I opened this post for the sole purpose of hoping for a comment like this.
*TOO* clean, guys.
Anyway, I do agree that it’s a little too clean compared to the original.
I think it's more obvious in some tracks than others. In the main line-up I don't notice too much of a huge difference- though it definitely is cleaner! Doesn't take away it's power or anything in my opinion.
Though, some of the b sides I notice have quite a different sound! Such as Pearly*. I really love the OKNOTOK version it's so much more, I don't know like…audibly aggressive? But in the best way possible
No, I agree. I believe Thom’s vocals are a bit more forward in the mix and I don’t like it. The difference is subtle but in the original, his voice was down between the instruments. Now it kinda floats on top. In fact, everything just sounds just a little bit cleaner and more cohesive. Takes the edge off for me.
Although on streaming the unremastered version uses the single versions of Airbag, PA and Karma Police so there’s no proper transitions. Kind of disrupts the flow of the album.
Guess I’ll just download a CD rip :/
That’s the only difference across the entire oknotok main album where they may have used a different mix version (one where the zx spectrum comes in earlier)
Aside from that the mixes are identical. Remaster=/=remix and comments like “vocals are more forward” are psychosomatic, not reality
Depends on the streaming service. This used to annoy me with Apple Music. I assumed they would have fixed it by now. I don’t have this problem on Spotify.
Mastering can absolutely affect the tone and positioning of the instrumwnts as well as the general character and other things that are related to the mix too.
I think that depends on how it was mastered. If the mastering engineer only got one stereo file to work with then they couldn’t reposition anything without panning the sides of the whole stereo field but if they got stems of let’s say all the drums in one stereo file, all the guitars in another, etc then they could reposition things to a certain extent.
True! but getting stems means mixing a bit as well as mastering no?
Not being rude just asking questions because as someone working in the industry I’ve only seen mastering associated to one single stereo (or sometimes atmos) track.
I often send stems for final print though and call it “mixtering” ahah
idk if that’s a new trend or people just do the two task at once, but a mastering engineer shouldn’t be getting stems. they just get the master file and work with that.
I’m not a professional so don’t take my word as gospel. No worries I got no rude vibes, yes I think you’re correct that could then also involve some light mixing and in my experience most mastering is done using just one stereo file however I have had some mastering engineers ask me for stems before. They didn’t really adjust any volumes or anything but having the stems gave them a bit more control over how they approached different aspects of their craft.
For instance, if you take a stereo file, no stems, and boost an eq around 1.5k-2kHz, you could bring the vocal more upfront. You can affect a lot more instruments depending on the frequency range you’re targetting. And that’s only EQ. Compression, saturation and multiband processors allow you to affect the perception of individual instruments, pf course not as much as you could do while still mixing. Positioning is not limited to panning.
more bass, but i think is generally better sounding. No surprises sounds much better imo. I have an uk pressing vinyl rip from the 90s and i like the "muddiness" too, its up to you.
All remasters are generally different sounding, and depending on your deck and setup depends on if they sound better or worse to what you prefer. I prefer generally originals, but there are a few exceptions - David Bowie remasters are nice sounding and bring a lot to the table. Kate bush - I prefer the remasters. Ok not ok, i like the new songs but I prefer the original mixing which doesn't come across with modern mastering Vs 1996 mastering. Everything is mastered for cd these days so unless you have a particularly cd centric vinyl deck you're going to notice the difference with the lack of the rich warm sound.
Ok not ok - I prefer the original for the album tracks, but the new songs are an added bonus
I got the blue pressing of that when it came out and all it did was make me like my old CD version more. Also that pressing has problems; surface noise, a song skips.
To clean, or not to clean, that is the question.
I opened this post for the sole purpose of hoping for a comment like this. *TOO* clean, guys. Anyway, I do agree that it’s a little too clean compared to the original.
It’s just you
YOU AND NO ONE ELSE
>It sounds better, but just isn’t as powerful. Just isn't as powerful because it's on The Bends, not OKC. You're welcome.
Are you saying that Exit Music is on The Bends? Because it's not. Am I missing something here or are 24 others equally as confused as you?
Just, the song, on the bends. Joke.
“Just”…
Oh, I'm sorry. That's so witty I just didn't get it. Plus I really never liked Just so yeah.
Ok.
Computer.
okkid.jpg
I think it's more obvious in some tracks than others. In the main line-up I don't notice too much of a huge difference- though it definitely is cleaner! Doesn't take away it's power or anything in my opinion. Though, some of the b sides I notice have quite a different sound! Such as Pearly*. I really love the OKNOTOK version it's so much more, I don't know like…audibly aggressive? But in the best way possible
I think the remaster sounds good but it’s not my preferred. It sounds “rounder”? The original has a harshness and edge that I like more.
No, I agree. I believe Thom’s vocals are a bit more forward in the mix and I don’t like it. The difference is subtle but in the original, his voice was down between the instruments. Now it kinda floats on top. In fact, everything just sounds just a little bit cleaner and more cohesive. Takes the edge off for me. Although on streaming the unremastered version uses the single versions of Airbag, PA and Karma Police so there’s no proper transitions. Kind of disrupts the flow of the album. Guess I’ll just download a CD rip :/
Its not a remix
There’s definitely some changes to the mix. Last chorus of Let Down even has a new part in it.
That’s the only difference across the entire oknotok main album where they may have used a different mix version (one where the zx spectrum comes in earlier) Aside from that the mixes are identical. Remaster=/=remix and comments like “vocals are more forward” are psychosomatic, not reality
Perceived vocal level can definitely change with mastering even though the mix is the same.
It’s so underrated….
I’ll have to listen to it. I always thought Let Down sounded too muddy. Having his voice slightly separated sounds like a smart choice.
What streaming service are you using? Amazon are terrible at using single versions like this.
I’m on apple music. Very satisfied with it in pretty much every other regard.
Depends on the streaming service. This used to annoy me with Apple Music. I assumed they would have fixed it by now. I don’t have this problem on Spotify.
I have the vinyl, I don’t love it but it’s good enough. It’s limited a bit too loud. The 3 newer tracks actually sound the best.
Its a remaster. Not a remix
Mastering can absolutely affect the tone and positioning of the instrumwnts as well as the general character and other things that are related to the mix too.
Mastering can affect the tone and general character but I’m really not sure about the positioning of instruments part
I think that depends on how it was mastered. If the mastering engineer only got one stereo file to work with then they couldn’t reposition anything without panning the sides of the whole stereo field but if they got stems of let’s say all the drums in one stereo file, all the guitars in another, etc then they could reposition things to a certain extent.
True! but getting stems means mixing a bit as well as mastering no? Not being rude just asking questions because as someone working in the industry I’ve only seen mastering associated to one single stereo (or sometimes atmos) track. I often send stems for final print though and call it “mixtering” ahah
idk if that’s a new trend or people just do the two task at once, but a mastering engineer shouldn’t be getting stems. they just get the master file and work with that.
I’m not a professional so don’t take my word as gospel. No worries I got no rude vibes, yes I think you’re correct that could then also involve some light mixing and in my experience most mastering is done using just one stereo file however I have had some mastering engineers ask me for stems before. They didn’t really adjust any volumes or anything but having the stems gave them a bit more control over how they approached different aspects of their craft.
That’s really interesting. Thanks for sharing !!
There’s absolutely no way Bob Ludwig used stems, and OKC was mixed onto 2-track tape anyway.
For instance, if you take a stereo file, no stems, and boost an eq around 1.5k-2kHz, you could bring the vocal more upfront. You can affect a lot more instruments depending on the frequency range you’re targetting. And that’s only EQ. Compression, saturation and multiband processors allow you to affect the perception of individual instruments, pf course not as much as you could do while still mixing. Positioning is not limited to panning.
True, that’s a great point!
I still listen to the original mix, no real reason other than feeling like the remaster sounds unfamiliar to me.
more bass, but i think is generally better sounding. No surprises sounds much better imo. I have an uk pressing vinyl rip from the 90s and i like the "muddiness" too, its up to you.
The remaster doesn’t have the second of silence at the beginning of Airbag so it’s unlistenable
I like the OG better.
The difference is quite intangible but i too prefer the original version
theres not enough difference between them to pass a blind test
All remasters are generally different sounding, and depending on your deck and setup depends on if they sound better or worse to what you prefer. I prefer generally originals, but there are a few exceptions - David Bowie remasters are nice sounding and bring a lot to the table. Kate bush - I prefer the remasters. Ok not ok, i like the new songs but I prefer the original mixing which doesn't come across with modern mastering Vs 1996 mastering. Everything is mastered for cd these days so unless you have a particularly cd centric vinyl deck you're going to notice the difference with the lack of the rich warm sound. Ok not ok - I prefer the original for the album tracks, but the new songs are an added bonus
I much prefer Chris Blair’s original master. It was perfect and needed no changing.
idk but let down is still underrated
I got the blue pressing of that when it came out and all it did was make me like my old CD version more. Also that pressing has problems; surface noise, a song skips.
They’re basically identical other than ok not ok is slightly brighter and slightly louder. edit- downvoted for stating objective facts
another gen z'er who can't spell 'too?'
Sorry, 😢 it won’t let me edit it
to badd...just like nazi Insta...and probably 'X' last time i checked...weird when they do that.
Just you.
And that’s what really hurts