|
Post by oceanbeach on May 25, 2005 9:17:28 GMT -5
NEW! Screaming Trees album?! Cant help feeling slightly disappointed by this release, with only two previously unavailable tracks! Surely they could have dug deeper into their archive and unearthed some more hidden gems? I remember hearing a few years back that over 400 songs were written between the Sweet Oblivion/Dust period.. Where are they? I appreciate they may not all be of top quality but come on Mr Lanegan and Co release something for your true, long suffering fans!!
|
|
|
Post by Daveym on May 25, 2005 11:23:49 GMT -5
Caught Between and Lay your head down could have been on it. But to be honest the two new ones I am very happt with especially Watchpocket Blues, simply awesome.
|
|
|
Post by rbrianj on May 26, 2005 1:46:15 GMT -5
At least it's remastered
|
|
harro
New Recruit
Posts: 0
|
Post by harro on May 26, 2005 1:49:14 GMT -5
What difference did remastering make...any??
|
|
|
Post by rbrianj on May 27, 2005 1:35:16 GMT -5
dude it sounds amazing. The sound is fuller lanegan's voice is more clear too. i would recommend fans getting it.
|
|
harro
New Recruit
Posts: 0
|
Post by harro on May 27, 2005 2:08:00 GMT -5
I'll be getting that tomorrow thanks. ;D
|
|
harro
New Recruit
Posts: 0
|
Post by harro on May 27, 2005 6:10:06 GMT -5
Just noticed that some people have shared Watchpoket Blues and Paperback Bible on Kazaa but the copies are all fucked up....Hail the loyalty!! ;D
|
|
harro
New Recruit
Posts: 0
|
Post by harro on May 28, 2005 17:00:29 GMT -5
Not released here for a few weeks yet
|
|
|
Post by melaniewhorehouse on Jun 3, 2005 18:29:54 GMT -5
The remastering really makes bugger all difference - as technically all CDs are digitally remastered anyway. So as the Epic stuff all appeared on CD in the first place, it just means that it sounds just the same a the original CDs. Parking "remastered" on the cover just makes it sound spanglier.
As a compilation, it's not bad. The purpose of these things is essentially to get people who didn't buy the albums in the first place to go out and buy them now, with a couple of rarities thrown in so that people who did buy them first time round to buy this one also. So, it's a fairly even spread between what's already available, a couple of B-Sides (in Who Lies in Darkness and E.S.K.) that people might have missed, and 2 newies.
The old tracks are a fair example of what the band were capable of, although there are also going to be additions and omissions that will annoy various older fans depending on taste (for me: Disappearing instead of Bed of Roses? More or Less and no Winter Song? Gah). But (and this is possibly just me thinking out aloud rather than something anyone else would agree on) I always treated the first 2 Epic albums - as with most of their work - as single entities rather than a collection of songs, so to hear them in abridged form as they are here feels really odd. Dust to me doesn't feel quite so much as a whole album as a collection of individual songs, and so fit the compilation far better. The CD format doesn't really help either - the SST Anthology was originally released as a double album, so each phase of the Trees' carreer could be more clearly defined by having each bit on a single side of a disc. Here, it's all a bit too regimentally arranged and doesn't (for want of a better word) flow as these songs do in their natural environment ie. on their respective albums.
It's still an essential purchase though, just for the 2 new tracks which are fucking marvellous. I'd have been happier though if the albums were just re-released as they originally were, and a separate B-Sides/unreleased CD was released in addition. Too much of the Screaming Trees' work was relegated to EPs and singles that too few people bought (and more people need to hear their cover of Sabbath's Tomorrow's Dream or their frankly completely bladdered Numb Inversion Version of Something About Today - the epitome of a band who loved to play together). As it stands though, it's a great introduction to a fantastic band, but a slight disappointment to longer-standing fans hoping for that little bit more...
|
|
harro
New Recruit
Posts: 0
|
Post by harro on Jun 4, 2005 2:50:34 GMT -5
Always respect your summations, Foz. Onya bloke! ;D
Gotta buy it anyho
|
|
|
Post by rbrianj on Jun 12, 2005 14:55:43 GMT -5
The remastering really makes bugger all difference - as technically all CDs are digitally remastered anyway. So as the Epic stuff all appeared on CD in the first place, it just means that it sounds just the same a the original CDs. Parking "remastered" on the cover just makes it sound spanglier. I have to differ with you on that. It sounds better, period, especially the earlier stuff. Where as the originals sound like they are coming through a barrel. A lot of bands were still recording in analog during the time Uncle Anesthesia came out. I didn't even know it was remastered when I bought it. I put it in my car stereo and that was the first thing I noticed. The sound was much better. The Dust stuff is not that much different, but Uncle Anesthesia and Sweet Oblivion is much better. Another thing...not all cds are remastered. All you got to do is throw one of those old original Led Zepplin cds in your rig and listen to it. It sounds actually the same as a tape, that's because all the record company was doing was a straight copy from the master tape to cd, that's if they even did that and not from a regular old cassette. From how it sounds I will say it was from the latter. It sounded like shit. The Led Zepp remasters are a 100x better than the originals.
