked and had noticable end-of-side distortion on non-audiophile records.
The Sony amp is actually impressive technically (distortion is 0.001% and frequency range up to 70k treble: enough for SACD) and the sound is not ‘tinny’ like the stereotypical Japanese integrated amp.
If I wanted a ‘warmer’ sound I could pick up one of those Musical Fidelity X-series tube pre-amps from a few years back for a 100 or so ‘gallons’…
btw my Linn/Naim set-up had NO tone controls at all.
Both companies discourage their use saying that they ‘filter’ the sound, robbing it of its ‘purity’.
@38
I don’t have any problems with the music on HOBL or S&M for that matter.
But I would like PROPER new stereo remixes of these albums, being that they are hi-spec analogue recordings: drums without that ‘Grand Canyon’ reverb, guitars, bass and Hammond forward and uncompressed….and sensible treble levels….
Truts.
February 2nd, 2010 at 23:36@ 39
Vegan brunch.
Ok, did slip there…..
Again…..
Ermmmmm—
Must admit although I m blessed, or cursed if you like it the other way….., with a BIG CONSCIENCE.
I really love animals and can be very judging towards people in Haiti who tend to eat cats while I truly adore these animals.
But who am I to judge when eat loads of meat from animals probably treated badly?
Its still on my MY NAME IS EARL KARMA WISH LIST to skip eating meat…..
15 E too much for a double vinyl?
On the other hand, did not know that it is yet 1 for 1….
Are you sure?
More vegans than females?
February 3rd, 2010 at 13:48Uhhhhhhh…..?
@39
Its a pity those B&W DM110 (rated response 70hz-20khz +/- 3bd) are unable to cope with such an ‘impressive’ amplifer.
Mind you, neither can the human ear!
February 3rd, 2010 at 14:53@41
An interesting point – apparently our ears cannot detect anything beyond 18khz treble – which suggests that CDs (21k), SACD and DVD-Audio (50k plus) and vinyl (up to 50k with some Denon, Grado, and Stanton cartridges)would be unnecessary, and listening to mp3s off ‘satellite’ or even laptop speakers is ideal as they match this frequency………some of us can certainly hear the difference!!
btw, what is the lowest bass frequency that the human ear can detect I wonder?
@40
I meant to say there are more VEGAN MALES than VEGAN FEMALES.
For currency conversions, try xe.com
Truts.
February 4th, 2010 at 12:26@ 42
Maybe cause females are more sensitive in that sense that they dont to like to smell like a grocery story?
I noticed from vegan male friends of mine they a tendencey to look pale and smell, ahem, not pleasant.
But I do not imply YOU smell, hehehe
February 6th, 2010 at 12:20quote truth hurts:
“I don’t have any problems with the music on HOBL or S&M for that matter.
But I would like PROPER new stereo remixes of these albums, being that they are hi-spec analogue recordings: drums without that ‘Grand Canyon’ reverb, guitars, bass and Hammond forward and uncompressed….and sensible treble levels….”
Here we go again. Where does sound end and where does music begin?
You have much better words for sound and production aspects than I – if only because I can’t detect details as accurately as you can. “Grand Canyon” reverb definitely hits it! But you forgot the 15 Ian Gillans that compete for the lead vocal!!!
If music as such is the compositions and the ideas, then I would agree with you as far as HOBL is concerned. There are a lot of good ideas on that record. With “crap recording” I was referring to all the other aspects. I chose the example “Bad Attitude” because it has a lot of elements of a really good Purple song – intro, riff, vocal line and chorus are all good. But apart from the production/sound problems you mentioned I have also the feeling that it isn’t or wasn’t played properly – in the end you get your formulaic standard r’n’r treatment instead of a good Purple tune.
A good comparative listen from “Fireball” is “No No No”. It’s a song you would hardly credit with compository genius and of all the songs on the record this one always hasn’t gone down that well for me. But it is played with so much dedication and enthusiasm by all members – and the production does its best to highlight this enthusiasm – that you can’t help liking it.
