I can hear the difference. I think there is either little changes or changes in pitch. like you said. I like the original though more cuz of the feel... you know
Not really worth it..No one is gonna notice it, unless you study it or are a big-time angel dust fan, i noticed it pretty quick. Got both albums now, good news is i learned what a difference an audio mixer plugin makes for playback an a PC. Thanks, i would of never used one if i didn't have to compare the two album.
Oh and just one thing else, Angel Dust doesn't only need a remaster, I needs a remix. I've always found it to be too drum heavy and too dry sounding with no beef or balls to the guitar. Same with KFAD. Was really excited bout Trey Spruance being their new guitarist after his amazing playing and sound on the Mr Bungle debut CD, but I found the whole sound of KFAD to be weak, dry and not heavy enough.
annoyingly out of tune. Bands sometimes slightly slow down or speed up a song to change the dynamic (either making them heavier or lighter). A horrible example of this is The Bends by Radiohead. The entire album is about half a fret too sharp, apart from Street Spirit, which is about same pitch as the slowed down ones on Angel Dust. So no song on the album is in correct concert pitch. Arrrgg. I think I will get the Angel Dust remaster now I know about this correction. :)
Speaking as a guitarist, I love Angel Dust, but it is frustrating to try to play along to on the guitar because of the face that during the mastering and sequencing stage, certain songs (Caffeine, Midlife Crisis, Smaller & Smaller etc) have been slightly slowed down to make them sound heavier. They read at a pitch somewhere between E and E-flat (about half a fret). Therefore it is impossible to play along to the entire album in one go because some are at normal tuning and others are....see above
The remaster just sounds a Semi-tone higher than the original either that or the remaster is how it should really sound and when the original was recorded on anologue it went out of focus or something.
So is it worth buying the remaster then? It doesn't sound like it's an amazing remaster, but it's probably my favourite album of all time so I'm seriously considering it.
Really to me it sounds as if someone has pressed the 'Dolby' button on an old tape stereo; sure, the small amount of hiss has gone but I feel some of the higher frequencies have been sacrificed too. Also, maybe it's just me, but I feel the mids are slightly more muted than the original.
Overall, why bother? The poster that mentioned the need for TRT to be remastered was spot-on.
Oh how sooo ugly these remasters often sounds. Heavy metal in laboratory. Too clean, too crystal, too nerdy. why do people remaster! stop it! My ears are melting! ARggh!! :D I love Faith no More.
Good observations. I have the remastered version. I also felt it sounded less "punchy" and the volume level decreased. I think its pretty good. But I thought you would be able to here more subtle changes, as they advertised.
Sounds good. Sounds like the remastered one has a wet layer compared to the original which sounds like they're playing in a church or something. I hope they'll remaster "The Real Thing" as well and add a bunch of bonus tracks which "Angel Dust" should have as well.
THE ORIGINAL SOUND MUCH MORE ''ALIVE''...
nightmusic9 2 weeks ago
I can hear the difference. I think there is either little changes or changes in pitch. like you said. I like the original though more cuz of the feel... you know
Velvetaeroplane1 6 months ago
JIZZLOBBER IS MUCH BETTER. I CAN REALLY HEAR THE DIFFERENCE, ESPECIALLY IN JIM'S GUITAR. just another 2 cents worth of my opinion.
zombiegirl71 6 months ago
Not really worth it..No one is gonna notice it, unless you study it or are a big-time angel dust fan, i noticed it pretty quick. Got both albums now, good news is i learned what a difference an audio mixer plugin makes for playback an a PC. Thanks, i would of never used one if i didn't have to compare the two album.
zombiegirl71 7 months ago
my favorate album of all time, ;i can hear the difference, or i should say i FEEL the difference and it is awesome.
zombiegirl71 7 months ago
Thank You been wanting to hear this!!
zombiegirl71 7 months ago
...I don't hear a difference!
SicStoneknot 10 months ago
Oh and just one thing else, Angel Dust doesn't only need a remaster, I needs a remix. I've always found it to be too drum heavy and too dry sounding with no beef or balls to the guitar. Same with KFAD. Was really excited bout Trey Spruance being their new guitarist after his amazing playing and sound on the Mr Bungle debut CD, but I found the whole sound of KFAD to be weak, dry and not heavy enough.
JonnyDTank 1 year ago
annoyingly out of tune. Bands sometimes slightly slow down or speed up a song to change the dynamic (either making them heavier or lighter). A horrible example of this is The Bends by Radiohead. The entire album is about half a fret too sharp, apart from Street Spirit, which is about same pitch as the slowed down ones on Angel Dust. So no song on the album is in correct concert pitch. Arrrgg. I think I will get the Angel Dust remaster now I know about this correction. :)
JonnyDTank 1 year ago
Speaking as a guitarist, I love Angel Dust, but it is frustrating to try to play along to on the guitar because of the face that during the mastering and sequencing stage, certain songs (Caffeine, Midlife Crisis, Smaller & Smaller etc) have been slightly slowed down to make them sound heavier. They read at a pitch somewhere between E and E-flat (about half a fret). Therefore it is impossible to play along to the entire album in one go because some are at normal tuning and others are....see above
JonnyDTank 1 year ago
The remaster just sounds a Semi-tone higher than the original either that or the remaster is how it should really sound and when the original was recorded on anologue it went out of focus or something.
shrinken 1 year ago
So is it worth buying the remaster then? It doesn't sound like it's an amazing remaster, but it's probably my favourite album of all time so I'm seriously considering it.
coderkind 1 year ago
The guitar sounds quieter on the remaster, to me. (Or at least like they ripped out some mids.
Guitarsthatkill 1 year ago
Really to me it sounds as if someone has pressed the 'Dolby' button on an old tape stereo; sure, the small amount of hiss has gone but I feel some of the higher frequencies have been sacrificed too. Also, maybe it's just me, but I feel the mids are slightly more muted than the original.
Overall, why bother? The poster that mentioned the need for TRT to be remastered was spot-on.
humanfly78 1 year ago
..eehhh, I do like the Original much more tho! - But thanx very much for the upload!
KenneThrasher 1 year ago
I think these are small detail that become more evident with an High Fidelity stereo.
Good work by MFSL though :-)
I think that "The Real Thing" needs a remaster more than the other FNM albums.
MrBungle82 2 years ago
yeah "need' as in toning down Patton's nasal tone, which after listening to AD slaps you in the face.
michaels2q 2 years ago
Most mobile fidelity sound labs remasters, are top-drawer. You should check out their on-line catalogue. Highly recommended.
StinkFingerr 3 years ago
Oh how sooo ugly these remasters often sounds. Heavy metal in laboratory. Too clean, too crystal, too nerdy. why do people remaster! stop it! My ears are melting! ARggh!! :D I love Faith no More.
ZZombyWooff 3 years ago
Good observations. I have the remastered version. I also felt it sounded less "punchy" and the volume level decreased. I think its pretty good. But I thought you would be able to here more subtle changes, as they advertised.
gouldbass 3 years ago
Sounds good. Sounds like the remastered one has a wet layer compared to the original which sounds like they're playing in a church or something. I hope they'll remaster "The Real Thing" as well and add a bunch of bonus tracks which "Angel Dust" should have as well.
Wacke666 3 years ago