Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 24, 2016 16:19:50 GMT
Don't think Moscow was on film judging by what I've seen. Or Seattle. Which means no HD. There is a discussion about Cunning Stunts being converted to HD as that was film on 35mm. I don't think anything pre CS was recorded in a format that can convert to HD basically. Could be wrong... I will cry if they are taped but not filmed. I could be wrong! But I think that tape was the cheaper option back in the day so most things were recorded that way. Moscow might be different as it was such a huge event though. |
|
|
|
Post by sindre on Feb 24, 2016 16:28:17 GMT
I will cry if they are taped but not filmed. I could be wrong! But I think that tape was the cheaper option back in the day so most things were recorded that way. Moscow might be different as it was such a huge event though. No idea if it means something but AC/DC Live at Donington has a Blu Ray. So there may be a filmed Metallica show from that era. |
|
|
|
Post by Alan-P on Feb 24, 2016 16:37:50 GMT
I would give heaven for a live at Donnington 95
Remember when they did 2X4 debut, recorded it and put it on the Unitl it sleeps single.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 24, 2016 19:36:40 GMT
I could be wrong! But I think that tape was the cheaper option back in the day so most things were recorded that way. Moscow might be different as it was such a huge event though. No idea if it means something but AC/DC Live at Donington has a Blu Ray. So there may be a filmed Metallica show from that era. Oh no doubt there are videos that were recorded on film during that era but it was a cost thing more than anything else. Film was, and still is actually, really expensive to buy as well as develop. So unless it was a "special" gig there would be no reason to shell out on it necessarily. But hey, all I'm going on is a vague memory that Dan said, back in time that the Live Shit stuff was the best quality we had (on DVD) as it was tape and if that was the officially scheduled gig recording from that era..... I'll be crossing my fingers though ;) |
|
|
|
Post by Kimbo on Feb 25, 2016 22:04:38 GMT
I would give heaven for a live at Donnington 95 Remember when they did 2X4 debut, recorded it and put it on the Unitl it sleeps single. That snare  |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 1, 2016 15:06:02 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by Alan-P on Mar 1, 2016 16:30:33 GMT
Does this not stink of winding down? I expect this from KISS |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 4, 2016 23:51:39 GMT
Listened to the fifth member sampler today. The live Phantom Lord was awesome. The garage Ride The Lighting was instrumental, and was slower, but I liked Kirk's solo better if that's even possible. The blitzkrieg and Am I Evil rough mixes were nearly identical to the originals to where they're not really even worth owning. Then again, it's free!
|
|
|
|
Post by Kimbo on Mar 5, 2016 10:18:47 GMT
The solo in Ride is pretty awful there, but that's expected on a garage demo thingy
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 5, 2016 17:55:12 GMT
The solo in Ride is pretty awful there, but that's expected on a garage demo thingy I like it. It has more of an authentic feel, like the Motorheadache covers. Overkill is really sloppy and it sounds like the band didn't practice it at all, but it's still awesome. Maybe the original doesn't have the same power it used to have on me.. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 7, 2016 14:49:36 GMT
Does this not stink of winding down? I expect this from KISS Well it wouldn't surprise me if this was part of the drawing to a close plan. Spent the next 5-8 years touring a new album, releasing the back catalogue in deluxe format and then calling it a day. Nah. This has actual worthwhile content. Of all the things they've sold with the name Metallica on it, this is the least Kiss-like. |
|
|
|
Post by SicJes on Mar 7, 2016 18:57:08 GMT
^ Yeah, those skis were awesome, and the picture of them with the skis was just great.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 7, 2016 20:13:28 GMT
^ Yeah, those skis were awesome, and the picture of them with the skis was just great. I was referring specifically to the deluxe box sets whilst also tacitly acknowledging some of the merch they've released over the years has the whiff of Kiss Kash In about it. But, of course, you knew that already. So it kinda makes your post slightly redundant. And by slightly, I mean, wholly. |
|
|
|
Post by SicJes on Mar 7, 2016 20:21:06 GMT
[This has actual worthwhile content. Of all the things they've sold with the name Metallica on it, this is the least Kiss-like. I was agreeing with this that you said. The box sets are cool, the skis are way more of a Kiss cash grab |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 8, 2016 9:25:01 GMT
[This has actual worthwhile content. Of all the things they've sold with the name Metallica on it, this is the least Kiss-like. I was agreeing with this that you said. The box sets are cool, the skis are way more of a Kiss cash grab Sorry bud. I was in douche-mode yesterday. That'll teach me to visit the internet when work is getting on my tits. |
|
|
|
Post by Kimbo on Mar 8, 2016 15:17:11 GMT
I don't see the fuzz about them releasing stupid shit, if dumbasses bought crap with my name on it, I would too
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 8, 2016 16:00:03 GMT
I don't see the fuzz about them releasing stupid shit, if dumbasses bought crap with my name on it, I would too My feelings too. And, to be fair, it's their jobs. They want to make sure they can pay the bills. Money from record sales is not as high as it was so if they can put food on their tables for the families via selling Kiss Kaskets/Kondoms/Glasses/Keychains/Whatever more power to them. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 15, 2016 8:46:31 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by Zalman on Mar 21, 2016 16:40:59 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by filthyheart on Mar 21, 2016 19:01:04 GMT
So audiophiles how much better is remastered version?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 21, 2016 20:01:08 GMT
Cliff is way more prominent in the mix. That's the thing that really stood out to me. The drums sound punchier. It generally sounds crisper to my ears. I've done a VERY rough A/B mix. The versions alternate every 10 seconds, the first 10 seconds are the current CD mix the next the remastered version and so on, back and forth soundcloud.com/jaysee-683868984/untitled-mixdown |
|
|
|
Post by lightning master on Mar 21, 2016 21:34:39 GMT
Yeah, it felt like you could hear the double bass a bit clearer?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 21, 2016 22:46:58 GMT
Yup. It's worth noting that SoundCloud encodes at 128kbps so by the time I mixed the track down the quality would have lessened again.
It does sound freshers and cleaner to my ears so that's good. Also, comparing the waveforms indicates the (from the SC rop at least) the remaster is not pushing things too much and seems within a good range (ie not brickwalled).
|
|
|
|
Post by ford71V8 on Mar 21, 2016 23:22:16 GMT
Yep, without listening to jaysee's mix or playing the original disc, this sounds a lot clearer and Cliff's bass is more obvious.
These 2 things alone are enough to justify the money and effort of them going through with the project.
I hope they don't go putting out too much before the release, I want to hear it when I own it not be tempted by soundcloud links.
|
|
|
|
Post by metman18 on Mar 22, 2016 3:23:37 GMT
From what I can tell, it sounds great. But why would they choose to showcase the first track, from their first remaster from their first album IN 128 kbps!????
|
|
|
|
Post by Kimbo on Mar 22, 2016 8:39:41 GMT
Dude it's only 2016, not 2026
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 22, 2016 8:58:31 GMT
From what I can tell, it sounds great. But why would they choose to showcase the first track, from their first remaster from their first album IN 128 kbps!???? Because it's a taster. Also accessibility. Besides, if it sounds THIS good in 128kbps, imagine the CD quality..... |
|
|
|
Post by Kimbo on Mar 22, 2016 10:11:44 GMT
From what I can tell, it sounds great. But why would they choose to showcase the first track, from their first remaster from their first album IN 128 kbps!???? Because it's a taster. Also accessibility. Besides, if it sounds THIS good in 128kbps, imagine the CD quality.....  |
|
|
|
Post by Jayzon on Mar 22, 2016 10:23:42 GMT
... What's different in the remaster? I honestly can't hear any difference.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 22, 2016 10:57:42 GMT
... What's different in the remaster? I honestly can't hear any difference. Well I A/B'd the versions in an attempt to demonstrate this. The most prominent thing is that Cliff's bass is up in the mix more. Take a listen to my SC link with headphones. Or listen to the full track and then the current CD mix. It's pretty stark differences. |
|
