Welcome Guest
[ Log In :: Register ]

 

[ Track this topic :: Email this topic :: Print this topic ]

Topic: Which version of Boxed should I get?< Next Oldest | Next Newest >
Jammer Offline




Group: Members
Posts: 641
Joined: April 2000
Posted: April 21 2004, 14:18

I've decided that I'd like to get a copy of Boxed. I currently own not so good editions of these albums, and I'd like to hear what the common mix of HR sounds like - I've only got it on the better original LP as you can probably guess by my avatar!

So to those who have it, which edition of Boxed is the best one to have? I am obviously after the best sound quality, but also good liner notes. My crappy CD of Ommadawn doesn't say a thing and doesn't even acknowledge 'On Horseback' as the third track. Will the HDCD remaster offer these?
Back to top
Profile PM 
Korgscrew Offline




Group: Super Admins
Posts: 3511
Joined: Dec. 1999
Posted: April 21 2004, 17:25

I don't think there's an awful lot of difference between the editions - they all contain the same material and all come with the same booklet (I'm including the LPs in that statement, though the CD squashes the contents of the fourth 'collaborations' LP onto the ends of the other three albums). Thankfully, it was left alone during Virgin's remastering exercise, so Dave Laing didn't get the chance to 'improve' the sleeve notes.

The only thing to watch out for is that some earlier pressings of the CD have the original mix of Tubular Bells Part One instead of the remix. Later editions are fine, though.

The HDCD remaster of Hergest Ridge is from the same master, by the way, if you should want an HDCD version of that album - the SQ quad encoding is still intact! I haven't directly compared the two to work out which sounds better, but the Boxed CD doesn't sound offensive to me. The remaster might be slightly crisper with a bit more warmth as well, but I could be imagining that!
Back to top
Profile PM 
Spinne Offline




Group: Members
Posts: 397
Joined: May 2003
Posted: April 24 2004, 06:15

Quote (Jammer @ April 21 2004, 14:18)
My crappy CD of Ommadawn doesn't say a thing and doesn't even acknowledge 'On Horseback' as the third track. Will the HDCD remaster offer these?

No, the remastered version of Ommadawn (and the others too) doesn't retrieve any kind of lost information or artwork. They only add the "great" Dave Laing sleeve notes, the remastered edition credits (these are the only credits on Ommadawn HDCD, the original ones are still missing) and some horrible computer textures or little montages based on the cover (Platinum, QE2...) and sometimes a photograph taken from Elements book.

The Ommadawn HDCD edition is horrible in my opinion (no old credits and photos, no new photos, very simple design...), so maybe the old CD edition is good enough (I haven't compared the sound but it is supposed that the HDCD must be better in this field).
Back to top
Profile PM 
familyjules
Unregistered





Posted: May 14 2004, 06:51

Quote (Korgscrew @ April 21 2004, 17:25)
The only thing to watch out for is that some earlier pressings of the CD have the original mix of Tubular Bells Part One instead of the remix. Later editions are fine, though.


This is weird.  A faq I was reading the other day stated that the first CD pressing of Boxed had the remix of TB part 1, but that Mike ordered it to be replaced by the original mix for the reissue.  Now I'm reading the exact opposite is true.

I still don't know which mix of TB part 1 I have on my copy of Boxed.  I don't have another version of TB to compare it with.  Does anybody know how I can tell?

Maybe the timing is a clue?  Mine runs for 25' 47".  The box says 25' 55".  I believe the original mix is usually credited at around 25' 36".

Confused?  You bet I am!

Jules
Back to top
Korgscrew Offline




Group: Super Admins
Posts: 3511
Joined: Dec. 1999
Posted: May 14 2004, 12:13

That would indeed be the Boxed mix, as it's slightly longer (not because of any additional acoustic guitar parts as I've sometimes heard said, but because the 'nasal chorus' before the 'Thrash' section is doubled in length). That's about the best way of telling really, as all the other ways of identifying it (or at least, all those I can think of) are only possible if you know the original.

I hope that clears up the mystery anyway!
Back to top
Profile PM 
familyjules
Unregistered





Posted: May 15 2004, 09:52

Thanks for that, much obliged!
Back to top
lostrom Offline




Group: Members
Posts: 53
Joined: Feb. 2006
Posted: Feb. 16 2006, 13:34

I don't like that Mike change things in that way. You don't know what you get and it doesn't say clearly. I know of Hergest Ridge, but this is the first time I've heard that he messed with TB as well.
Back to top
Profile PM 
6 replies since April 21 2004, 14:18 < Next Oldest | Next Newest >

[ Track this topic :: Email this topic :: Print this topic ]

 






Forums | Links | Instruments | Discography | Tours | Articles | FAQ | Artwork | Wallpapers
Biography | Gallery | Videos | MIDI / Ringtones | Tabs | Lyrics | Books | Sitemap | Contact

Mike Oldfield Tubular.net
Mike Oldfield Tubular.net