Detailed message on "Very Best of," for those interested

[Cili]

If you aren't wondering about the "Very Best of" release, then this message may not interest you much. This message isn't about anything else, so if you're not interested you can stop reading here. No top three lists.

Initially I was opposed to yet another compilation release, but since some of the tracks have been remastered, I thought it might be worth owning. After buying the CD and giving it a perfunctory listen, I gave a second close listen to it, taking track by track notes, thinking that maybe I would review it but after I was all done I realized that this degree of scrutiny matters little to most people, Smiths fans or not. So, I thought since I'd gone through the trouble of taking notes on each track, I'd bring some of the more interesting comments to this board for those of you who may be interested. I'll just list them in bullet fashion for brevity.

Comments of overall "Very Best of The Smiths" sound:
The many poorly recorded original vocals--possibly due to the limitations of the original analog equipment--are exposed with this new digital remastering.

The songs sound less warm, a bit sterile, to the already initiated Smiths fan with a halfway decent ear. But I have very good speakers, which helps bring out all the details of the songs. I don't know how well the details would be hidden through lesser systems. I've only played it on my main one so far. Can you tell yet that I hate digital sound? This whole compilation album sounds like that so if you're like me, think twice about buying.

The Queen is Dead/The Smiths tracks benefit the most from the remastering due to their relatively poor original sound (especially the debut album). But there is something endearing and special about that warm analog sound. That "flawed" sound ties the band to their era and allows a fan to understand the band and their sui generis music within context.

Most of the noticeable remastering seems to be the balancing of all the instruments. The bass guitars and the bass drums are no longer overpowered and are rounded out as well as evened out within the mixes.

The Strangeways tracks were needlessly touched "up." They ended up sounding thinner, matching the sound of the rest of the compilation CD, but losing the original--and intended--richness. Johnny Marr has talked about how he wanted his first guitars to sound large and up front on that album. These tracks were definitely hurt the most, and the remastering actually inadvertently somewhat altered the stylistic change Johnny made towards the end of The Smiths. Leaving the Strangeways songs as they originally were may have hurt the homogenous quality of the compilation, but I feel that a compilation album should serve the catalogue of songs, and not the other way around.

That said, here are the tracks that were most affected by the digital remastering--and by the way, no track was untouched:
"How Soon is Now?": This track is very modernized. Low end really brought out, and the contemporary hip-hop influence is apparent. The amazing thing is that the track (its music especially) translates extremely well, and I'd love to hear Johnny re-record this one as an instrumental. It's amazing to think that this song was recorded in 1984.

"Some Girls Are Bigger Than Others": While being cleaned up and more balanced, whoever did the remastering was a bit too zealous. The low end is way too exaggerated. It changes the song.

"Hand In Glove": this song is one of the few that benefited--and it benefited the most--from digital remastering. This is the way the track should've sounded the first time. All instruments and levels are balanced nicely. The recording is also set at a comfortable level, unlike tracks such as "Some Girls Are Bigger Than Others," or "How Soon is Now?" which have some settings that are too high. The overall bass sounds (on those tracks) almost engineered to be overdriven. On "Hand in Glove" they sound right.

"Please Please Please Let Me Get What I Want": Levels raised to match other tracks (the original was very low). But somehow the track, by doing this, also loses some of its original subtlety and subdued melancholy in this new remastered version. Strange, but the track was hurt by being aurally improved. Although, members of Camp Morrissey may be pleased by the extreme and sharpened clarity of the his voice.

"Sheila Take a Bow": Second song to benefit from digital remastering. All the instrumentation is made clearer and all the levels have been raised. It sounds much better. The original released version is very flat and muddled.

"I Started Something I Couldn't Finish": Totally needless remastering. Sounds thinned out and digitised. It sounds the way you'd expect the track to sound downloaded and through very good computer speakers. There's a big hole in the middle of the sound. Absolutely vile to anyone with a good ear.

