Graceland 25th Anniversary remaster - my review

MajorFubar

New member
Mar 3, 2010
690
6
0
Visit site
I first heard this remaster last week via Spotify. I was impressed by what I heard so I decided to buy it.

What you get is a fold-out Digipack like the Beatles stereo remasters, consisting of two discs (one of them a DVD containing a documentary running nearly two and a half hours), and a revised booklet containing the lyrics, notes and period photos.

The audio CD also contains a few period demos and a nine-minute walkthrough of the title-track narrated by Paul himself.

Ok, you say, but what of the sound?

The original CD I bought in 1988 always sounded a bit lacking to me, compared to the LP I had borrowed from a friend some months earlier. In my opinion its sonic qualities epitomised everything which was wrong with early analogue to digital transfers: clear and quiet, but cold, brash and soul-less.

So what about this remaster?

There's only one word for it really: phenomenal. Sure, there is evidence of 'loudness war' dynamic compression in so far as this remaster is louder than the original CD, but it's not overdone. What is really, really obvious from the very opening notes of Forere Motloheloa's accordion on The Boy In The Bubble is that this is one quality A->D conversion of the analogue master. Everything is so spacious and well-defined. As Vusi Khumalo starts to hit the skins from 0:08, the attack and precision makes the original CD sound veiled. Bakithi Kumalo's bass comes in with a definition, weight and depth to it which is foreign to the original CD. Simon's vocals are sonorous, clearly defined and they cut through the mix with precision. The musical textures and layers never sound jumbled or tiring: everyone's just stood in your living room, playing and singing for you, occupying their own little accoustic space.

It's much of the same story for the rest of the CD. Listening to Ladysmith Black Mambazo during Homeless and on the opening to Diamonds on the Souls of Her Shoes has them sounding like they've gone and re-recorded their vocals in a bigger sound-booth, and picking out their individual voices is much easier. You Can Call Me Al has a sense of pace and rhythm which I haven't heard before.

In short, if you are a fan of the original album, I'd class this as an absolutely essential purchase. The package presentation, which so few people seem to care about in today's digital dowload era, is excellent, and the whole album sounds like 2012 studio engineers have zapped back in time to 1986 and re-recorded everyone on better equipment. Sad that all these years it's obviously always been there on the tape, but some substandard part of the original tape->CD conversion just didn't capture it.
 

richardw42

New member
May 2, 2010
299
0
0
Visit site
Cheers.

Never been a Paul Simon fan, never owned anything by him. BUT, I've been seriously considering getting this, and now I think I probably will.
 

MajorFubar

New member
Mar 3, 2010
690
6
0
Visit site
Maybe listen to it on Spotify before dropping the money on it; what a remaster can't really do is make you like an artist you previously didn't.
 

BenLaw

Well-known member
Nov 21, 2010
475
7
18,895
Visit site
One of my favourite albums, but hadn't read anything about this, definitely going on my list, thanks :) Any news on how worthwhile the extras on the £90 edition are? If anything like pink floyd, not very....
 

Clare Newsome

New member
Jun 4, 2007
1,657
0
0
Visit site
I agree with the OP: I've got the vinyl version of the Graceland 25th anniv. edition, and it's brilliant. Several outbreaks of goosebumps listening to it yesterday!
 

MajorFubar

New member
Mar 3, 2010
690
6
0
Visit site
Now that would certainly make an interesting listen, Clare. I wonder how much it varies from the original LP, which imo was always superior to the original CD.
 

toyota man

New member
Apr 22, 2009
79
0
0
Visit site
Hi your review has sold it to me I love graceland not keen on the original recording though I will keep an eye open for this one many thanks for your review:cheers: :)
 

MajorFubar

New member
Mar 3, 2010
690
6
0
Visit site
This is track one, The Boy In The Bubble. The top is from the original CD, bottom is the 25th Anniversary remaster:

Untitled.jpg


It's not good to see, but I've seen worse, and imo the overall improved SQ still makes it very easily worth it. My perception is that it doesn't sound too compressed. Obviously others may feel differently.
 

Gusboll

Well-known member
Aug 22, 2008
58
1
18,545
Visit site
This was the 1st CD I ever heard. Despite being blown away by the SQ at the time I thought it a bit of a pretentious album. But memories are making me want to check it out again and I've always liked Boy in the Bubble.

Currently listening to: Stump - The Song Remains
 

6th.replicant

Well-known member
Oct 26, 2007
292
0
18,890
Visit site
MajorFubar said:
This is track one, The Boy In The Bubble. The top is from the original CD, bottom is the 25th Anniversary remaster:

Untitled.jpg


It's not good to see, but I've seen worse, and imo the overall improved SQ still makes it very easily worth it. My perception is that it doesn't sound too compressed. Obviously others may feel differently.

Thanks for posting :)
 

matthewpiano

Well-known member
I'm pretty sure this wasn't remastered specifically for the 25th anniversary but that this is a re-packaging of the remaster that came out a couple of years ago. I have the original CD release and the remaster and feel the remaster is substantially better sounding.
 

