Complete Masters compared/contrasted with Franklin Mint

Anything about Elvis
More than 100 Million visitors can't be wrong

Moderators: FECC-Moderator, Moderator5, Moderator3, Site Mechanic


Matthew

Re: Complete Masters compared/contrasted with Franklin Mint

Post by Matthew »

Sebastian E wrote:Matthew, what is your opinion regarding the claim that remixes were used for the 60s box set? Can you compare the box set with the (1991?) release of FEIM (masterd by Dick Baxter)?
I don't have that CD anymore - gave it away a number of years ago to a band buddy of mine. My opinion though is that the stereo mixes are original - at least for the album tracks. Only a number of '69 tracks were mixed afresh in the early 90s I believe - mainly some of the singles.


User avatar

Sebastian E
Posts: 506
Registered for: 15 years 2 months
Location: Germany
Has thanked: 909 times
Been thanked: 374 times

Re: Complete Masters compared/contrasted with Franklin Mint

Post by Sebastian E »

I just compared them again and stand by my earlier claim that the mixes are identical.

frus75, thank you for that quote. IMO it does not say that everything beside the Elvis Is Back tracks was remixed for the box set.



Matthew

Re: Complete Masters compared/contrasted with Franklin Mint

Post by Matthew »

Matthew wrote:Mystery Train appears to be the same restored work that appeared on "Elvis at Sun", including the full fade from a lower generation tape mentioned here:
The equally great new Sony transfer of the unprocessed, dynamic Mystery Train makes its debut here on 'Elvis at SUN'. The original, full-ending-to-the last-note version derived from lost Sun Tape Box #1 (that was reported to us by Sven Adamski in 1999) has been recovered from the best available source (tape copy with compression and severe generation loss) and matched with precision during the fade-out, using all the tricks in the book and for once stretching all the 'Elvis at SUN' restoration rules. The result of this impossible task is stunning considering the circumstances.
Sebastian Jeansson - elvisrecordings.com

This would appear to give implication that Kevan Budd's work is certainly still being used - at least at a pre-mastering stage.
To add some confusion to the mix the "Vic" version doesn't sync with the "Budd" version - although both feature that same restored full-fade.


User avatar

thenexte
Posts: 1574
Registered for: 19 years 7 months
Has thanked: 4 times
Been thanked: 39 times

Re: Complete Masters compared/contrasted with Franklin Mint

Post by thenexte »

Matthew wrote:This evening I have reviewed tracks 1 to 12 (ie. the original album tracks) from the Legacy Edition against 1999's "Suspicious Minds - The Memphis Anthology". Every single one of them stays in sync. On paper this tells me both releases from the same digital source transfers. Now, disclaimer: it should be noted they are not the same remasters, the Legacy set has better sonics.
I think that's a wrong conclusion, if two digital transfers sync up then they are likely sourced from the same analog source (meaning they used the same tape for the analog-to-digital transfer), but certainly not from the same digital source, that doesn't make any sense. What is a digital source transfer anyways?



Matthew

Re: Complete Masters compared/contrasted with Franklin Mint

Post by Matthew »

thenexte wrote:
Matthew wrote:This evening I have reviewed tracks 1 to 12 (ie. the original album tracks) from the Legacy Edition against 1999's "Suspicious Minds - The Memphis Anthology". Every single one of them stays in sync. On paper this tells me both releases from the same digital source transfers. Now, disclaimer: it should be noted they are not the same remasters, the Legacy set has better sonics.
I think that's a wrong conclusion, if two digital transfers sync up then they are likely sourced from the same analog source (meaning they used the same tape for the analog-to-digital transfer), but certainly not from the same digital source, that doesn't make any sense. What is a digital source transfer anyways?
I think you've misread what I've written. I'm saying that both releases use the same digital transfers. I do not believe tracks 1 to 12 have been re-transferred for the Legacy Edition - simply re-mastered from the 1993 digital transfers.

A tape player is mechanical, and needs to be calibrated. No two digital transfers from the same tape will be 100% identical. Sometimes the drift is little, sometimes its wider but it is what it is. A transfer made in 1993 will not sync in the digital realm with a transfer made in 2007, there will be variences.