So your GBP are “great British pounds”, eh? Amazing, then you paid less than 250 quid for your complete system. And not one I would normally connect with the term “downsizing”.
I had a similar experience as you with your downsized equipment. I had to downsize my speakers for space reasons. So what I could grab was a pair of 40 Watt Wega Speakers (presumably from 1973) which I bought for 20 Euro and a pair of Schneiders (a notorious low budget company from the 1980s). Placing them in the 4 corners of the room I had a supreme sound like never before or ever since. The main reason was that there was a lot of wood in walls, ceiling and floor which gave a good resonance. The shape of the room might also have helped.
What has survived to this day is the 4-speaker solution. Even if you don’t hook them to a surround amplifier I have the feeling that this gives the sound more presence and more ambience.
Recently bought the 96 vinyl. Will soon report about the sound.
February 7th, 2010 at 18:43Cheers.
@42 The power of the mind is a wonderful thing!
February 7th, 2010 at 21:37Back to the original topic. I received my vinyl copy of Montreux 96 on Friday and gave it a good comparative listen to the DVD .
Basically, all prejudices can be confirmed. But Tracy was also right all along.
Set-Up: Linn Axis Turntable, Panasonic DVD S 53, Yamaha Rx 797 Amp, Magnat Quantum 505 Speakers, Sennheiser Wireless Headphones.
Major Problem: The DVD output is twice as loud as the turntable output, which makes switching between input channels a potentially deafening enterprise. It may also account for slight sound impurities if have to adjust the loudness of the respective sources to the same level with you volume control.
1. Very short listen with speakers (“Fireball”, “Ted”):
First impression: No difference at all. Instant suspicion that this vinyl hasn’t been mastered from the right kind of sources (as Tracy suspected – another cheap transfer from the digital master to vinyl?)
Second impression: DVD sounds crisper, has more attack in the drums, sounds more forward, mighty and powerful. Vinyl appears muffled and somewhat muddy and distant, having difficulty in keeping up with the rapid fire approach of the concert.
2. Careful listen with headphones and with tone control (trebles on +2,5, bass on +1,5, loudness – 4)
The DVD has the more aggressive edge, a more powerful: The overall sound is crisper and more together, more coherent and tighter, which accounts for the powerful and driving sound. Despite the stereo effect, all instruments tend towards the middle.
The Vinyl is definitely softer, with more ambience to the sound. Organ and guitar with a lot more room to the left and the right, bass and drums slightly more in the background, leaving more space for the lead vocal in the middle, which makes Ian Gillan more prominent in the mix.
Technically, one might say the DVD has more higher mid- and treble frequencies and a more concentrated spectrum than the vinyl. The frequencies of the vinyl reach deeper below and are more varied.
The next thing you realize is that the single instruments sound slightly different. Well, not so sligthly in the case of Ian Paice’s drumkit. The bassdrum sounds like a real bassdrum on vinyl, deep and resonating, on the DVD it’s located in a different frequency spectrum altogether, more in the lower mid frequency than in the real bass section. This makes it more audible in the first place, but is a bit tiresome as time moves on. What you relish as “attack” in the beginning, becomes an annoying “click” or “tschack” the longer you listen to it. Annoying because this somehow generates a slight computer drum feel. A similar, yet weaker effect can be observed regarding the snare drum.
It takes a rather quiet passage to locate differences in the other instruments. Steve’s magnificent solo spot in “Black Night” is where it becomes obvious. On vinyl, you can actually hear the cranking of the amplifier, the stroking and bending of the strings, the small imbalances in the dynamic, rhythmical nuances, all details that are missed on the DVD, on which everything is pretty much on the same beautiful surface level. Once you’ve spotted it, you can also hear it in other places, much to Steve’s advantage. His fast runs, which are often criticised as cold, uninspired and flat, suddenly display an unexpected depth and colour. You could really make a point out of this: Steve is too fast to be adequately represented on a digital format!!! Needless to say that this observation of dynamics and rhythm also transfers to the organ and the bass guitar.
