Don't know what they used on the Concord but the DCC was taken from a 2nd Gen 2-track source and just sweetened by Hoffman (whom I'm NOT a fan of personally).
According to Steve, he used "the original two-track Abbey Road mixes." And yes, he admits that he didn't do much in mastering but give it some body "with a special vacuum tube insert stage", whatever that means.
-Erik-
Yeah that's basically code for "Not the absolute first generation multitrack tapes*" but still fairly high in the chain.
*Which I presume were 2". The DCC I presume was sourced from quarters.
The rear cover of the DCC states "mastered from the original two-track stereo master tapes".
I don't like the DCC release
the sound is muffled
I made a version with the CONCORD and put in Desert Chase from DCC and you can clearly hear a difference in detail
also, I tried to compare the very first track with concord and DCC and they are very much different - they sound like two different cues because the instrument detail is so much clear on the Concord
I know some people in here praise Steve Hoffman, and I only have two releases where he was involved
but he has yet to impress me
TERMINATOR (OST) and RAIDERS which he mastered are both beaten by a superior sounding release, TERMINATOR DEFINITIVE and RAIDERS CONCORD respectively
Two releases that has much more instrumental detail and nuance which I like
BTW I really hate reviews like this that fails to address things probably - like here where the reviewer fails to mention that there is a limited set that have extra music
A full RAIDERS release would be a 2-cd-set with the original album included and have bonus tracks that give us options to make out own desired listening experience (no cross-mixing and cross-mixing included will give us the best from both world to their respective fans)
The rear cover of the DCC states "mastered from the original two-track stereo master tapes".
Again... NOT FIRST GEN. Absolute first generation tapes would be 18-24 tracks. Not binaural L-R. That's a mixdown. That's one to two (if it was folded down from a 3-track film mix) generations off. FWIW the 1981 LP master was probably a further two to three generations off of that because of editing.
So yeah its the master tapes, but because of the nature of analog mixing its had some loss a long the way.
I made a version with the CONCORD and put in Desert Chase from DCC and you can clearly hear a difference in detail
also, I tried to compare the very first track with concord and DCC and they are very much different - they sound like two different cues because the instrument detail is so much clear on the Concord
Granted the Concord edition is brighter. crisper and louder than the DCC. But as has been said before the DCC is the film mix and there are instruments and detail on the DCC mix that are just not audible on the Concord, OST mixes. Flight from Peru and Desert Chase are the best examples. Interesting choice? Tomlinson film Mix or OST mix? I guess a combination of both would be ideal. Is that even possible?
Granted the Concord edition is brighter. crisper and louder than the DCC. But as has been said before the DCC is the film mix and there are instruments and detail on the DCC mix that are just not audible on the Concord, OST mixes. Flight from Peru and Desert Chase are the best examples. Interesting choice? Tomlinson film Mix or OST mix? I guess a combination of both would be ideal. Is that even possible?
I am not so sure that is the case about film mix and others - I'dd like to have some time codes to where those differences are so i can check myself
Granted the Concord edition is brighter. crisper and louder than the DCC.
To me, the Concord version of "In the Jungle" is *so* much brighter, crisper, and louder, that it sets my ears and teeth on edge. Ears and personal preference will differ.
Raiders sounded incredible on my sound system, not too high or shrill or loud. Really just very pleasant and expansive. And I could live with the edited "Desert Chase" cue if it were just edited more smoothly.