User avatar

thenexte
Posts: 1574
Registered for: 19 years 7 months
Has thanked: 4 times
Been thanked: 39 times

Re: Complete Masters compared/contrasted with Franklin Mint

Post by thenexte »

Matthew wrote:
thenexte wrote:
Matthew wrote:This evening I have reviewed tracks 1 to 12 (ie. the original album tracks) from the Legacy Edition against 1999's "Suspicious Minds - The Memphis Anthology". Every single one of them stays in sync. On paper this tells me both releases from the same digital source transfers. Now, disclaimer: it should be noted they are not the same remasters, the Legacy set has better sonics.
I think that's a wrong conclusion, if two digital transfers sync up then they are likely sourced from the same analog source (meaning they used the same tape for the analog-to-digital transfer), but certainly not from the same digital source, that doesn't make any sense. What is a digital source transfer anyways?
I think you've misread what I've written. I'm saying that both releases use the same digital transfers. I do not believe tracks 1 to 12 have been re-transferred for the Legacy Edition - simply re-mastered from the 1993 digital transfers.

A tape player is mechanical, and needs to be calibrated. No two digital transfers from the same tape will be 100% identical. Sometimes the drift is little, sometimes its wider but it is what it is. A transfer made in 1993 will not sync in the digital realm with a transfer made in 2007, there will be variences.

http://www.elvisinfonet.com/interview_ernst_from_elvis_in_memphis.html
EIN: Who did the audio remastering on this new ‘From Elvis In Memphis’ and is the quality a real upgrade?

Ernst: Vic Anesini and you tell me if you think it sounds better. I do, but this is not necessarily something that the average consumer will notice.

EIN: Did you find better generation tapes, or a new Studio master?

Ernst: They were the same tapes. But better transfer and mastering. However this is also subjective.



Matthew

Re: Complete Masters compared/contrasted with Franklin Mint

Post by Matthew »

thenexte wrote:
Matthew wrote:I think you've misread what I've written. I'm saying that both releases use the same digital transfers. I do not believe tracks 1 to 12 have been re-transferred for the Legacy Edition - simply re-mastered from the 1993 digital transfers.

A tape player is mechanical, and needs to be calibrated. No two digital transfers from the same tape will be 100% identical. Sometimes the drift is little, sometimes its wider but it is what it is. A transfer made in 1993 will not sync in the digital realm with a transfer made in 2007, there will be variences.

http://www.elvisinfonet.com/interview_ernst_from_elvis_in_memphis.html
EIN: Who did the audio remastering on this new ‘From Elvis In Memphis’ and is the quality a real upgrade?

Ernst: Vic Anesini and you tell me if you think it sounds better. I do, but this is not necessarily something that the average consumer will notice.

EIN: Did you find better generation tapes, or a new Studio master?

Ernst: They were the same tapes. But better transfer and mastering. However this is also subjective.
I'm afraid the audio evidence - at least on paper - speaks for itself. I've done some digging looking for that IRSC report - my friend, you posted them here!
thenexte wrote:And here are the ISRC's. Strangely enough, the ISRC's of the original FEIM tracks (Disc 1, Tracks 1-12) are identical to the ISRCs these tracks had on the 60's box set, I can only hope the mastering will be not!
DISC 1:
01 USRC16908256
02 USRC16908257
03 USRC16903936
04 USRC16908258
05 USRC16903937
06 USRC16908259
07 USRC16908260
08 USRC16903938
09 USRC16908261
10 USRC16908262
11 USRC16903635
12 USRC16906016
13 USRC19306035
14 USRC19306033
15 USRC19306040
16 USRC19305712

DISC 2:
01 USRC19306028
02 USRC19306023
03 USRC19306037
04 USRC19306026
05 USRC19306038
06 USRC19306039
07 USRC19306032
08 USRC19306041
09 USRC19306025
10 USRC19306034
11 USRC16906016
12 USRC16903635
13 USRC19901938
14 USRC16901355
15 USRC16908462
16 USRC16908264
17 USRC16908282
18 USRC16903934
19 USRC19901933
20 USRC16908463
FULL DETAILS 'From Elvis In Memphis' 40th Anniv - 2 CD Set - page 6

Based on my testing it would certainly appear to be the case that those first 12 tracks are old transfers BUT remastered in 2007 - the results are far superior to the 60s box.



Claus

Re: Complete Masters compared/contrasted with Franklin Mint

Post by Claus »

How old? From 1969?



Matthew

Re: Complete Masters compared/contrasted with Franklin Mint

Post by Matthew »

Claus wrote:How old? From 1969?
Haha, no. Although hopefully 1969 tapes were used in the first place! No - the evidence appears to show that tracks 1 through 12 on "From Elvis in Memphis - Legacy Edition" (ie. 2007 restoration project masters used on the Mint set and likely the upcoming Complete Masters set) are in fact remastered from the 1993 (or earlier) digital transfers done for "From Nashville to Memphis - The Essential 60s Masters 1", rather than fresh digital transfers as implied by the various commentaries on this project.



Claus

Re: Complete Masters compared/contrasted with Franklin Mint

Post by Claus »

Then why don't they have "93" in the number like the Back In Memphis tracks?



Matthew

Re: Complete Masters compared/contrasted with Franklin Mint

Post by Matthew »

Claus wrote:Then why don't they have "93" in the number like the Back In Memphis tracks?
Honestly? Couldn't say. All I know is that it was noted that the numbers are the same here as for the 60s Box and that based on loading rips of the same songs from each release and analysing them they appear to derive from the same original digital transfers.


User avatar

KiwiAlan
Posts: 11660
Registered for: 19 years 7 months
Location: Wellington, New Zealand
Been thanked: 15 times

Re: Complete Masters compared/contrasted with Franklin Mint

Post by KiwiAlan »

It's rather obvious that the first 12 tracks eg USRC16908256 are referencing the date of recording - 1969 - many years before the advent of digital


When you get to the point where you really understand your computer, it's probably obsolete
User avatar

Topic author
elvissessions
Posts: 2554
Registered for: 18 years 8 months
Been thanked: 7 times

Re: Complete Masters compared/contrasted with Franklin Mint

Post by elvissessions »

[This is a continuation of the thread's original post.]

Following is an analysis of songs on the Franklin Mint set that have been -- and have not been -- restored to "perfect" mono, both in the mono and stereo eras.

This analysis allows us to consider patterns in restoration work. It also provides a quick -- but far from 100 percent reliable -- check of masters during the stereo era for which mono masters might have been selected.

These songs are sorted according to their placement on the Complete Masters set.

Songs from the mono era that are in "perfect" mono
Disc 1
_Harbor Lights
_I Love You Because
_That’s All Right
_Blue Moon
_I’ll Never Let You Go
_I Don’t Care If the Sun Don’t Shine
_Just Because
_Good Rockin’ Tonight
_Baby Let’s Play House
_I’m Left, You’re Right, She’s Gone
_I Forgot to Remember to Forget
_Mystery Train
_Trying to Get to You
_I Got a Woman
_Heartbreak Hotel
_Money Honey
_I’m Counting on You
_I Was the One

Disc 2
_Blue Suede Shoes
_My Baby Left Me
_One-Sided Love Affair
_So Glad You’re Mine
_I’m Gonna Sit Right Down and Cry (Over You)
_Tutti Frutti
_Lawdy, Miss Clawdy
_Shake, Rattle and Roll
_I Want You, I Need You, I Love You
_Hound Dog
_Don’t Be Cruel
_Any Way You Want Me (That’s How I Will Be)
_We’re Gonna Move
_Love Me Tender
_Poor Boy
_Let Me
_Love Me
_How Do You Think I Feel
_How’s the World Treating You
_When My Blue Moon Turns to Gold Again
_Long Tall Sally
_Old Shep
_Paralyzed
_Anyplace Is Paradise
_Ready Teddy
_First in Line
_Rip It Up

Disc 3
_(Let Me Be Your) Teddy Bear
_Don’t Leave Me Now
_I Beg of You
_One Night
_Jailhouse Rock
_Young and Beautiful
_I Want to Be Free
_(You’re So Square) Baby I Don’t Care

Disc 4
_Treat Me Nice
_Blue Christmas
_My Wish Came True
_White Christmas
_Here Comes Santa Claus (Right Down Santa Claus Lane)
_Silent Night
_Don’t
_O Little Town of Bethlehem
_Santa Bring My Baby Back (to Me)
_Santa Claus Is Back in Town
_I’ll Be Home for Christmas
_Hard Headed Woman
_Trouble
_New Orleans
_Crawfish
_Dixieland Rock
_Lover Doll, undubbed master (EP version) [also Lover Doll (LP version) on Disc 28]
_Don’t Ask Me Why
_As Long as I Have You
_King Creole
_Young Dreams
_Steadfast, Loyal and True
_Doncha Think It’s Time (single master) [also Doncha Think It’s Time (LP master) on Disc 28]
_Your Cheatin’ Heart
_Wear My Ring Around Your Neck
_I Need Your Love Tonight
_A Big Hunk o’ Love
_Ain’t That Loving You Baby
_(Now and Then There’s) A Fool Such as I
_I Got Stung