Rather surprising was the realization that the vinyl also flatters Ian Gillan. It doesn’t make him sound like 1971, but the passages in which his voice gets a bit thin and creaky sound less so on vinyl, he has more sustain and depth in his voice, more lower frequencies in his voice make him sound more in command than on the DVD.
3. Listen with headphones and without tone control (button “pure direct” activated)
Basically the same result as before, but more in favour of the vinyl, the more treble oriented sound of the DVD now definitely generates a somewhat flat impression. But after 80 minutes of noise on your headphones you may not hear the same as in the beginning.
Another observation from the guts: Switching back and forth between the sources I realized that I listened to the vinyl for a much longer time in one go before switching back to the DVD again than the other way round.
Conclusion on sound:
The vinyl is not the by far superior medium per se. The differences are not that big, rather marginal. Something that I had expected otherwise, to be honest. This may have to do with the audiosource from which the vinyl was cut.
But even if this was a careless transfer from the digital master, my setup showed a confirmation of what was common sense in this thread.
Vinyl is nearer to the natural and authentic sound, makes you sit down and listen carefully to the individual performances, while the DVD allows you to enjoy a kick ass rock show.
The DVD overwhelms you with its grand and polished sound, the vinyl entices to get into it and discover its mysteries.
Or as my turntable dealer puts it: It doesn’t SOUND better, it PLAYS better.
4. Track selection etc. of the vinyl and the rip off problem
There’s also something to be said about what is actually on the record, because this is – as always – suboptimal.
The vinyl has the same track selection as the CD. The first three sides of the vinyl edition are from 96, side four offers “SIFLS” and “FOOLS” from their appearance in 2000. Fine renditions as they are, they can’t maintain the energetic level of the
other 3 sides. I don’t know exactly what went wrong, but to me those two sound like the group decided to give their songs a kind of “Richard Strauß treatment” on that occasion.
As an extra, there wouldn’t be anything wrong with those “bonus tracks”.“FOOLS” is of course a rarity and an additional buying stimulus.
The problem is, what had to go to make room for those two songs! The first thing that went, are the in-between-song comments. There’s virtually no break between the songs. It’s a pity, because big Ian was in really good form that night. Not hearing his witty remarks slightly detracts from the concert experience. This makes the vinyl an even more puristic listen, but I think that’s a somehow justifiable decision.
What is really hard to justify is that “Cascades” has been completely dropped and “Speed King” is only included in the edited version. On “Speed King” the band was absolutely on fire and it’s unbelievable that someone messed around with that!! “Cascades” was also a concert highlight, and being a “Purpendicular” – tune, it also rendered some contextual framing. Now this original context is destroyed for the sake of two rather mediocre extras from another concert. Generally, I want to have a complete concert and not a shitty compilation! In this special case I would always prefer the two originals over the two from 2000.
Well, one could also debate the necessity of making room at all. Since Iron Maiden’s “Live After Death” we know that double vinyls have a playing capacity of 100 minutes – the complete concert could have easily fit on the vinyl.
It’s unbelievable that these mistakes in DP releases happen over and over and over again.
Well presumably it was like this: On putting the Montreux DVD together, some PR manager in the record company, let’s call him Dick Pencilhead, realised that the 96 gig left some 28 minutes of the DVD empty. As bonus sections are an indispensible selling argument of any release, he tagged on 5 bonus tracks from the concert 4 years later. Now he had a value for money product with only one problem: It would make the CD with its maximum capacity of 74 minutes a radically inferior product and virtually unsellable. So, how do you maintain the market for the CD or even make the fans go out and buy both releases? You secrectly reduce the playing time of the original concert – idiots like me won’t notice the missing track! – and select two different bonus tracks than on the DVD. When they made the vinyl edition they just forgot to rectify this and to give vinyl collectors what they seek: the real deal.
So, Tracy was right all along. After all, a somewhat unnecessary release with the unpleasant aftertaste of a rip off.
She was wrong concerning the clicks and pops of the vinyl, however.
5. Conclusion
Is it worth it? It is definitely worth owning one or the other release of that concert – CD, DVD or vinyl. To my mind, this was one of the best DP performances after the reunion, presumably the best with Steve Morse. The vinyl conveys the energy maybe even a bit better than other releases.
If I had to decide between the vinyl and the DVD I would go for the DVD, however. Even if the vinyl sounds marginally more involving, the DVD more than makes up for it with the greater song selection, the possibility to hear it in one go and of course the visual aspect.
As an additional purchase I would be extremely careful, if you don’t collect for completeness’ sake – something which I’m afraid applies to me. You can justify buying Made in Japan for the sound and the Copenhagen Video for the visuals – here it’s not that easy. The analogy would be to go for another concert like LATO before you become tautological. But LATO doesn’t quite reach the same heights as Montreux, but who knows, maybe somebody discovers some reels somewhere….
I think that was all there was to say about the shrimpin’ bus’ness.
February 8th, 2010 at 22:16Good Night.
@44
A big reason if not THE reason why later LPs like HOBL are very different to 70s Purple is the use of the ‘click-track’.
To get a slick, tight-sounding, radio/arena friendly sound literally every mainstream record from the mid 70s onwards used it as a basis for track laying. Even John Fogerty used it for ‘Centerfield’. Which obviously means that you can’t ‘waver’ or ‘deviate’ from the prescribed beat – you are locked into that groove.
It’s the only realistic way to make 24 or especially 48-track recordings – imagine trying to add multiple guitar overdubs etc. to a drum track that is moving about everywhere – it makes for a more accurate recording than maybe an exciting one.
The older recording method e.g. 70s Purple, Doors L.A. Woman, The Who Who’s Next etc.etc. relied on really strong live performances, because there was technically only so much overdubbing you could do, and you couldn’t ‘fix’ or quantise the drums. Later in the 90s artists like Paul Weller started a revival in these recording and production methods.
These days it’s much ‘worse’ with Protools, Auto-tuning, ‘flying in’ complete verses, plug-ins, Frankenstein digital recording and editing, ridiculous and pretentious workstation signal processing, I could go on and on………….
Truts
February 8th, 2010 at 22:36@47
I get your point but believe me, it’s no problem making overdubs on 48 tracks without a click track. One of the basic duties of a drummer is after all to keep time. 🙂
And you don’t have to abuse and overuse a thing like Pro Tools just because you have it at your fingertips. Sure, there are a lot of top 40 hits making things easy for themselves by replicating and rearranging in the computer but for a band, and I would guess this applies to Deep Purple, Pro Tools is just a great tool making life in the studio easier than it was in the stone age. There was editing done then too, you know. It was took a lot more time and was a riskier business. 🙂
February 8th, 2010 at 22:46Interesting but also frustrating things to read.
I almost felt convinced I should get the vinyl but in the end Horst succeeded to let me become demotivated again……
Will sleep another night thinking about it….
And btw, I made the mistake earlier on…., Tracy is NOT a she….
Cheers.
February 9th, 2010 at 17:17Me a She????? Who said that? That’s the main reason I linked my name to my Band Performance on YOU TUBE. Should be self explanatory and full known by now….
But thanks for backing me up Priest.
Cheers
February 19th, 2010 at 17:34Ah, what a great read – the format wars continue onward, unabated. I’m more of a vinyl junkie – but, still listen to CD’s in the car and occasionally at home when it’s convienient. Trust me – I share many of your points from both sides of the table. I even laugh at myself because I know I’ve bought so many copies of the same material in different formats, be it remastered in 180gram vinyl, cd, sacd, dvda, 24 ct gold cd, etc. Call it artist support. In fact, yesterday, I purchased “Fireball” on 180gram vinyl by a company called FridayMusic. This version is based on the US release which includes “Strange Kind of Woman” instead of “Demon’s Eye”. This company does a very good job – the album sounds fantastic & beats out the UK Anniv. Edition vinyl & CD version. However, it doesn’t have “Demon’s Eye”! Artist Support!
February 19th, 2010 at 21:36