18 of 21 people found the following review helpful
A Small But Important Point.,
Verified Purchase(What is this?)
This review is from: Tusk (Audio CD)
This 'version' of the album is sold as a 'budget edition' and you will certainly be able to get it pretty cheaply(it should be cheap as it is NOT the original album).
I used to be less than keen on this album because, I feel, it suffers when compared to "Rumours", for a lack of the former's consistency. Actually I have been playing it again recently and find it is growing on me. One thing it has always had going for it though, was the presence of 'Sara', a song that is not just one of the best Fleetwood Mac songs, but one of my all-time favourite songs.
This 'version' of the album, however, features the shorter 'single edit' of 'Sara' for no fathomable reason... Oh hang on a minute, could it be that the 'suits' at the record company saw a way of persuading even casual fans of the band to buy the 'Deluxe 2 disc edition' of the album for more money, when a straight forward remastering of the album on a single disc would be enough for all but a few die-hards.
It has been suggested that CD sales are falling. With this sort of cynical manipulation(they chopped up the highlight of the album!)the record companies do not win themselves any friends.
I have seen it suggested that the reason that an 'edited down' version was offered was because of 'technical constraints of CDs at the time of its release' well the full album on the 2 disc reissue(with a full length 'Sara') is 74mins 20 secs long and fits neatly onto 1 disc, so I don't see how that argument can be used, even if that was the case, there was a simple solution, they could have released the album on 2 discs at the time(it's not that difficult is it?).
4 and a bit stars for the Proper album, 3 for this.
***UPDATE*** Since writing the above Amazon have amalgamated this review into the reviews for the 2 disc edition (very annoying since they are clearly different products)which has the complete album/full version of Sara. The price of the 2 disc version is very close to that of the single disc edition so purchasing that is the best option (although that may change). However an even better idea would be for the record company to replace the single disc (2000) edition with an unedited single disc. Maybe they will and, no doubt, this review will be attached to that one too.
Sort: Oldest first | Newest first
Showing 1-5 of 5 posts in this discussion
Initial post: 13 Sep 2008 08:54:12 BDT
Bill Peter says:
You are completely correct. Record companies seem intent on alienating their customers, then complain when the customers stop buying.
Posted on 1 Feb 2011 23:10:41 GMT
[Deleted by the author on 3 Feb 2011 21:54:12 GMT]
Posted on 3 Feb 2011 21:58:17 GMT
Last edited by the author on 3 Feb 2011 21:59:21 GMT
Mr. R. G. Prizeman says:
I am not a fan of the endless reissues, however I have this version the remastered version double CD Sara is the full version. The original un-mastered version issued in 86 some 25 years ago has the single edit they said to fit it on the disc, yes back then 74mins was the limit. So if you have the double version then it is not chopped if you bought the single disc which is listed separately then you have purchased the old issue. This review is attached to the double expanded issue which has the correct version on it. Warners have never issued Tusk remastered as a single disc
Posted on 12 Jul 2011 22:59:49 BDT
Thanks for the update, Billyjay. It is annoying when Amazon show a review that's not for the actual item being reviewed. They could link to reviews for related items instead.
Posted on 13 Jul 2011 12:46:30 BDT
Mr. R. G. Prizeman says:
Now it all makes sense not your fault mate at all. Personally warners should just delete the single disc with the edit then the confusion is over
‹ Previous 1 Next ›