|
|
|
Post by rbrianj on Jun 12, 2005 15:01:28 GMT -5
Typically record companies release a remastered greatest hits album before they release the remastered albums. So it wouldn't surprise me to see the Epic albums rereleased sometime soon.
|
|
New Recruit
Posts: 0
|
Post by on Jun 14, 2005 7:41:04 GMT -5
do any of you actually know what 'mastering' is...? no, thought not.
but im sure you'll all be typing it into google and getting a bit more info on mix compression, de-essers, enhancers and exciters...
i haven't actually compared the supposedly 'remastered' versions... ive only really listened to the 2 new tracks... the first of which is complete toss (was the producer really the same guy who did sweet oblivion?), and the other of which sounds like it could've been released as a b-side, but nothing more... it would've been a lowlight on Dust or Sweet Obliv.
It just goes to prove the band were right not to release the 1994ish stuff and that it was worth hanging on to do Dust instead... at the time, the Trees said the stuff between Sweet Obliv and Dust just wasnt good enough... and nothing has changed.
|
|
New Recruit
Posts: 0
|
Post by on Jun 14, 2005 7:48:21 GMT -5
The remastering really makes bugger all difference - as technically all CDs are digitally remastered anyway. So as the Epic stuff all appeared on CD in the first place, it just means that it sounds just the same a the original CDs. Parking "remastered" on the cover just makes it sound spanglier. As a compilation, it's not bad. The purpose of these things is essentially to get people who didn't buy the albums in the first place to go out and buy them now, with a couple of rarities thrown in so that people who did buy them first time round to buy this one also. So, it's a fairly even spread between what's already available, a couple of B-Sides (in Who Lies in Darkness and E.S.K.) that people might have missed, and 2 newies. The old tracks are a fair example of what the band were capable of, although there are also going to be additions and omissions that will annoy various older fans depending on taste (for me: Disappearing instead of Bed of Roses? More or Less and no Winter Song? Gah). But (and this is possibly just me thinking out aloud rather than something anyone else would agree on) I always treated the first 2 Epic albums - as with most of their work - as single entities rather than a collection of songs, so to hear them in abridged form as they are here feels really odd. Dust to me doesn't feel quite so much as a whole album as a collection of individual songs, and so fit the compilation far better. The CD format doesn't really help either - the SST Anthology was originally released as a double album, so each phase of the Trees' carreer could be more clearly defined by having each bit on a single side of a disc. Here, it's all a bit too regimentally arranged and doesn't (for want of a better word) flow as these songs do in their natural environment ie. on their respective albums. It's still an essential purchase though, just for the 2 new tracks which are fucking marvellous. I'd have been happier though if the albums were just re-released as they originally were, and a separate B-Sides/unreleased CD was released in addition. Too much of the Screaming Trees' work was relegated to EPs and singles that too few people bought (and more people need to hear their cover of Sabbath's Tomorrow's Dream or their frankly completely bladdered Numb Inversion Version of Something About Today - the epitome of a band who loved to play together). As it stands though, it's a great introduction to a fantastic band, but a slight disappointment to longer-standing fans hoping for that little bit more... other than the remastering issue (which i cant really comment on cos i haven't bothered to compare) and the 'fucking marvellous' new songs bit, i would say that you're pretty much bang on with a lot of that statement. The fabled box set of unreleased stuff/diff versions/etc would be much more interesting to the likes of foz/karlito/myself etc...
|
|
|
Post by carlito on Jun 14, 2005 12:26:15 GMT -5
i find myself in a quandary friends. i have every screaming trees album, and i'm not much of an audiophile so i could care less about remastering. but i want those two songs, and i'm wondering about the investment for just two songs. here's the rub, the two most respected authorities on the trees, other than me, are foz and mokkly. foz likes, mokkly does not.
can i please here from other authorities, perhaps el diablo, lava, daveym, or someone who actually listened to the trees pre-qotsa. don't mean to single anyone out or hurt feelings, but i need the straight scoop from an authority. someone hook a brother up.