"Still Ill": Third song to benefit from remastering. Cleaned up, and low end levels raised and balanced. The guitars particularly have been affected. They sparkle and have much more dimension. The sound is digital, but the guitars somehow sound much more natural. While the song does sound better, I feel this is a testament to the horrendous sound of the original release, as opposed to the "improved" quality of these digital remastered jobs. Morrissey's tears upon first listen back then were definitely warranted.

"Shoplifters of the World Unite": Fourth song to benefit from remastering. Sound is now balanced and has more dimension. Original recording is offensively flat (I've always felt this way), and now the song breathes a bit.

"Last Night I Dreamt That Somebody Loved Me": As far as the sound goes, this is the Strangeways track least hurt by remastering but this single release edit is abrupt and clumsy. A fade in with some of the build up left in would've been better in my opinion. But I digress.

"Stop Me If You've Heard This One Before" [sic]: Badly hurt by remastering. The sound--mainly the guitars--is very thin. The first position guitars were suppressed a bit, while the second position guitars were brought out more. Terrible. It sounds like early Smiths guitar--which is fine for early Smiths songs, but (according to Johnny Marr) Strangeways tracks weren't meant to sound that way.

A friend of mine recently made me a double-disc Smiths compilation, and while the track listing makes it my favourite album of all time at this point, the drawback is the fact that the songs vary so greatly in recording quality. I'd say that the best thing about the new Smiths compilation is that it has a homogenous sound quality about it even though the tracks extend over the course of five years of recording. "Please Please Please..." sounds as if it were pulled from the same recording session as "Stop Me..." and that in my opinion greatly makes it easier to go from track to track when sitting down and really listening to it. The one good thing this does is it allows the new listener to span the career of The Smiths in one fluid listen. The Very Best of The Smiths actually sounds like a single album in terms of sound quality but while it may be great for a new fan with the modernized ear, I'm sure the old fan will prefer the 'character' of the original recordings nine times out of ten.

I'm sorry if this felt long, but I pretty much copied my notes directly, and I thought that this might be helpful for anyone on this board who's still trying to decide whether it's worth it to dish out the import price of a disc with no new songs. I also don't understand the misspellings of titles. That's ridiculous!

Cili.

P.S. "Heaven Knows I'm Miserable Now," which is one of my top two favourite Smiths songs of all time, sounds fu*king terrible. The guitars were hurt badly, and the bass is too large, smothering the mix. I'm sure Andy Rourke loves it, but the remastered sound is sh*t.

P.P.S. I've never noticed this before, but in that Salford Lads Club picture of the band (it's on the back of the comp album), Andy Rourke's jean's are so tight, it looks like it's smashing his penis into an omlette.

 

[Jimmy]

Re: I wish I had as much free time on my hands as you do

 

[A Nice Tingle of Skins]

Thank you for all that. I appreciate it. And I won't be buying 'Very Best of'. I like the old analogue sounds played on my old analogue cassettes. Am I the only fan to have all of the Smiths albums only on the Rough Trade cassttes? I love 'em. An you too Cili. x

Ps I had noticed Rouke's trouser snake. eeeurrrrghhhhh.

 

[L'Estrange]

> If you aren't wondering about the "Very Best of"
> release, then this message may not interest you much. This
> message isn't about anything else, so if you're not interested
> you can stop reading here. No top three lists.

> Initially I was opposed to yet another compilation release, but
> since some of the tracks have been remastered, I thought it
> might be worth owning. After buying the CD and giving it a
> perfunctory listen, I gave a second close listen to it, taking
> track by track notes, thinking that maybe I would review it but
> after I was all done I realized that this degree of scrutiny
> matters little to most people, Smiths fans or not. So, I thought
> since I'd gone through the trouble of taking notes on each
> track, I'd bring some of the more interesting comments to this
> board for those of you who may be interested. I'll just list
> them in bullet fashion for brevity.

> Comments of overall "Very Best of The Smiths" sound:
> The many poorly recorded original vocals--possibly due to the
> limitations of the original analog equipment--are exposed with
> this new digital remastering.

> The songs sound less warm, a bit sterile, to the already
> initiated Smiths fan with a halfway decent ear. But I have very
> good speakers, which helps bring out all the details of the
> songs. I don't know how well the details would be hidden through
> lesser systems. I've only played it on my main one so far. Can
> you tell yet that I hate digital

Spot on!
Some tracks are enhanced and that bass is just too strong in others. And yes despite thier shortfalls the original poor recordings contains warmth.
Possibly Morrissey's young voice was suited to a poorer recording - i don't really know, as it is something i can't truthfully say i can identify.
But well done for taking the time and effort to express the "new" remastering in words. Some of us are wary of this release- cover star, mis- spellings etc and as you have stated some good is to be found on this release!

 

[Cili]

> Thank you for all that. I appreciate it.

You're welcome. I thought the info could come in handy, and at the very least it can be interesting reading for someone who plans on not buying the cd but is curious about it.

> And I won't be buying
> 'Very Best of'. I like the old analogue sounds played on my old
> analogue cassettes. Am I the only fan to have all of the Smiths
> albums only on the Rough Trade cassttes?

That's charming that you feel no need to keep up with new technology. I have friends that remain loyal to vinyl, and I find something very endearing and comforting about a person in the middle of all this high tech machinery sticking to, and being contented with, an old cassette or record. The only gripe I have about cassettes though, is how it's impossible to jump from song to song. And you also don't get the cool dust jackets like with records!

> I love 'em. An you too Cili. x



How do you make the smiley faces blush?

Cili.

> Ps I had noticed Rouke's trouser snake. eeeurrrrghhhhh.

It's all smashed though. I doubt it's shaped much like a snake in that photo. Jeans that tight have got to be bad for a man's sperm count.

 

[Cili]

> Spot on!

Thanks! I think I've developed a good ear over the years, and musician friends have helped me appreciate music more fully as well. Which is why I appreciate The Smiths much more than Morrissey solo. At least, now I know how to justify it anyway.

> Some tracks are enhanced and that bass is just too strong in
> others.

I agree. On "How Soon is Now?" it works, since the song has that swampy, groovy feel to it. It's hard to tell whether it was accidental or intentional. But on "Some Girls are Bigger Than Others," I'm pretty sure the bass was accidental, since it's even out of balance with the rest of the cd and doesn't go with the song. I think maybe the person (or persons) doing the remastering--two people are credited--hasn't much familiarity with The Smiths and tried to manipulate the songs without keeping the artistic intentions of The Smiths in mind. Which is a shame, since you can change a lot with subtle shifts in sound. There's a reason why a guitarist will choose one guitar over another. Differences in sound affect the listener's emotions. All you have to do is find the element of a song that you want to dominate the mix, and the whole tune is different. This may seem persnickety to some, but as the saying goes: "The devil is in the details."

> And yes despite thier shortfalls the original poor
> recordings contains warmth.

Yes, the originals are better, the only exception for me being "Sheila Take a Bow." Although the remastered "Hand in Glove" is an improvement, the original isn't horrible. The original "Sheila Take a Bow," for some reason, sounds God awful. There's so much in there that's difficult to hear because the sound quality is so poor. It's like listening to the track through am radio. It's such a great song too.

> Possibly Morrissey's young voice was suited to a poorer
> recording - i don't really know, as it is something i can't
> truthfully say i can identify.

Oh, I don't know about that. I think that we're a bit biased since it's always most comfortable to go back home so to speak. And even though The Smiths have a lot of songs with crappy sound, the bulk of their catalogue sounds great. Young Morrissey's voice on Strangeways tracks, sounds great. He sounds beautiful on "I Won't Share you" for example. And Meat is Murder, aside from the slightly convoluted "Headmaster Ritual," sounds great. It's just those odd songs here and there, like "Sheila Take a Bow," "William It Was Really Nothing," or "This Night Has Opened My Eyes" that sound poor. Fantastic songs though!

> But well done for taking the time and effort to express the
> "new" remastering in words.

Thanks again. I'm glad some people appreciated it. I was afraid no one would want to read about it.

> and as you have stated some good is to be found on this
> release!

I think it's great for the nascent Smiths fan--and I suppose it's good timing for this remastered compilation--but the tried and true fans wouldn't miss a thing without buying the cd.

Cili.

 

[Ruffian]

Thanks for the detailed synopsis.. a needless cash in!! Like you're generally saying.. most of the originals are where its at..

> It's all smashed though. I doubt it's shaped much like a snake
> in that photo. Jeans that tight have got to be bad for a man's
> sperm count.

Re the 'Bass Things' Thing.. He may have been wearing refrigerated underpants, and had loads of Zinc tablets to accommodate the omelette you amusingly notice.... isn't that good for your S count?

 

[hazard]

Well, now you all know why Morrissey wasn't too keen on this thing being released into the public domain before some form of 'creative' input could be provided, by at least one of the original band members.

This smacks of a little lack of knowledge from the record label. Surely Morrissey wants to ensure that his songs are put out
in an appropriate style and quality - no-one would begrudge any recording artist of that privelege.

Regards,

Hazard

> Thanks! I think I've developed a good ear over the years, and
> musician friends have helped me appreciate music more fully as
> well. Which is why I appreciate The Smiths much more than
> Morrissey solo. At least, now I know how to justify it anyway.

> I agree. On "How Soon is Now?" it works, since the
> song has that swampy, groovy feel to it. It's hard to tell
> whether it was accidental or intentional. But on "Some
> Girls are Bigger Than Others," I'm pretty sure the bass was
> accidental, since it's even out of balance with the rest of the
> cd and doesn't go with the song. I think maybe the person (or
> persons) doing the remastering--two people are credited--hasn't
> much familiarity with The Smiths and tried to manipulate the
> songs without keeping the artistic intentions of The Smiths in
> mind. Which is a shame, since you can change a lot with subtle
> shifts in sound. There's a reason why a guitarist will choose
> one guitar over another. Differences in sound affect the
> listener's emotions. All you have to do is find the element of a
> song that you want to dominate the mix, and the whole tune is
> different. This may seem persnickety to some, but as the saying
> goes: "The devil is in the details."

> Yes, the originals are better, the only exception for me being
> "Sheila Take a Bow." Although the remastered
> "Hand in Glove" is an improvement, the original isn't
> horrible. The original "Sheila Take a Bow," for some
> reason, sounds God awful. There's so much in there that's
> difficult to hear because the sound quality is so poor. It's
> like listening to the track through am radio. It's such a great
> song too.

> Oh, I don't know about that. I think that we're a bit biased
> since it's always most comfortable to go back home so to speak.
> And even though The Smiths have a lot of songs with crappy
> sound, the bulk of their catalogue sounds great. Young
> Morrissey's voice on Strangeways tracks, sounds great. He sounds
> beautiful on "I Won't Share you" for example. And Meat
> is Murder, aside from the slightly convoluted "Headmaster
> Ritual," sounds great. It's just those odd songs here and
> there, like "Sheila Take a Bow," "William It Was
> Really Nothing," or "This Night Has Opened My
> Eyes" that sound poor. Fantastic songs though!

> Thanks again. I'm glad some people appreciated it. I was
> afraid no one would want to read about it.

> I think it's great for the nascent Smiths fan--and I suppose
> it's good timing for this remastered compilation--but the tried
> and true fans wouldn't miss a thing without buying the cd.

> Cili.

 

[um]

I'm not interested so shut it (nm)

 

[Cili]

Re: Twisted knobs and penis omlettes

> Thanks for the detailed synopsis.. a needless cash in!!

More than being needless, it should've been dissuaded--at least in this (so) digital format. Ugh. I abhor that digital sound when it's so poorly masked. With a band as historically important as The Smiths, you'd think that a little more effort would have been made to present a better product. I think the time is right for such a compilation album but the whole thing reeks of philistine apathy. It just seems so, so lazily done. Like the attitude was: "Let's just twist a few knobs and put it out there. No one will care." If Warner Music owns The Smiths, I don't see why they couldn't just release an analog remastered album. It didn't have to be this digitised crap.

> Like you're generally saying.. most of the originals are
> where its at..

Yeah, I don't want to seem like I'm opposed to altering The Smiths' music in any way, but compared to the digital remastered stuff, the originals are definitely where it's at.

> Re the 'Bass Things' Thing.. He may have been wearing
> refrigerated underpants, and had loads of Zinc tablets to
> accommodate the omelette you amusingly notice.... isn't that
> good for your S count?

Not *my* S count!

Cili.

 

[Cili]

When has Morrissey commented on "The Very Best of"?

> Well, now you all know why Morrissey wasn't too keen on this
> thing being released into the public domain before some form of
> 'creative' input could be provided, by at least one of the
> original band members.

I'd have liked for that one band member to have been Mike Joyce. It would've been all rhythm and attitude. Hee, hee. I don't recall reading Morrissey commenting on this compilation album. Was it on this website? I must've missed it.

> This smacks of a little lack of knowledge from the record label.
> Surely Morrissey wants to ensure that his songs are put out
> in an appropriate style and quality - no-one would begrudge any
> recording artist of that privelege.

Record companies don't exactly have vested interests in pleasing former pop icons, especially when the former pop icons have no legal connections to their music. Whether Morrissey was happy or sad, dead or alive, should make about as much difference as sh*t on a shoe to Warner Music.

Besides, judging from Morrissey's attitude towards The Smiths, I'd say that even if he were asked he'd want nothing to do with helping remaster old Smiths tunes. Then again, I don't know if he'd even be able to if he wanted to. Morrissey, while being a genius lyricist and charismatic performer doesn't seem to have musicality. And as far as Johnny goes, he doesn't even seem to like discussing his music that's a few years old. I can't see him wanting to be involved with remastering fifteen year old Smiths tunes.

I suppose we all should face the fact that to both Morrissey and Johnny Marr, The Smiths is dead history. In a way, it should be that way. They've both got a lot of music to make, and the last thing they should do right now is look backwards. We fans are doing just fine in that department.

Cili.

 

[Ruffian]

Re: Twisted knobs and penis omlettes

Your Comments are very insisive. We agree unanimously. I like the raw sounds of for example, Handsome Devil, and would really dislike a digital version. It's like oldest versions of Still Ill are far batter than the later versions for me.. I am not a fan of 'over production'.

> Not *my* S count!

I would hope your 's' count is low, Cili!! ha ha Sorry to be lewd or suggestive, but you can probably regulate yours by choice anyway!!

And would a pen1s omelette be allowed in a vegetarian diet?

 

[Cili]

Re: penis omelette

> And would a pen1s omelette be allowed in a vegetarian diet?

One may chew but not swallow.

Cili.

 

[Ruffian]

Re: penis omelette

> One may chew but not swallow.

...as anthony said to Cleopatra as he opened a crate of ale... 'Carry On Cili'

But no gargling!!!

> Cili.

Ha ha.. thanks.. the etiquette of vegetarianism exposed for all.. meat and two veg for me I am afraid.

 

[Laura]

'Fraid he mentioned it quite a bit ago...said his info came from a 'reliable source...'

> I'd have liked for that one band member to have been Mike Joyce.
> It would've been all rhythm and attitude. Hee, hee. I don't
> recall reading Morrissey commenting on this compilation album.
> Was it on this website? I must've missed it.

It was on the front page right after he posted that there was to be yet another compilation set up. David said that Morrissey had expressed his dislike for the fact that it was happening and in the choice of the sleeve picture, but the company that did it said it was too late and past the production stages to change anything...anyway- rather old news at this point. I just missed your message when you posted it probably days ago! How are ya, Cili? Are you going to the SaTH's on saturday? Email me and tell me if you'd rather do it that way. I don't know if I will go or not at this time. I probably won't know until saturday at 5p.m.!

Laura