"Quadrophenia: The Director's Cut"--Reviews

Now that the thing is finally here, I thought I'd start a new thread so people can weigh in on the actual product--the mastering, the 5.1 mixes, the notorious "new drums," the book, and the swag. Have at it, fellow Who fanatics (disgruntled or otherwise)!

 

I've not had a proper listen yet but the DVD I have has sound glitches in 5 places on the tracks I've Had Enough (1) & The Rock (4).

From what I have heard I like the sound on the 5.1 mix and it reiterates the premise that the whole album should have been available like this. The CD's sound pretty similar to the 1996 mix to my ears.

 

I haven't had a chance to really listen, but the lack of marbles really ruins the whole experience for me.

 

Okay, after months of my complaining and nit-picking, I called my local record store, the owner of which is a great guy with whom I'm on a first-name basis (that place is like my Cheers, which would make me Norm, I guess), just to see if he was going to be getting any of the box sets and so forth, and he said he already had one with my name on it. As in, he received it, and put my name on a post it and put it behind the counter. He also said I could come look at it today. So, instead of going to lunch, that's what I did. The whole way over I said, "Just hold it. Just look at it. Don't be rash." So I held it, and lifted it. And I cursed Pete Townshen for being such a narcissistic ****** bag for wasting all that time on his precious little demos and ignoring everything else. And set it down. And got ready to walk away. And couldn't do it. I could not walk away.

Reader, I purchased it.

So anyway, quick early thoughts. The book is heavy and lovely and much more of a fetish item than I would have thought. The original album artwork is included, and though the reproductions aren't as crisp as they were in the original book, there's a kind of washed out sepia tone to them that I think might have been deliberate. Anyway, I have the album and the 96 CD so this is the third copy of that photo montage I own, and I'm kind of happy to have a different version of it.

The CDs are the 1996 remix. No "seal noises" on "The Dirty Jobs" and so on. The remaster is kind of flat and dry, which isn't necessarily a bad thing. I only sampled it on my car stereo heading over, but all the instruments are kind of shockingly clear and separated. So to that extent, it's kind of another version, and one sure to reveal surprises, I would think. There's a lightness to it, I guess I would say. The original album was lumbering had very heavy--too heavy in the case of Roger's vocals--whereas the 1996 mix was kind of "hot," I would say. This is cool and dry. In a way, the band here sounds like the same band that made "The Who Sell Out." Don't know how else to explain it.

The 45 is a joke, I'm afraid. Heavy vinyl, so that's nice. But the label is a xerox of the old Track label--faded and washed out. Haven't listened to it yet.

And now the 5.1 EP. Again, I only sampled it. But it's a mixed bag, what I heard. But interesting, to be sure. I think this was made from the original mix. On "The Real Me," Roger sings that extra "can you see?" after "Moooother," which is missing on the 1996 mix and is still missing from the new remaster. But the vocal take on that entire verse is different, as is the take on the third verse, which has Roger singing a bit off beat. My guess is that the original album mix was made from two different vocal takes. One is now on the CD, the other on the 5.1. "5:15" is the original mix, with the loud ringing sound when the band explodes after the intro. The ocean and rain sound effects on "Dr. Jimmy" are now on the tail end of "5:15." That is, if you advance to "Dr. Jimmy" you go straight to the opening power cord. This is probably an error in the mastering: No big deal, really. The reverb on Roger's vocal on "Love Reign O'er Me" is very prominent and a bit annoying, though that might just be because the vocal is now isolated in the swirling 5.1mix.

My heart was thumping with excitement as I listened, though, and I'm happy I just bought the sucker and now own it. I mean, if you love this album as much as I do, and you actually hold the thing in your hand, you're toast: trust me. You'll want it. I'm still angry about many of the decisions made here, but it's now mine, and I have it.

Incidentally, as I was typing this, I received an email from The Who website inviting me to watch footage from "Bush Hall," whatever that is (I suppose that's the 2010 performance?). Anyway, it'll be a Quad Thanksgiving, and that's not a bad thing.

 

Bush Hall is where Pete did his solo gig for press last week. It's in Shepherds Bush, & I believe The Who actually played there in the very early days

 

Thanks, Prof, for sharing your first impressions. You had me laughing: not at you, but with you. Like you were until today, I'm determined not to support this overpriced exercise in greed and narcissism. But like you, I'd probably cave in and "put the money down" if I actually held the contents in my hands.

 

I'd be interested in knowing if the actual 45 mixes were used.

The 5.1 mixes would have been made from the 16-track multitracks, not the existing stereo mix.

The Real Me - Are you saying the vocal take is different from one of the CDs? Or the original mix and '96 remix are different takes? Or...?

5.15 - What "loud ringing sound" are you speaking of?

