Do You Ever Prefer Re-Recordings by bands?

[jeffb01]

A few times bands re-recorded their early material 10+ years later:

Suicidal Tendencies - Still Cyco After All These Years (re-recording of debut album)
Subhumans (canada) - Same Thoughts Different Day (re-recording of Incorrect Thoughts)
Warzone - Lower East Side (re-recording of Lower East Side Crew 7")
Fear - The Fear Record (re-recording of The Record LP)

Usually, it's because they don't have the rights to release these songs and usually people I know groan and say how pointless it is. My question is that is there ever a time you prefer the re-recordings?

[yourenotevil]

no, and i would use these as examples of records that suck and are a waste of everyone's time. sick of it all did this recently because they wanted to do a greatest hits cd and couldn't get the rights to all the songs i think. they were redoing stuff that had no need to be redone. i know with the warzone ep if was because raybeez hated the way the first ep sounded and was just signed to victory at the time he redid the album. it had stupid audio samples and a business cover, it was a mess. closest to being good was the absolution ep that came out last year and it was a remake of the first one. it was cool, but it didn't have the energy and urgency of the first record.

[tad ghostal]

There are times when a band might re-record a song for the better but I can't think of a single instance where the re-recording of an album is better than the original.

[WrEtcH]

EXODUS re did "bonded by blood," but the interesting situation was that it was re-recorded with Rob Dukes (since Baloff passed away.) pretty much the fan base criticized it since "bonded" was a classic and it wasn't necessary to rerecord that album. hated the re-recordings by TESTAMENT and SUICIDAL because it sounded slower and sloppy. Only the TSOL re-recordings sounded like the originals, but it wasn't really necessary to record 'em again.

to me, something interesting is DJ Bonebrake of X who re-recorded some X songs in a surf vibe and all instrumental

[the mean]

Agent Orange re-recordings of some of the "This Is The Voice" songs are better than the originals with that bad mid-80s production.

7Seconds second version of "We're Gonna Fight" is better than the first. "Regress No Way" is also miles ahead of "No Class, No Way."

[lewdd]

Buzzcocks tried and failed with a greatest hits ish re-recording.
ALL tried and failed with ALL
Anti-Nowhere League just re-did We Are the League which may have been better than the others mentioned already, but still not very good.
Sham 69 did it recently too. There are some songs that may be better than the originals and others that failed miserably.

So, I guess I agree with those that already posted that usually it is not for the best.

[xxxHunterxxx]

ALL tried and failed with ALL


.

Didn't they only re-record the songs from "Breaking Things"? (And didn't they only do that because they lost the master tapes?) I think the re-recordings sound pretty much identical to the originals.

[lewdd]

ALL tried and failed with ALL


.

Didn't they only re-record the songs from "Breaking Things"? (And didn't they only do that because they lost the master tapes?) I think the re-recordings sound pretty much identical to the originals.

Wretch or Shary probably know the specifics, but I think it was more than the songs from Breaking Things. I could quite possibly be wrong too.

[john stabb]

Bad idea unless you're just putting another slant on a song: I don't mind a few we did in GI - Ramones-y version of Bored to Death, or heavier version of Plain to See. Didn't care for our re-doing The Next Time.

Even despite poor production like This is the Voice - I prefer just listening to the originals.

[gregpolard]

Buzzcocks tried and failed with a greatest hits ish re-recording.
ALL tried and failed with ALL
Anti-Nowhere League just re-did We Are the League which may have been better than the others mentioned already, but still not very good.
Sham 69 did it recently too. There are some songs that may be better than the originals and others that failed miserably.

So, I guess I agree with those that already posted that usually it is not for the best.

I love the way that ALL Hits album sounds.

[MXV]

It should be illegal for bands to do this. There isn't a single case you could cite where a re-recorded album sounded anywhere close to as good, let alone better than the original. Fuck that nonsense!

Now doing different versions of songs here and there is OK if like Stabb pointed out you do a different slant on it. I love the different versions of "Sheer Terror" and I thought the second version of "Plain to See" from Give Us Stabb.. was light years better than the already great first version.

[scannest]

Most of the time this is done because of rights issues. It is very rarely done for artistic reasons, although I can see the temptation (especially for metal and punk bands) to take advantage of technology to make "better" sounding recordings. Death of Samantha put out a record last year which was a kind of live-in-the-studio greatest hits - a live album with no audience so to speak. We've talked about lots of bands who have never put out recordings that do justice to their live sound. The opportunity to take a do-ever must be very tempting.

[jeffb01]

Yeah... overall, I agree with you all. I was never talking about re-doing a song (7 seconds we're gonna fight or MDC John Wayne...). The real reason I was asking was that I'm making my Subhumans (canada) mix and Death Was Too Kind is so much louder, I was thinking of using the re-done version of Incorrect thoughts (which also has much better mastering/production)... but I decided to use the pissed off... versions. thanks.

[Neal]

yeah, it pretty much never sounds good for punk/hardcore, because the old crappy/dated recordings are part of what made it sound great. "better" production values don't sound right.

the accused's "martha splatterhead" was re-recorded for "oh, martha" and that sounds pretty good though.

and van halen's "a different kind of truth" is pretty great. it's mostly made up of old demos, which sounded pretty good, but it's nice to hear them cleaned up without sounding much different than the rest of the dlr era.

i wish late 80's or 90's rkl had re-recorded all of their mystic stuff. that probably would have sounded great. nofx re-recorded "hold it back" from their first mystic 7" recently and it's really good. their mystic stuff wasn't that solid though.

[captain2man]

Hard to disagree with anything already said here.

There's a difference between a band re-recording one of their own songs here & there (G.I.'s "Sheer Terror" was the first thing that came to mind) and a band re-recording an entire record - which seems to almost be a trend in the metal world (Exodus, Testament, Manowar)........Suicidal re-recording their first album was absolute blasphemy.

No one really does this for artistic reasons, even though they'll say that it is almost 100% of the time. Look, these guys know what it's like to be music fans....and you can never duplicate the original thing - because it's not JUST about performance, recording, etc. - it's about capturing a pure moment in time....and, for the listener, it's about an emotional attachment. Same reason why in film, sequels and re-makes are virtually never as good as the original.

But, I totally get why bands do it. Bands might own their own songs, but not necessarily their own recordings, and if they're not seeing a dime in royalties from sales from an old record that is selling, of course the natural instinct is to find a way to earn some of that back. At the same time, you can justify the release using some "artistic" excuse.

The most abhorrent example of this, of course, were the re-releases of the first two Ozzy records - which they didn't actually re-record in full, but only took out Daisley & Kerslake's bass/drum parts and replaced those parts only with the guys who were in the band at that time (Robert Trujilo & Mike Bordin) - for no reason other than spite. The Ozzy camp - whether it be Ozzy himself or Sharon (probably Sharon) didn't like that Kerslake/Daisley were suing for royalties they were owed, so they just scratched them out of existence. Absolutely disgusting. They eventually remedied it and re-released them yet again with the original tracks in tact, but, c'mon. That's just some total bullshit right there.

[john stabb]

How would you GI fans feel about a Sheer Terror (Reggae style) a la Minor Threat's (Jah) Asshole

[MXV]

I can tell you that in Suicidal Tendencies' case they didn't re-record the first album because of not getting their royalties, they always get them on time and always have. It was done out of spite and Mike Muir really believed that people would buy the new one and stop buying the old one. What a dumbass.

[Gary]

I wouldn't say I prefer it,but the Cheap Trick rerecording of In Color is not bad at all.

Probably the only one I would listen to.

[JGJR]

no, and i would use these as examples of records that suck and are a waste of everyone's time. sick of it all did this recently because they wanted to do a greatest hits cd and couldn't get the rights to all the songs i think. they were redoing stuff that had no need to be redone. i know with the warzone ep if was because raybeez hated the way the first ep sounded and was just signed to victory at the time he redid the album. it had stupid audio samples and a business cover, it was a mess. closest to being good was the absolution ep that came out last year and it was a remake of the first one. it was cool, but it didn't have the energy and urgency of the first record.

I haven't heard the Warzone one (not a fan of the original; their 1st 2 Lps are way better), but I actually really like the Subhumans Lp. I have heard the ST and Fear records and yeah, what you said applies there for sure but I could just be biased as I love the originals in both cases and have since I was a teenager. It's not a good idea in general, but there are a few exceptions.

[scannest]

The Fear record is particularly dopey as the original was recorded at Sound City Studios, home of Fleetwood Mac, Tom Petty, Nirvana, etc. There was certainly no "sonic" reason for re-recording that thing,

[JGJR]

I wouldn't say I prefer it,but the Cheap Trick rerecording of In Color is not bad at all.

Probably the only one I would listen to.

Sorry, but I think it sucks and people give it a pass because of Albini. I love the single they recorded with him around the same time, though. But yeah, I actually LIKE the production on the original version of In Color. It rules.

[JGJR]

The Fear record is particularly dopey as the original was recorded at Sound City Studios, home of Fleetwood Mac, Tom Petty, Nirvana, etc. There was certainly no "sonic" reason for re-recording that thing,

I didn't know that, but it makes sense. It's a great-sounding record (the original).

[captain2man]

I wouldn't say I prefer it,but the Cheap Trick rerecording of In Color is not bad at all.

Probably the only one I would listen to.

I've never heard the Albini version - but I'll say this, at least that's genuinely interesting.

Also, to be fair, you may have found the ONE instance where a band did re-record their record for some sort of artistic fulfillment. Don't ask me to link specific articles, but as a long-time Cheap Trick fan (the only fanclub I've ever belonged to), I know that the band was unhappy with the recording of that album almost from the time it came out.

The songs on the first two records were all written around the same time, and history has sorted it out that the first record is the darker, moodier record, and In Color is the more poppy,lighter record.

While there's no doubt In Color has more power-pop type of songs than the first, the band preferred Jack Douglas's production on the first album to Tom Werman's "overproduction" on the second. They've always said that that record should have been much more powerful than it turned out.

I'm sure Cheap Trick didn't sign a bonehead contract that slighted them on royalties on the original version, so I actually believe that they re-recorded that so that both they & their fans could hear those songs in a way they were originally intended.

I don't think the Albini version was ever officially released anyway - which lends more credence to the fact that you found an example of this situation that was pure.

[lewdd]

The Fear record is particularly dopey as the original was recorded at Sound City Studios, home of Fleetwood Mac, Tom Petty, Nirvana, etc. There was certainly no "sonic" reason for re-recording that thing,

Ving wanted to record at Grohl's studio which caused him to cancel the Fear participation in 2000 Tons of TNT fest in Hartford a few years ago because Grohl had an opening in his schedule that he had to take.

[MXV]

I forgot about the Cheap Trick one. It actually is good but I still prefer the original version because that's what I grew up with. It's a novelty more than anything but certainly the only example of an album being re-recorded that doesn't suck. I'm not sure it can count though since it wasn't officially released.