|
|
bdt
New Recruit
Posts: 30
|
Post by bdt on Jun 14, 2005 14:12:47 GMT -5
Hello, I am a recovering lurker. I have listened to the trees since about 1993-1994, which I don't think that makes me an authority, but I'll give you my opinion. I originally just downloaded the two new songs from i-tunes, then after reading the posts here about it sounding better, I decided to just buy the damn thing on cd anyway. The two new songs aren't great, but I think they are worth having just to get an idea where the band was at during that time period. They sound kind of demo-ish and I don't think there is anything exceptional about them, but I think ML's voice sounds pretty good if nothing else. Anyway, you can tell they weren't really at their very best on the songs (as a band), but I'm still glad I have them. I'm a sucker for packaging, though, and I probably would have eventually bought the cd regardless of what I heard about it just to satisfy my curiousity. As far as the sound goes, I did think the Uncle songs sounded a bit fuller,though.
So reading this, that probably didn't help you much.
|
|
|
Post by carlito on Jun 14, 2005 14:39:54 GMT -5
thank you for your thoughts, they're very appreciated because really i am just trying to spark up some actual trees-related conversation, as opposed to your favorite fucking word or some shit.
so thanks, and in closing, welcome to the retard farm buddy. peace out.
|
|
bdt
New Recruit
Posts: 30
|
Post by bdt on Jun 14, 2005 15:40:49 GMT -5
Actually, I had a question too. I have all the trees' epic albums, change has come, and then the sst anthology. Just curious to hear from people what sst albums are better than others in their opinion, worth getting, etc. I was also thinking about getting Clairvoyance now that it's out on CD too. Guess I should post this as another topic, though. Thanks
|
|
|
Post by froggequene on Jun 14, 2005 15:47:04 GMT -5
Actually, I had a question too. I have all the trees' epic albums, change has come, and then the sst anthology. Just curious to hear from people what sst albums are better than others in their opinion, worth getting, etc. I was also thinking about getting Clairvoyance now that it's out on CD too. Guess I should post this as another topic, though. Thanks .........don't worry about staying on topic, the rest of us never do
|
|
|
Post by Lava on Jun 14, 2005 15:47:27 GMT -5
thank you for your thoughts, they're very appreciated because really i am just trying to spark up some actual trees-related conversation, as opposed to your favorite fucking word or some shit. (and FYI, it's on my list of things to buy...haven't heard it yet, but I'm very intrigued, caring about such things as mastering)
|
|
|
Post by jonnythc on Jun 14, 2005 15:50:30 GMT -5
buzz factory motherfuckers! yeah!!!!! black sun morning!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
|
|
|
Post by carlito on Jun 14, 2005 16:02:49 GMT -5
get them all dude.
than get clairvoyance last, it's a fun one to have because it's finally out on CD, but it's not as good as invisible lantern or buzz factory.
and you should get change has come too. you wanna know why? because I stand against barriers, each and every way.
trees chupacabras!! trees!!
|
|
|
Post by MR GUMBY on Jun 14, 2005 20:54:52 GMT -5
you know you'll buy it anyway, for the exact same reason i won't.
my favourite word for today is: droplets.
|
|
New Recruit
Posts: 0
|
Post by on Jun 15, 2005 5:39:07 GMT -5
The two new songs aren't great, but I think they are worth having just to get an idea where the band was at during that time period. They sound kind of demo-ish and I don't think there is anything exceptional about them, but I think ML's voice sounds pretty good if nothing else. Anyway, you can tell they weren't really at their very best on the songs (as a band), but I'm still glad I have them. as far as first posts go, you dont get much more eloquent and accurate than that. carlos, you're gonna want to hear the new songs. they're not bad, they're just not great...
|
|
bdt
New Recruit
Posts: 30
|
Post by bdt on Jun 15, 2005 15:47:14 GMT -5
Thanks for the feedback- I think I WILL buy all of them. I do have Change Has Come- that's a good one.
Don't know if anyone has ever posted about these songs before (I'm sure they have), but I really like Mud Pink Skag and Mirrored on the Hit the City Single. Mirrored is a haunting song. Anyway, I've been lurking for quite awhile (even on the old board), so I remember things like the guy that posted he didn't think it was Mark Lanegan singing on Song for the Dead and wanted "proof" from someone that it actually was him. That was some funny shit.
Since I'm a recovering lurker this is my first step-
"Hello" to everyone. And stuff.
|
|