1. Please take 30 seconds to register your free account to remove most ads, post topics, make friends, earn reward points at our store, and more!  
    TalkBass.com has been uniting the low end since 1998.  Join us! :)

The Who reissue "Who's next"- again?????

Discussion in 'Recordings [BG]' started by The Mock Turtle Regulator, Mar 30, 2003.

  1. in today's Totalrock newsletter;

    The Who have revamped their classic 1971 album ‘Who’s Next’, for reissue early next month. The record has been remastered from the original master tapes (the first time this has been done with ‘Who’s Next’). And not only will there be bonus tracks, but also an extra CD featuring a live performance at The Young Vic in London during April 1971."


  2. john turner

    john turner You don't want to do that. Trust me. Staff Member

    Mar 14, 2000
    atlanta ga
    when was it first re-issued?
  3. The Who?

    *snickers uncontrollably*
  4. I have a reissue of Who's next ("remixed & digitally remastered + bonus tracks,rare photos and new sleeve notes") from 1995.

    looks like they're doing what they did with Live at leeds (ie. reissue in 1995, "deluxe edition" in 2001)
  5. gfab333


    Mar 22, 2000
    Honolulu, Hawaii
    I need to check it out. I've always been a finger style player for the most part, but I really like John's tone with that pick on round wounds.
  6. Philbiker

    Philbiker Pat's the best!

    Dec 28, 2000
    Northern Virginia, USA
    The last "remastered" Who's Next is generally considered by hardcore fans and audiophiles to be an abomination. How is it wrong? let me count the ways.....
    • There was nothing wrong with the original mix to begin with. A remix was unnecessary, and it would be almost impossible for it to sound as good as Glyn Johns' original mix.
    • The tapes were extensively noise reduced, noticably killing high end, as if hearing tape hiss from a 1972 recording would somehow be offensive.
    • The whole mix was dynamically compressed, reducing dynamics.
    For the new disc, they went to Glyn Johns' original 2 track master tapes and simply mastered them to CD using modern mastering equipment. They didn't "no-noise" or comress or remix. They just gave us a nice clean presentation of the original master tape that was generated. (for the record, this was done once before, by Steve Hoffman, in the mid-80s. That disc was the definitive CD version of "Who's Next")

    They also gave us some new "bonus tracks", and the second disc of Young Vic "Lifehouse" performances is worth the price of the set IMO.

    I got the remaster and I'm very happy with it.
  7. that's interesting- I've always thought the mixes on my 1995 reissue were dull-sounding re. high end, but I just thought this was the way the tracks were mixed originally.
    I might have to check out this re-reissue after all.
  8. Thor

    Thor Moderator Staff Member Gold Supporting Member

    It's kind of typical, 25 years later some nitwit comes along and decides his ear is better...

    The original masters, I assume that they are done on 1/2" professional tape, are probably excellent.
    The equipment in 1972 in top studios was not that bad, people were putting in equipment at that time worth millions, after Jimi's Electric Lady studios
    raised the bar to 64 track.

    And Glyn was one of many in that era that produced fine work. It is unfortunate that this happens, but it does.

    I felt the same way when I got James Gangs greatest hits on CD, what THE HECK happened! It got mixed for a whole different sound. Not a good thing to do for one of the worlds LOUDest bands.
    " 'If my Jack Casady were Jack Casady, I couldn't
    reproduce with it. ' :D "
    Going to eleven ....
  9. jerry

    jerry Doesn't know BDO Gold Supporting Member

    Dec 13, 1999
    I agree with Philbiker, the live second disc is worth it.........but I do wish they would have charged a little less for it! It's like the new "Remastered" Bob Marley albums with the extra disc.......thirty bucks and they take Familyman Barretts name off the songwriting credits:mad:
  10. brianrost

    brianrost Gold Supporting Member

    Apr 26, 2000
    Boston, Taxachusetts
    Modern listeners seem to be used to very compressed and in your face mixes and many remasters I have heard go for this sound rather than using the capacity of the CD to have a more dynamic mix and try to recreate the original mix minus the alterations for LP mastering (like reducing the bass content :rolleyes: ).

    The only advantage of a compressed mix is it sounds good at low volumes but uncompressed mixes sound much better if you can crank them up. There's no impact without dynamics.

    I do wonder about these endless remasters. I 'm a big King Crimson fan and their back catalog has been remastered at least three times. I'm not rich enough to keep buying the same CDs over and over ;)

    As far as bonus live tracks, it amazes me how much live stuff has been languishing in vaults only to pop up 30 years later. Not long ago I bought a UK remaster of Traffic's "John Barleycorn". It has two songs from a live album that was announced for release in 1970 but cancelled at the very last minute. So where's the REST of it? How come the Who have been sitting on these Old Vic tapes if they are so good and include songs never released in any form? Where did the Doors find the tapes for this rash of live albums they have been issuing over the last 2 years? In 20 years will there be 10 more remasters of the King Crimson catalog? :confused:
  11. Philbiker

    Philbiker Pat's the best!

    Dec 28, 2000
    Northern Virginia, USA
    It's "Young Vic" BTW.

    The Young Vic tapes were first really investigated in the mid 90s with the production of the big box set "30 years of Maximum R&B". A couple songs found their way into that set, and one or two more found their way to the original Who's Next 1995 remix/remaster :spit:. In the literature for the box set they discuss the possibilities of releasing the stuff down the line. They didn't just pop out of nowhere.

    The reason they were never released is that they're very rough around the edges, and were not recorded with any intention to ever release them as a live album. Some of the performances are very sloppy, definitely not on par with the exceptional "Live At Leeds". Still, for a hardcore fan they're fascinating.
  12. jerry

    jerry Doesn't know BDO Gold Supporting Member

    Dec 13, 1999
    True!....the Live at the Young vic is not exactly Live at Leeds........but it just amazing to hear a band just so close to the edge of train wrecking, and pulling it out at the last minute:bassist: The Who have always been a real high-wire act in live shows with Moonie;)
  13. I would most probably get it, for the live material. I'm like the biggest WHO fan, so I can't pass around this one. I would like Townshend to release more live material. I know there are good quality bootlegs out there, so I guess he can do better. The couple of live numbers from the "Who By Numbers" re-issue are really worth it. I don't understand why they don't include more. I guess they don't see any profit to be had.

    Getting back to "Who's Next", it's really one of the greatest rock albums ever. It's a fantastic ride, and I just wish Townshend would have finished his original vision in time to have released this album as "Lifehouse", the rock opera (yes, another one).

    I also can't wait for the "Kids Are Allright" DVD. I should come out soon. Entwistle's performance of "Won't Get Fooled Again" is just beautiful to listen and watch.

    I can't have enought of THE WHO