 

Because they were mp3 samples, I didn't want to comment, but your description of the new mastering is close to what I thought I was hearing when listening to the samples (dry, clean, flat?) and I was thinking that could be a good thing too ('96 mastering a bit too hot for me, specially some of the crashing cymabls) if that is how it is or how I hear it when these cd's arrive.

The Q Cloud is available to you too. It looks like it could be interesting. You have to register and have proof of purchase (load the cd, I didn't get that far since mine haven't arrived).

 

I know: it's confusing, as re: the vocal on "The Real Me." I'm saying, yest, the vocal takes on verses 2 and 4 sound different than the one on the CD. On verse two this is very obvious. But the interesting thing is that the 2nd chorus is the same as on the original album--that is, it goes, "Can you see, can you see, can you see, can you see the real me," whereas on the 1996 remix the first "can you see" is missing. The fourth verse sounds a bit odd, too: Like I said, Roger is off syncopation a bit. That might been a problem with the mastering, I don't know, or it was in the original take, and so an alternative take of that verse was dropped in for the original mix--and subsequent others. This was all very quick--I was home during my lunch hour and clicking through the disc with a stop watch in my hand.

More later.

 

When you say "the one on the CD", am I correct in assuming you mean the CDs included in the box? I.e., the '96 remix?

Other than the first "can you see" I had not noticed a difference in the vocals between the '73 and '96 mixes. I would suspect the difference on the 5.1 is due to not making an attempt to match the original mix (or remix, for that matter).

Note on 5.15 the original mix (and '96 remix) uses two different takes for the guitar solo at the end. The soundtrack remix just uses one of the takes, so the start of the solo is different.

 

The vocal on the new CDs is the same as the vocal on the 1996 CD. In both, one of the "can you see"'s is missing. It's here on the 5.1 and on the original album.

If you listen to "5:15" on the 1996 and the new remix, when the band kicks in, you hear only the instruments--guitar, bass, drums, piano, horns. On the original album, and on the 5.1, there's also a loud ringing sound, like ambient feedback, that accompanies that dramatic explosion. I only listened to that part of the track to see if the sound was there, and it was. I haven't listened to the whole track.

 

I'm not talking about the "can you see", but rather your comment that the vocals on verses 2 and 4 were different.

Both the original mix and the '96 remix have a sound just as the drums come in. I'm not certain, but they may be different sounds. The soundtrack remix, on the other hand, does not have a sound at all. And, of course, the CD in the new set ('96 remix with additional tweaking) has an *additional* sound before that, not present on any previous mix.

Not sure what you mean by "the 1996 and the new remix"...the CDs feature the '96 remix, just with that added noise in 5.15. It wasn't a totally new mix.

 

You know this stuff better than I do! Anyway, I'm saying the second verse is a different take on the 5.1--as far as I can tell. And the fourth verse sounds diffrerent in the sense that Roger is off the beat in places. That's as far as I can tell you.

 

Right, but just different from the '96 remix, or also different from the original mix? That is, are you saying the second and fourth verses match on the '73 and '96 mixes but the 5.1 is different? If yes, that makes sense. If not...I have more listening to do.

 

The 5:15 sound effect at the intro is a train whistle. Clear as can be......

 

Which sound effect? We're talking about a few different things. The '73 and '96 mixes have a noise just as the drums are coming in (which sounds like it might be different on the '96), and the new CD version has an additional sound slightly before that, not present before. Not sure if that sound is in the 5.1 mix or not.

 

I mean the latter. The second verse sounds different from any version I've heard--and I think I've heard them all (73, soundtrack, 96, 2011)--while the fourth verse sounds oddly syncopated in a way that I've never noticed on any other version, though that might just be a product of the 5.1 mix, where the vocals sort of float free in the air and away the instruments. On a stereo mix, the vocals are imbedded into the instrumental tracks , and so the weird sort of bad syncopation might just be something I noticed, or imposed on the recording, because of the way the vocal has been "set free" from the band, if that makes sense.

 

Ok, thanks.

 

Roger isn't off beat. The mix is. They obviously failed to sync the vocal track used in the 4th verse correctly with the music. Kinda like every time they try to remix Eleanor Rigby, the vocals or some of the strings are out of sync.

 

On the 45rpm single included in this box. Instead of a whistle sound effect, the sound is that of a guitar pick scaling the strings (left channel)

 

Since I haven't heard this yet, are you saying the vocal is the same, just out of time? That seems surprising, since I wouldn't have expected it to have been mixed from multiple stages of 16-track tapes.

 

I think you're right. That was my first thought. But then, with that odd second verse, I thought maybe the singing was off. But yeah, it's probably in the mix.

 

That guitar sound is on the other mixes too.

 

Clearer here....afaict

 

Assuming we're talking about the same mix, I guess I didn't notice that. It is center or center-right on the other mixes.