• Guys, we've spent considerable money converting the Les Paul Forum to this new XenForo platform, and we have ongoing monthly operating expenses. THE "DONATIONS" TAB IS NOW WORKING, AND WE WOULD APPRECIATE ANY DONATIONS YOU CAN MAKE TO KEEP THE LES PAUL FORUM GOING! Thank you!

Duane Allman - Derek & The Dominos

ampig

New member
Joined
Mar 3, 2015
Messages
19
I recently bought a CD of Layla and Assorted Love Songs. It seems that Duanes guitar volume is generally too low throughout the recording. Did I get a bad remaster or is that how the original recording was mixed? I dont remember it being like that on the old LP version, but I dont remember a lot of things....
 

goldtop0

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 19, 2003
Messages
8,218
He was playing 2nd fiddle to EC so he's at lower volume in the mix.
 

ampig

New member
Joined
Mar 3, 2015
Messages
19
That's what I kinda thought. I was trying to give EC the benefit of the doubt, but that's how the mix seems. Why bring on a hired gun guitarist just to bury him in the mix? Clapton's always been a bit of an odd bird to me anyways.
 

Nick-O

Member
Joined
Aug 12, 2015
Messages
197
From what Bobby Whitlock has stated on his YT channel, that remix is a disaster. The method they had to use to get Duane's work on there was poor to start with, and apparently the remaster did it no justice. Check his channel, he speaks much about it. Duane wasn't brought in as a hired gun, he was heard by the dominos in Miami, and partied with them and ended up jamming in the same studio.
 

Nick-O

Member
Joined
Aug 12, 2015
Messages
197
I don't believe so. Bobby sounded pretty down about it and believed the original vinyl was better. They had to adjust the timing manually for Duane's parts, thus the somewhat out of tune parts, so I don't know how to say what would be best...being there in the studio I reckon.
 

ampig

New member
Joined
Mar 3, 2015
Messages
19
With today's technology, I think it could be fixed. But there's no financial incentive.
 

Doc Sausage

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 21, 2006
Messages
1,594
Is there a better mix available or maybe in the works?
From what I understand thru Bobby's channel, the original - I mean a much older copy, is the best. Or at least as good as it gets.
 

gmann

Active member
Joined
May 26, 2003
Messages
5,861
With today's technology, I think it could be fixed. But there's no financial incentive.
I don’t think it can be fixed. With all the reissues and remasters it hasn’t been improved. The reason being, IMO, is it was badly recorded/engineered in the 1st place. Yeah I know, Tom Dowd and all that. I’ve often wondered if the producer and the engineers weren’t doing as much drugs as the band. Whatever the case, it’s still my favorite LP.
 

Nick-O

Member
Joined
Aug 12, 2015
Messages
197
I don’t think it can be fixed. With all the reissues and remasters it hasn’t been improved. The reason being, IMO, is it was badly recorded/engineered in the 1st place. Yeah I know, Tom Dowd and all that. I’ve often wondered if the producer and the engineers weren’t doing as much drugs as the band. Whatever the case, it’s still my favorite LP.
I agree with this. Again, going back to Bobby Whitlock and comments by Eric...the tape was sped up and slowed, there was all sorts of interference and it just wasn't well recorded. The issue is there were some mighty jams, and so much inspiration. We just have to enjoy it for what it is, and stop patronizing those who keep repackaging the music with "the latest/greatest" technology.
 

Bob Womack

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 8, 2002
Messages
1,987
Here is a story for you: when they did the twentieth aniversary remaster back around '91, the business had transitioned to linear digital tape. They went back to the first generation mix master and spent a WHOLE lot of time mastering the song and just felt something wasn't right. It was dragging, and it ended up longer than the original. Then Tom Dowd in remembered that they speeded the song up. Multiple times. They grabbed the premaster from the library and checked and sure enough, there were seven sections edited together to form the second half. Dowd and Clapton felt like it was dragging so they copied the tape and progressively speeded it up tiny amounts, seven times before the end of the song. That is the version everyone remembers from the album. No wonder you can't play along.

But then they had a problem: At that point, linear digital didn't offer vari-speed.

The guys had to copy the first gen mix to digital, speeding it up seven times to match the seven sections of progressive vari-speed, and then digitally edit them together to match the original.

I read this in Mix Magazine when the remastered CD came out.

Bob
 

Nick-O

Member
Joined
Aug 12, 2015
Messages
197
Here is a story for you: when they did the twentieth aniversary remaster back around '91, the business had transitioned to linear digital tape. They went back to the first generation mix master and spent a WHOLE lot of time mastering the song and just felt something wasn't right. It was dragging, and it ended up longer than the original. Then Tom Dowd in remembered that they speeded the song up. Multiple times. They grabbed the premaster from the library and checked and sure enough, there were seven sections edited together to form the second half. Dowd and Clapton felt like it was dragging so they copied the tape and progressively speeded it up tiny amounts, seven times before the end of the song. That is the version everyone remembers from the album. No wonder you can't play along.

But then they had a problem: At that point, linear digital didn't offer vari-speed.

The guys had to copy the first gen mix to digital, speeding it up seven times to match the seven sections of progressive vari-speed, and then digitally edit them together to match the original.

I read this in Mix Magazine when the remastered CD came out.

Bob

This is almost exactly what Bobby Whitlock said on his YT channel. I think we just have to enjoy what we have.
 

Ed Driscoll

Les Paul Forum Member
Joined
Apr 24, 2002
Messages
4,633
Here is a story for you: when they did the twentieth aniversary remaster back around '91, the business had transitioned to linear digital tape. They went back to the first generation mix master and spent a WHOLE lot of time mastering the song and just felt something wasn't right. It was dragging, and it ended up longer than the original. Then Tom Dowd in remembered that they speeded the song up. Multiple times. They grabbed the premaster from the library and checked and sure enough, there were seven sections edited together to form the second half. Dowd and Clapton felt like it was dragging so they copied the tape and progressively speeded it up tiny amounts, seven times before the end of the song. That is the version everyone remembers from the album. No wonder you can't play along.

But then they had a problem: At that point, linear digital didn't offer vari-speed.

The guys had to copy the first gen mix to digital, speeding it up seven times to match the seven sections of progressive vari-speed, and then digitally edit them together to match the original.

I read this in Mix Magazine when the remastered CD came out.

Bob
Is the '91 remaster considered the best of the seemingly endless remixes of the Layla album, or is there a newer one that tops it? I seem to recall the first attempt at releasing Layla on CD back in the mid-'80s was trashed by multiple music magazines.
 

Bob Womack

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 8, 2002
Messages
1,987
Is the '91 remaster considered the best of the seemingly endless remixes of the Layla album, or is there a newer one that tops it? I seem to recall the first attempt at releasing Layla on CD back in the mid-'80s was trashed by multiple music magazines.
I don't know. After reading the article I got a copy of it and enjoyed it. The old Criterion recordings of the 1960s-1970s period were pretty rustic so that is one recording I haven't followed the remasters on. Now, YES' Close to the Edge, and Pink Floyd's Dark Side of the Moon, I've got multiple remasters on them. Joe Walsh and Barnstorm The Smoker You Drink the Player You Get - check.

The funny thing is that we've reach the technological level where a slick remixer could speed up the song without changing the pitch. I wonder if anyone has tried that? Frankly, I'm not sure I want that sort of tinkering because there are always artifacts.

Bob
 
Top