Metamatic Forums John Foxx John Foxx remastered or not ? :-o

Having had a read through the posts on here and the NW site it seems to me that the argument is not whether or not the latest release has been remastered but what was it remastered from. As it has been stated for a remaster to be of significant improvement the original analogue tapes need to be used. If you are just using a CD, whether it be the Virgin or Edsel release then surely that shouldn't count as a true "remaster". At least when CD's first came out a lot of them had the AAA or DDD or ADD etc guide on the sleeve to let the listener know. I have the latest Metamatic release at home but I am currently away so I can't actually comment on what I hear myself.
If you're trying to tell the difference on a Japanese boombox with a loudness control though then you might have some difficulty.

Does anyone really care! We have the new tracks on Metamatic, two new albums released today, ICA show, tour starting soon, new releases next year and even a Metamatic t-shirt (cool!)........fill ya boots

yes , I DO !

this topic's question is indeed a very serious one for me , because either we - the fans - were fooled by the makers of this new "metamatic" version , as we were told that it's a remastered version ... or it's jus' a vicious scheme by a certain individual , whose aim was to generate some controversy about it all ! :-o

either way , i simply DEMAND a clear answer now , as i'm not @ all willing to let this question go by unsolved !

that much is for sure - without a doubt !

Well, I'd like to thank Scott very much for taking the time to post his comments here and for the detail he's provided on The New Wave Outpost forum ... the 'screen-prints' were very interesting (to me) to view.

Without wanting to cause any offence to anyone involved in the new 2CD release of Metamatic, I have to say that I agree with everything Scott has said. I certainly appreciate having this 2CD set, and the obvious time and considerable effort that's gone into it (thanks, Rob! ), but it is almost certain that, being a reissue from Edsel, the new CD sound source is a 're-tweaking' of the 2001 CD, which, as I'm sure many of us realise, contains numerous flaws ... the tracks run too fast, for one thing!

The original Virgin CD (CDV 2146, released in 1993 ... from where I discovered Extreme Voice, I might add ) appears to have been taken from the same master as the original vinyl album. I say this because the inter-track links are identical ... e.g. the way the CR-78 snare roll at the end of Underpass runs right into the start of Metal Beat ... the end fade of 030 runs into the start of Tidal Wave ... sort of thing.

I also agree with Scott's comments about Assembly being a pretty-good remaster, even though there's obvious technology changes over fifteen years, but I can imagine that the quality of remastering certainly depends on who's doing it and the amount of time and care they can afford to invest in the project. It's interesting to note that the cover of Assembly states, "Remastered for CD by John Foxx.". So, perhaps it's just the fact that the first CD of Metamatic, released by Virgin, was able to be taken from the actual vinyl master, but the Edsel CD's had to be taken from a different source and an 'economic' remastering process was done for that release, which has now been tweaked and corrected, where possible, for the latest CD.

So, I do appreciate all of Scott's comments as I can certainly hear what he is referring to, and given that I've done quite a bit of 'strictly amateur' sound enhancement, I can appreciate what it's like to spend hours on one track, zooming in to 1000ths of seconds to correct 'drop-outs' and the like.

There are clearly different degrees of quality of remastering and I can say that only one CD in my entire collection totally impresses me, and that's the 2003 MCA remaster of Reach The Beach by The Fixx ... it literally had me going back to the vinyl to check to see if some of the sounds on the CD were in the original recording.

So, again, while I am eternally grateful for the considerable time and effort that goes into all of these CD projects ... all of the EV/EMI Gold Ultravox reissues, the Island remasters, and all of the John Foxx CD's ... there are certainly going to be elements of these projects that are totally out of 'supervisory' control, expecially when you're trying your best to get details like the artwork the way you want it, but someone else is insistent on doing it their way, etc ... so I have nothing but appreciation for the people who enable these items to end up in our private collections, and if this latest release is the definitive Metamatic CD, then I'd certainly rather have it than not.

Once again, thank you Scott for the very interesting details you have provided and for explanations of what I can certainly hear.

All the best ...

I was going to post yesterday morning but had a certain train to catch to get to a certain city for a cetain gig (Nice to see eveyone on Saturday BTW), but Martin's posting following Scott's put it in almost the same words.
Firstly, welcome Scott to the forum and I hope that you do indeed stay, I read your postings on the NW thread and see what you're saying. I am appalled at the viciousness with which you've been treated for what is an opinion founded in fact.
Secondly, I believe Scott was trying to say that there is remastering and then there is remastering, and he hasn't once said don't buy the CDs. OK he stated it was NOT remasterd at first, but we're splitting semantics here, there's no libel, no case to sue, no demands to be made. John, Steve, Rob, Louis, Chris 1, Chris 2 and all those people involved with making these CDs and the shows available, thank you from the bottom of my heart as a fan of all this Foxxy since 1981. And I am going to say it, and hopefully NOT get thrown off the forum - but if I do I'll understand why cos I've read the rules and regulations - Olaf (yes I'm naming names) how dare you treat someone in this way over something so petty, you have an opinion and so does Scott. I'm sick to death of coming on this forum to see what developments there are for John's various projects only to read petty arguments form forum members who constantly feel their's is the only opinion. Please grow up and treat this place the way it was intended. AND I won't be replying to any disected point for point response cos I hope to find better things to do.
Keep up freedom of speech on this forum - Scott, thanks for sharing you're opinions.
Cheers

Well, I'm certainly glad to see others are able to view my comments as they were meant to be. And thank you for the welcome.