6th.replicant

Well-known member
Oct 26, 2007
292
0
18,890
Visit site
Hmm, indeed. Been digging... From what I can gather, there's been two remasters: the first in 2004 - which by all accounts was merely an EQ tweak that boosted treble and bass - and the second, released Oct 2011, was a more comprehensive fettle. It seems the 25th is a re-packaged version of the latter?
 

MajorFubar

New member
Mar 3, 2010
690
6
0
Visit site
6th.replicant said:
It seems the 25th is a re-packaged version of the latter?
Very likely...I had no idea about the previous recent releases and I even only found out about this one quite by accident. If you already have the 2011 remaster, it's probably a bit pointless buying this unless you really need the new packaging and supplementary material.

I love it when remastering 'works'. Technology has improved immeasurably in 25/30 years, allowing us to digitally capture the subtleties and 'life' of original analogue masters in a quality which was often lacking back then. Such a shame then when it all goes a bit wrong due to the fact that producers and engineers too-often feel the need to over-modernize the sound with additional compression and re-EQs.
 

CJSF

New member
May 25, 2011
251
1
0
Visit site
I'm a fan of Paul Simon, I like Art Garfunkel’s solo work too. I was listening to the original vinyls of 'Graceland' and 'Hearts and Bones' only the other night . . . I saw this thread, had a listen to the re-release of both albums . . . I prefer the originals, especially Graceland, the re-release has an element of over analytical modern engineering? Hearts and Bones is a little easier on my ear.

I like both in the vinyl, Hearts and Bones might have the edge . . . but its marginal? The re-releases, I definitely prefer the softer presentation of Hearts and Bones. I'm happy with the originals, so won’t be rushing out to buy the new ones.

. . . a personal view, CJSF
 

6th.replicant

Well-known member
Oct 26, 2007
292
0
18,890
Visit site
MajorFubar said:
... I had no idea about the previous recent releases ...

I love it when remastering 'works'. ...

+1 and +1.

All this misty-eyed nostalgia re 1st-gen CDs and their superior dynamic range is a tad Hobson's choice; 1st-gen CDs also sound very tinny/bass-light and have an alarming lack of soundstage and separation, IME.
 

matthewpiano

Well-known member
6th.replicant said:
MajorFubar said:
... I had no idea about the previous recent releases ...

I love it when remastering 'works'. ...

+1 and +1.

All this misty-eyed nostalgia re 1st-gen CDs and their superior dynamic range is a tad Hobson's choice; 1st-gen CDs also sound very tinny/bass-light and have an alarming lack of soundstage and separation, IME.

I agree. On the whole I've found most remasters to be an improvement on the original CD release in terms of overall enjoyment.
 

Bell

New member
Sep 24, 2009
19
0
0
Visit site
Hi folks,

been reading your thread and like one or two of you had not listened to Graceland since listening on album when it came out. Have gone through a bit of a Paul Simon review since buying his last album, So Beautiful or so What on flac from hd tracks. That album, Graceland and Surprise (produced by Brian Eno) are for me some of the most beautiful sounding albums I own. I don't like all of his music but when he gets it right I can't resist and the sound is impeccable.
 

atticus

Well-known member
Nov 18, 2011
2
0
18,520
Visit site
It is slightly ironic that the Loudness War folks (http://turnmeup.org/index.shtml) cite the album 'Surprise' by Paul Simon as one of the worst offenders in the loudness stakes. What makes it worse is that the album is produced by Brian Eno, who really ought to know better.
 
T

the record spot

Guest
By and large, I will take the original CD anytime. Too many remasters that have been crippled by poor mastering. I haven't heard the remaster of Graceland, but the original was excellent IMO.
 

MajorFubar

New member
Mar 3, 2010
690
6
0
Visit site
the record spot said:
By and large, I will take the original CD anytime. Too many remasters that have been crippled by poor mastering. I haven't heard the remaster of Graceland, but the original was excellent IMO.
Just down to individual opinion I guess. I heard the original Graceland LP when I borrowed it from a friend soon after it was released. A few months later I bought the CD, and other than being impressed by the then-novel traits of a quiet background and no clicks and pops, to be honest I found it lifeless, unexciting and brittle compared to the LP, just like many CDs of the day made from analogue masters. To my ears, this remaster has injected a life and soul into this album which I haven't heard for 25 years.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
I have to agree with RS, I love the original cd.

Its probably been the most played album in the evenings for a couple of years now.

I will be getting the remastered as well though.
 

jerry klinger

New member
Jun 26, 2010
37
0
0
Visit site
The original CD is very good, as is Rumours by the way - in fact with that one, I prefer it because they inserted a lacklustre bonus track between sides 1 & 2 (LP speaking).

With all this fuss about Graceland, I think Jerry Dammers should be hauled up and forced to publicly apologise for being such an a**e back in 86. How else would the whole world have heard African music, these artists in particular?
 

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts