Shop now Shop now Shop now Shop now Cloud Drive Photos Shop now Learn More Learn more Handmade Shop now Learn more Shop Fire Shop Kindle Shop now Shop now

Sort: Oldest first | Newest first
Showing 1-18 of 18 posts in this discussion
Initial post: 12 May 2012 13:19:39 BDT
XRayLexx says:
So, I hear rumours that the Remastered disks are the wrong way around. Are the digital remasters also named incorrected?
The first 11 tracks are the Remaster and the final 11 are the DAT 2006 Remasters? yes? Or no?

Posted on 18 May 2012 15:13:06 BDT
This is correct. Disc 1, which the labeling indicates should be a digital version (using the same source material as the original CD with audio levels brought closer to 0dbFS), is in fact pulled from the analog tapes. This means that Disc 2, which is supposed to be the new analogue mix, is actually digital. There is also a significant, audible error in the Disc 1 (analogue) version of "What You Want" that is apparently an error in transcribing the tapes into digital. It's disappointing that given Shields' "perfectionist" reputation and the absurd way this re-release was continuously postponed that there are still such egregious errors in the final product.

Posted on 19 May 2012 00:09:13 BDT
Eric Generic says:
How likely is it that the audible error on What You Want will be fixed, and the disc repressed? I'm guessing that if it's a result of a transferring error, and not a disc-pressing error, then the answer is no, and this version is all we will get?

Although if the discs are numbered incorrectly, that would make the error-free version the main CD and the one I (and most people) would probably want to listen to anyway. Perhaps that's why they let it through.

Posted on 19 May 2012 01:04:57 BDT
Last edited by the author on 19 May 2012 19:04:44 BDT
Disc 2 is the error-free copy, practically identical to what people could purchase in 1991 but louder. There is a "roof" to how loud a digital signal can be at 0dbFS. The original record sat far below this limit for the most part. This is why, if you have an old version of Loveless on your iPod, you'll probably have to turn the volume up relatively high to reach an "average" volume level. Disc 2 brings everything closer to zero, which changes the volume and the way that the louder parts of the record are processed by different music players.

The analogue version (which is supposed to be disc 2 but is actually disc 1) is mastered differently, resulting in a slightly different sound. It might be somewhat difficult for people who don't listen attentively to tell the difference, but listening to the side-by side, there is a noticeable difference. The analogue master has a greater amount of stereo separation and a bit more focus on the lower end.

Both versions sound altogether very nice, choosing between the two is really a matter of personal taste (and whether you can stomach the minor analogue error) but the differences aren't going to revolutionize the way you hear the music.

By the way, the error in question is at about 2:46 of the Disc 1 version of "What You Want." It sounds like a short, low-pitched screeching noise in the guitar track.

In reply to an earlier post on 19 May 2012 15:41:19 BDT
XRayLexx says:
So, Are the digital downloads correctly labelled or incorrect?

In reply to an earlier post on 19 May 2012 17:36:29 BDT
Eric Generic says:
Yeah, I find the error pretty distracting and if it had been on the disc I intend to play the most, it would be more of a problem. Still not especially pleased that after all this time, they couldn't get it right!

Posted on 5 Jun 2012 21:29:05 BDT
Last edited by the author on 5 Jun 2012 21:29:40 BDT
G. Young says:
Can I confirm with you guys, (forgive me) that disc 2 is, in fact the superior version?

Posted on 6 Jun 2012 11:48:12 BDT
Eric Generic says:
Pretty much, yes. Disc 2 doesn't have the error, and being analogue it (arguably) has a more rounded sound. Oh and don't apologise for asking, it's all very confusing!

In reply to an earlier post on 6 Jun 2012 17:40:53 BDT
G. Young says:
Thank you Eric, I really appreciate the response. I am finding the second disc slightly more 'solid' sounding. It is a great album, just getting into it now, I had (unbelievably) never heard it until I decided to but it, last Sunday, I bought it after reading a superb article in NME and it really intrigued me.

In reply to an earlier post on 6 Jun 2012 18:10:32 BDT
Eric Generic says:
You're welcome! I'm another who missed it the first time around, and I love what I've heard.

Posted on 9 Jun 2012 17:06:20 BDT
Shatakan says:
I just bought the remastered records earlier today - there doesn't appear to be any audible glitch on either of the Loveless discs, and it sounds to me like they have corrected the labeling error, so I assume the new batch is all patched up.

Posted on 11 Jun 2012 13:09:07 BDT
Eric Generic says:
Did you buy on amazon, or in a bricks-and-mortar store? I'd very much like to have a non-error version.

In reply to an earlier post on 12 Jun 2012 00:30:32 BDT
Shatakan says:
I bought it from HMV.

Posted on 12 Jun 2012 19:07:19 BDT
Eric Generic says:
Thanks for that - my copy is from there so I many return it and try another one.

In reply to an earlier post on 13 Jun 2012 00:02:50 BDT
Shatakan says:
Might be worth doing - when did you buy it initially?

In reply to an earlier post on 13 Jun 2012 13:02:14 BDT
Eric Generic says:
As soon as it was released (pardon the pun), early in that first week.

Posted on 12 Sep 2012 09:21:58 BDT
try the error-free see-through orange and red marbled vinyl version in the 4 lp box set - on a great hi fi it all sounds as clear as a bell.

Posted on 10 Jun 2013 20:46:49 BDT
I bought it when it first came out. The initial cd had the sound error and was mislabelled. There is nothing on the label's site offering to replace discs, however after doing some 'research' online I recently bought another copy. Tis copy has a different serial number, is correctly labelled and does not have audible glitch. The glitch Kevin Shields talks about in interviews isn't the audible one, its the one you get if you analyse it on a pc. I am amazed the label and/or amazon haven't offered to replace original discs. It is a faulty product and not fit for purpose but it doesn't really seem worth suing in the small claims track over a tenner, something they are no doubt counting on.
‹ Previous 1 Next ›
[Add comment]
Add your own message to the discussion
To insert a product link use the format: [[ASIN:ASIN product-title]] (What's this?)
Prompts for sign-in


This discussion

Participants:  7
Total posts:  18
Initial post:  12 May 2012
Latest post:  10 Jun 2013

New! Receive e-mail when new posts are made.
Tracked by 5 customers

This discussion is about
Loveless by My Bloody Valentine (Audio CD - 1991)
4.3 out of 5 stars (123)