A thread in which to discuss the first tranche of Led Zeppelin reissues

Wot do you think of the new vinyl re-issues then, Steve? : )

Debs

I'll let you know when I return to the UK.

Steve.

Where are you and when will you return? We need a definitive diagnosis on this topic 

ATB Graham.

It has been pretty well established that if you buy from HDTracks, and use their downloader, no matter what format you purchase the downloaded file is a flac.  The JRiver downloader then converts to wav, or whatever, on your machine (and deletes the flac files).

Returning from Spain tomorrow Graham. My son has confirmed the LPs have arrived and I'm looking forward to hearing them.

One last beautiful meal tonight then I'll have to think about losing some of the weight I've put on over here. At least I beat the missus 4 games to 1 at golf whilst we've been here.  She normally hammers me on holiday. 

ATB

Steve

Having a listen to Led Zep one as we speak.

I haven't got an original so nothing to compare it to but in comparison to other formats I have this isn't half bad and worth the asking price at HMV.  Its clean and crisp and not unlike most recordings of the same era the drums and bass are a little behind the mix and a little soft around the edges.

Plant sounds as good as he ever did and Pages leading edges are as crisp as you want them to be. Cymbals are a little recessed for my liking but everything else is you would want it to be.

Very enjoyable and I am looking forward to two and three 

That's a pretty good summation from my one-time listen as well Harry. It's not the best high rez file I have but musically, better than any CD I own from Led Zep. 

Arun

Arrived home yesterday and listened to Led Zeppelin III. Tonight it's the turn of Led Zeppelin I. 

After listening to them I tune dem'd them with the original first presses. Chalk and cheese IMO. The new reissues sound too polite and lack the emotion of the original issues. They, to me, sound like the digital remasters they are, slightly clipped and veiled. I'm not saying they've done a bad job, just not a great job. They've brought some instruments forward and dropped some back making for a much different mix on some tracks. I can see some may like this but why change what was already brilliant on the originals. Led Zep III is better than Led Zep I but when I listen to it I don't get the 'goosebumps' I get listening to the LPs I've had since I was a teenager.

As for the extras I haven't had the time to listen to them on vinyl yet. I did listen to them using Amazon Player on holiday and, apart from the Paris concert with Led Zep I, the other extra tracks were a bit of a disappointment, much like a lot of 'bonus tracks' are on lots of CDs. Instrumental versions and alternative takes, I thought they may have thrown in a few different songs that were left from the sessions. These new LPs certainly don't 'squeeze my lemon'. 

I'm listening to my Turquoise Led Zep I now and the band seem to have come back into the room. So my advise would be to buy the first presses if the price has dropped as was mentioned above. 

I know I seem to be in the minority here but I'd be lying if I said I love them. A case of the Emperor's New Clothes IMO.

Steve

Steve. Have you had a chance to listen to them against any of your Classic reissues?

Hope you are well rested 

Graham.

I have just played side 1 of Led zep 1 reissue against the classic records version.  The new reissue is ok but I much prefer the classic records version. Better defined bass just sounds right where the reissue is a bit leaner and a little sharp to my ears.

i will stick to the classic version and just play the reissues for the extra material.

I have to disagree with you slightly there Steve.

Although I don't have original pressings to compare them with, I do have all the Classics and some 1970s/80s Japanese vinyl (as well as some crappy 1980s pressings which we can safely disregard) and I have lived with these remasters for 10 or 11 days now.

The presentation is - inevitably - different from the all-analogue LPs I just mentioned, but it's not always inferior. I think with the new masters some of the raw power and big fat bass has been sacrificed for more detail - but oddly, replaced with a greater sense of swing (and LZ always swung more than any other rock band). I can see why people might think them more polite but on my system at least (which I know some people think is a tad aggressive) they don't sound particularly polite.

I've always thought that LZII was the least good of the Classics and for this title at least I prefer the 2014 remaster. The other two, I can't decide - there are things I like about both Classic and 2014. I think the real test of these remasters will be PG and Presence, on which the guys at Classic did a superlative job.

On CD, all three absolutely slay the Marino/Page masters of the 1990s, and IMO easily edge out the Diaments of the 1980s (which, as Barry Diament himself has admitted, were made using safety tapes and not especially good equipment).

As for the extra material, I LOVE it - but then I'm an obsessive fan with over 300 bootlegs (many of them studio outtakes). Some of it is revelatory. There was virtually nothing left over from the I studio sessions, which is why we have the extraordinarily energetic Paris gig. As for the other two, I actually think they've been rather intelligently curated - it's as if Page has created "alternative" versions of each of the albums (rather than just going for a ragbag of alternate takes), an approach I really like. There's a huge amount of good quality live material from the I to III era, which could have made it onto these reissues, but maybe that's for another day.

Those looking for unreleased studio gold, IV, HOTH and PG offer potentially the most treasure and it'll be interesting to see if JP adopts this same mirroring-the-original approach.

One thing that has really got my goat about all this has been the sheer amount of FUD that people have been spreading about the masters - before anyone had even heard them. Michael Fremer (among others), who really ought to know better, started dissing them months before they were released - and before he'd heard them. The internet in general, and forums in particular, are breeding grounds for unsubstantiated rumour, and unfortunately that was the case here.

Mothershit and Constipation Day were indeed horrible, but the former - as JPJ said a few weeks ago - was a rush job, because the record company wanted something out quickly to tie in with the 02 gig, and the loudness wars were raging at the time; the latter was mushily recorded. Both seem to have been one-offs, and the snide remarks about Page's hearing have proved to be - again - unsubstantiated rumours. And as I said in an earlier post, Davis has done a very good job.

And finally, all these albums have been out of print for years; I think that it's great that people can get to listen to this celestially good music, decently presented on vinyl, at a tenth, or less (or in the case of the first album, a hundreth), of the price of a Classic or a first press.

One last thing _ I think that most people are aware of Bonzo's supernatural powers, but what about JPJ? What an awesome bass player he is - and a superb keyboardist and mandolin player as well.

The re-issues are a modern take on  classic albums, I would expect there to be differences and I would imagine the remixes are going to be voiced in line with modern equipment and thats what you are getting here.

I haven't heard the original pressings but I am guessing the differences are going to be similar to the differences between original and remixed Pink Floyd albums. The newer albums are more forward, a little compressed and the bass is a little recessed. Probably a little less musical as well.

There's nothing wrong with either of the pressing, both are still very enjoyable :-)

To be fair, Michael Fremmer made it quite clear that he had not heard the new releases and his criticism was limited to making the point that a tremendous opportunity was passed up by working with a digital transfer rather than going all analogue.  Particularly galling is the deceptive language used by the record company weasels to imply that these are in fact analogue: "from the original analogue tapes!!!" - a line I heard Jimmy Page himself use in a promotional appearance recently. A moment's thought and one realizes how meaningless this statement is - given that these albums were originally recorded in analogue.  The CDs I bought in the 80s were "from the original anologue tapes!!!"  What record buyers want to know is if the new releases are ALL analogue, which they clearly are not.  If you are going to work from a digital transfer be up front about it and just release it in CD and HiRez download formats. Vinyl seems pointless, if not an outright con.

I would agree with your last two comments there Kevin. I just feel if they had produced the vinyl all analogue they would have been so much better. 

If taking the originals as the gold standard and 10 I would rate the new LPs around 7. If there was nothing to compare to then I can see the new issues would be very enjoyable because the music is so damned good.

You must come around soon so we can do the comparison together.

ATB

Steve

Hi,

Has anyone done a comparison between these new offerings, (on CD), and the Japanese SHM-CD box set, issued a few years back?

I feel these were an improvement on what was around at the time, and would welcome thoughts, before I embark on yet another costly "better" version. 

Regards,

Dave.

Actually record buyers (well the vast majority of them who aren't collectors or audiophiles) want is to be able to buy records at an affordable price. Most of them outside this forum bubble couldn't care less whether they were sourced from digital, analogue, or from mystic runes in Percy's back garden.

Vinyl only seems "pointless"  if you're a fundamentalist, as people like Fremer are. Sometimes digitally-sourced vinyl LPs can sound very good - those cent Miles Davis RSD issues for example. And these Led Zeps ain't bad at all - some of the best digitally-souced remasters (on CD and vinyl - have also got the hi-res files but have nothing to play them on ) I have ever heard. My objection to what Fremer said is not that he didn't like them, but that he was passing judgement on the sound quality of something he hadn't actually heard.

Have you actually heard these 2014 masters? 

No! You smell!

[runs off, flicking v-sign]

Yes, digital sourced vinyl can sound OK but not nearly as good as what can be achieved by an all anologue recording, and if that makes me a "fundamentalist" I can live with that.  Have I heard the 2014 Led Zep vinyls? No, and "ain't bad at all" isn't a glowing enough recommendation for me to put up the money to buy them.  I doubt they can beat the analogue pressings I have already.

I only wanted to make the point that Warner Bros. were not being up front with the fact that these are digital, using weasel words like "sourced from the original analogue tapes!"

They kill the vinyl records I have. Admittedly, they're not first pressings, but they are analogue.

Perhaps JP used a Hugo to convert them? ;-)

Keith

Although the tapes were digitised for this run of LPs it seems a very high sample rate was used. Both the Zep and Beatles master tapes have been digitised at 24/192. Apparently that is so good you just can't hear the difference on playback from the tape in the studio. The 2009 Beatles stereo LPs were cut from 24/44 files - so much of the resolution was thrown away. They sound detailed enough but lifeless. These Zep LPs are light and day from those. The Hi Res downloads are available at 24/96. Some believe the LPs were cut from higher res than that, but no one knows.

Actually they're bloody good. Great, in fact. That good enough for you? Perhaps the Classics have the edge on I and III, but I personally think the 2014 II is actually better than the Classic equivalent. I haven't heard a first press of any of the three but it is highly unlikely I would be able to afford a minty one anyway so it's not worth worrying about.

As Keith says above, these slay the majority of previous vinyl reissues. And of course there is the extra material, which is fantastic.

NB: the records were actually sourced from the analogue master tapes - at 24/192!

I agree Mr Click that these LZ vinyl reissues are way better than the 2012 Beatles ones. Some of them were OK but Abbey Road in particular sounded really lifeless (that said I am looking forward to those AAA monos in September).

Swithering about these....G