Songs from the stereo era that are in “perfect” mono
Disc 7
_Follow That Dream
_What a Wonderful Life
_I’m Not the Marrying Kind
_Sound Advice

Disc 16
_Blue Christmas/One Night [from the 1968 Comeback Special]
_Tiger Man [from the 1968 Comeback Special]
_Medley: Lawdy, Miss Clawdy/Baby, What You Want Me to Do ... [from the 1968 Comeback Special]

Songs from the mono era that are not in "perfect" mono
Disc 1
_Blue Moon of Kentucky
_Milkcow Blues Boogie
_You’re a Heartbreaker

Disc 2
_Playing for Keeps

Disc 3
_I Believe
_Tell Me Why
_Got a Lot o’ Livin’ to Do
_All Shook Up
_Mean Woman Blues
_(There’ll Be) Peace in the Valley (for Me)
_That’s When Your Heartaches Begin
_Take My Hand, Precious Lord
_Party
_Lonesome Cowboy
_Hot Dog
_It Is No Secret (What God Can Do)
_Blueberry Hill
_Have I Told You Lately That I Love You
_Is It So Strange
_True Love
_I Need You So
_Loving You
_When It Rains, It Really Pours
_Don’t Leave Me Now

Songs that are not available on the Franklin Mint set to analyze
Disc 1
_Tomorrow Night
_I’m Left, You’re Right, She’s Gone (slow version)
_When It Rains, It Really Pours (Sun version)

Disc 4
_Danny
_____________________________________

For reference points, here are the songs from the mono era that are not in "perfect" mono that, in my judgment, are the closest and one of the farthest from mono.

Closest: Hot Dog

One of the farthest: (It Is No Secret) What God Can Do.

These clips allow us to listen to just that part of the music that is different between the two channels. The more you hear, the more information there is that is not in mono. Thus, all tracks in the collection that are in "perfect" mono are silent when examined in this way.
Last edited by elvissessions on Fri Sep 10, 2010 7:51 am, edited 5 times in total.



Claus

Re: Complete Masters compared/contrasted with Franklin Mint

Post by Claus »

Most mono cds released in the cd era are not in "perfect" mono. It just that a stereo head was used during the transfer and that the tape was slightly out of alignment. When this happens, some engineers pick the best channel while others leave it as is. Unless the difference is huge between the two channels, it should not matter.


User avatar

Topic author
elvissessions
Posts: 2554
Registered for: 18 years 8 months
Been thanked: 7 times

Re: Complete Masters compared/contrasted with Franklin Mint

Post by elvissessions »

This is true.

However, as you can see from the listings, there are some interesting patterns and discrepancies that emerge.

That is what I'm trying to trace.

Your point is also why I included examples of how close it can be to mono and not be mono (Hot Dog) and how "far" the farthest apart are (It Is No Secret and, though not sampled here, Playing for Keeps). I hope what people can hear is that though a mono recording really should be in mono, the amount of out of sync information can range from extremely tiny to just tiny.

I'm too tired now to get into a lot of close examination, but I find it intriguing, for example, which Sun tracks have not been restored in exactly the same fashion. Also, the patches of songs that go one way or the other interest me.

How could this be useful?

Well, to begin with: Test the Budd masters. If there is a track here that is not true mono, and his version is. Then very quickly we're on to something.

How much that "something" matters is up to the individual, but as such things have been the subject of much speculation, this is a starting point.
Last edited by elvissessions on Fri Sep 10, 2010 7:52 am, edited 1 time in total.



Matthew

Re: Complete Masters compared/contrasted with Franklin Mint

Post by Matthew »

Interesting. So what does this tell us? If we are working on the assumption "all tracks have been re-transferred from scratch (where a tape is available)" this would imply one of two things:

1) All mono 1-track tapes (or full-track tapes) have been played back on a stereo tape machine to transfer to digital. Then, in the "true mono" cases the mastering engineer has chosen one side of the transfer to remaster from. Those that display 2-track transfer remnants perhaps show transfers that are fine on both channels. If this is the case its a little frustrating as a mono head should really be used to transfer mono tapes.

2) Some tracks were transferred on a mono head and others on a stereo head. I don't find this likely unless the transfers originate from various time periods, by different engineers doing the work.


User avatar

Dan_T
Posts: 4008
Registered for: 13 years 5 months
Has thanked: 848 times
Been thanked: 642 times

Re: Complete Masters compared/contrasted with Franklin Mint

Post by Dan_T »

Anybody seen the Sony produced "Advance Copy" of the Complete Masters set being shown on an unmentionable site ?

Looks good, and should be worth a few Bob should anybody get their hands on a copy !


Image
User avatar

Topic author
elvissessions
Posts: 2554
Registered for: 18 years 8 months
Been thanked: 7 times

Re: Complete Masters compared/contrasted with Franklin Mint

Post by elvissessions »

Oh, great ... now i get to try to figure out which unmentionable site that might be.


User avatar

Dan_T
Posts: 4008
Registered for: 13 years 5 months
Has thanked: 848 times
Been thanked: 642 times

Re: Complete Masters compared/contrasted with Franklin Mint

Post by Dan_T »

elvissessions wrote:Oh, great ... now i get to try to figure out which unmentionable site that might be.

Think the first one that became unmentionable some years back. :D

PS...Who are these "Special Advance Copies" made for and how would you get hold of one ?


Image
User avatar

KiwiAlan
Posts: 11660
Registered for: 19 years 7 months
Location: Wellington, New Zealand
Been thanked: 15 times

Re: Complete Masters compared/contrasted with Franklin Mint

Post by KiwiAlan »

Thanks for that alert.

Looks interesting


When you get to the point where you really understand your computer, it's probably obsolete
User avatar

Dan_T
Posts: 4008
Registered for: 13 years 5 months
Has thanked: 848 times
Been thanked: 642 times

Re: Complete Masters compared/contrasted with Franklin Mint

Post by Dan_T »

You're welcome, some might argue that the CD's will be better protected in the Advance Copy.

I'm not looking forward to sliding them in and out of the cardboard sleeves on the proper set.

I want one of those advance copies ! :D


Image
User avatar

KiwiAlan
Posts: 11660
Registered for: 19 years 7 months
Location: Wellington, New Zealand
Been thanked: 15 times

Re: Complete Masters compared/contrasted with Franklin Mint

Post by KiwiAlan »

With such a pricey set....why they are not using jewel case is unfathomable


When you get to the point where you really understand your computer, it's probably obsolete
User avatar

Topic author
elvissessions
Posts: 2554
Registered for: 18 years 8 months
Been thanked: 7 times

Re: Complete Masters compared/contrasted with Franklin Mint

Post by elvissessions »

Interesting. So what does this tell us?
I wish it were practical to share all of these tracks because there are some interesting things that happen along the way.

One that I'm thinking about right now is Milkcow Blues, which goes along in perfect mono -- not something that happens just by chance, really -- and then suddenly "slips" out of it. ... Now, what does that mean? A splice between versions? I don't know. Maybe nothing.

I'll try to post a sample of this example later tonight.

It's true a lot of these things don't really alter our lives significantly, but if it helps with the detective work on what's going on with the tracks, it can be fascinating.


User avatar

Mike Windgren
Posts: 9092
Registered for: 19 years 7 months
Location: España.
Has thanked: 2214 times
Been thanked: 4237 times

Re: Complete Masters compared/contrasted with Franklin Mint

Post by Mike Windgren »

Hi there!! :D :D :D.
elvissessions wrote:Oh, great ... now i get to try to figure out which unmentionable site that might be.
Here you are my friend :wink:. Personally I don´t like the way the cd´s are going to be housed :evil:. Bye for now :smt006.


Image

Image

Image

Image


Maestro. Mike Windgren. Torero!!!!!!!!.
Always Trying To Make Peace <<--->> On FECC
Not The Best, Just The Coolest Guy Around!.
.


Viva el vino, viva el dinero, viva, viva el amor!!.

Image
User avatar

Dan_T
Posts: 4008
Registered for: 13 years 5 months
Has thanked: 848 times
Been thanked: 642 times

Re: Complete Masters compared/contrasted with Franklin Mint

Post by Dan_T »

Yay...nice one Mike !


Image