Bob Dylan: The Original Mono Recordings

T

The Absolute Sound

New member
Joined
Apr 19, 2013
Messages
312
<p>
Early Dylan just <em>sounds </em>better in mono, making this CD box set the holy grail of Dylan audiophilia. The eight reissues— from his 1962 eponymous debut through 1967’s <em>John Wesley Harding</em>—feature the original monaural mixes. Gone is the weird stereo separation that split voice, guitar, and harmonica into an unnaturally wide soundstage. Restored is the punchy bass that had been reduced in the original stereo mixes (and carried over to the first CDs) to meet limitations of early- to mid- 60s stereo cartridge technology. Also, there are numerous subtle differences between these mono discs and the original stereo releases, and even some non-US mono versions, which exhibited alterations in track length, musical pitch, tempo, edits, fades, reverb levels, and other elements.</p>
<p>
Sonically, these mono discs were mixed in the 60s to boost the impact of singles on AM radio. So even the electric band recordings, from <em>Bringing It All Back Home </em>on, benefit from added warmth and focus. <em>Blonde and Blonde </em>(restored to its two-CD format), especially, is much deeper. And <em>John Wesley Harding </em>has never sounded better. Dylan spent a lot of time supervising the original mono mixes, and these reissues accurately reflect his intentions.*</p>



[Source: http://www.theabsolutesound.com/articles/bob-dylan-the-original-mono-recordings/]
 
Are those CDs mastered so the volume of Dylan's voice is just about at the noise floor? :roflmao:
 
If these recordings are of the same quality as the Elvis mono recordings then they are definitely worthy of anyones collection.
 
...And they'll do even better remasters of them another five years or so from now. ...More or less.

...And same with Elvis, The Beatles, and the Rolling Stones.

*** Ten and twenty years from now, old Bob Dylan albums will sound their very best.
And fifty years from now, even better.
And hundred years from now, ....

The 'Sound' is something that keeps improving with time; even the older recordings from the 40s, 50s, 60s, 70s, 80s, 90s, ... Technology keeps improving, and remasters are constantly redone and redone.
And this is why "Music" (recording industry) is good business.
 
Bob I beg to differ on that, the best I've heard have not been remastered anything! It's always been the original that has been engineered by an intelligent & knowledgeable technician/studio recording artist. I do agree that you will get a good remaster from a well engineered original though. You can't put back in what was filtered out from the start.
 
I'm with you on that Kev; the original has to be good to start with.

BUT! I bet that somewhere in the future they'll be able to make bad recordings sound good!
1. Different listener, with different life's priorities; a totally different kind of audiophile animal.
2. With hi-res processing (adding several levels of distortion), they'll be able to camouflage all the crap.
3. This is just the way our world works. :)

* The best sound is always from the cash register machine. ;)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top