Without the intent of causing any further uproar, I do have a concern about the future reissues. The previous Edsel reissue of The Garden was plagued by similar issues as Metamatic; primarily the static pops throughout the duration of the main album tracks. Again, none of this was present on the Virgin CD. If the remastering of The Garden is going to be done from a previous remaster, it would be great that it start with the tracks on the Virgin CD, then go from there. Just a suggestion though.

Also, the bonus material on the Edsel reissue of In Mysterious Ways all seems to have come from vinyl sources. I'm assuming Virgin couldn't find the tapes when John bought back his back catalog?? Remastering from vinyl is my specialty, so if Robin or John would like my assistance on either of these future projects, I would be happy to assist for the best possible outcome, coming from an audiophile with a productive amount of OCD.

If you would want to hear examples of my remastering work, a couple of my projects were released a couple of weeks ago, with full credit details in the booklets:

Dead or Alive-Sophisticated Boom Boom (with 7 bonus tracks)

King-Bitter Sweet (With 8 bonus tracks)

Kind regards,
Scott

I think what is happening here is a division between those for whom fine detail is all important and those like myself who just wish to listen to the overall sound and are grateful to have new music to listen to.

I have been a Foxx fan most of my life, but had this release not included the second CD I would probably not have purchased it so the arguments above mean very little to me.

My own view is that if you are listening with that much detail to the technical aspects of the recording you are probably missing the overall majesty of this work, but maybe I'm missing something... maybe there is another dimension to this music that I am completely blind to.

Erm, without wanting to get the infamous-in-some-places feline1 claws out,
this really is a pretty no-brainer, put-up-or-shut-up case:

if you really think the latest Metamatic CD is the same as the Edsel one,
then rip a WAV file off both of them,
put them both in an audio editor,
invert the phase of one,
and see if they cancel to zero.

If they do - then they're the same
If they don't - then you're talking balls.

The end!

Stop sh*t-stirring and waffling on and trying to bamboozle less-technically-minded fans on John's website.


Personally speaking, I've owned all 3 CDs over the years -
I didn't spend time doing an AB comparison of the Edsel CD before I gave my old copy to a friend! Cos I was more interested in the previously unreleased tracks (and getting to hear YOUNG LOVE again!)
I did notice though that "Burning Car" sounded actually like it had more tape hiss and a slight ricketyness on it compared to the previous mastering.....

I imagine this is an artistic decision on the part of the mastering engineer - you can decide to try and remove tape his and beef up bass and squash things with multiband compression etc etc to make the track sound more "modern" -
or you can decide to have some respect for the original source material and not try and change it too much.

As Garry notes above, METAMATIC was recorded on a low budget 8-track, fer goodnessakes! I'm amazed it sounds as good as it does.
I have a Roland CR78 myself for instance, and the signal to noise ratio is pretty poor - always a bit of clock signal bleed, for example ... they must've EQ the bollocks off it on Metamatic to get it sounding so big...

Something like "Young Love" is only an out-take anyways, John's only letting us hear it out of the goodness of his heart ;-)
It's archaeology! If the stereo image flummuxes in the middle, don't be surprised.
Yes you could patch it up in an editor if you wanted. Or you could re-record bits! Or the whole thing from scratch! But it's a demo from 28 years ago! Why bother?

Fact is, about 90% of the people interested in Metamatic at all first heard it on VINYL. Probably on a crap record player. With all the attendant limited dynamics and frequency range.
They wanna still buy CDs of it in 2007 not for techinical isssues but because of what it is as a piece of art and music, in terms of SONGS, the Ballardian lyrics, the stark futuristic arrangements, John's pointy chisel chin and viscose clothes, etc etc etc.
It's low budget glorious art-school nonsense assembled from trash! (The CR78's green bakelite RHUMBA preset button, anyone?)
Arguing about how much tape hiss can fit on the head of a pin is missing the point badly.

A little off-topic I know but I have one, and love it to bits - and have noticed the clock signal bleed too I would love to chat about it a bit more if you have time, maybe share some tips on the old beast?

Cheers,

Dave.

Well,what can I say!!
If he doesn't think it's a remaster then I suggest he goes for an ear syringe!!

Broken Furniture is a very good friend of mine and I know I was the first to let him hear the re-master(can I rub that in again...RE-MASTER!!) when myself and another friend picked him up for a day out,we had Metamatic on in the car and you could just FEEL the differance!!.
A superb remaster done a great diservice by somepeople :rolleyes: