Another form of re-recording...

I know we've discussed the Ozzy re-recordings in the past and most agree that it is a travesty that the original tracks were removed and re-recorded over.

I finally scored a copy of Joshua's "Surrender" on vinyl. I was listening to it and noted that the sound, mix, and even some of the guitar solos were way different than I remembered them from my years of listening to the Ocean Records version on CD. I found out that the original recording of that album can only be found on the FM Revolver LP. Before the album was released on CD in 1992, everything except for the vocals were re-recorded and even the vocals were recorded over in one song. Robin Kyle Basauri recorded over Ken Tamplin's vocals on one track.

I know Metallica did this too. After the original Metal Massacre was released in 1982 the band decided they didn't like their version of "Hit the Lights", so they re-recorded the entire song before the second pressing.

What do you all think about this practice?

It might be necessary in some instances. I'd have to take it on a case-by-case basis.

I'm not a fan of revisionist history, but in the end it's up to the artist and what they are comfortable with.

I would prefer to have the original released material. If the band doesn't like it, do a Twisted Sister and release it as new

I'm not familiar with the Joshua band stuff, but to me, it sounds like it was just done to make it sound better. Same with Metallica. For better or worse, they had good intentions.

The Ozzy stuff was done out of sheer malice and spite. Sharon had a personal gripe with the original guys (sorry, the names escape me at the moment) and was done just to put the screws to them and keep them from receiving royalites.

Axl Rose supposedly re-recorded Appetite for Destruction with a whole new band with the same intentions of keeping all the publishing rights and royalties for himself. Total dick move.

MetalGuy71 wrote:

The Ozzy stuff was done out of sheer malice and spite. Sharon had a personal gripe with the original guys (sorry, the names escape me at the moment) and was done just to put the screws to them and keep them from receiving royalites.

Bob Daisley, Lee Kerslake & Don Airey.

Don Airey gets a little revenge each night he plays with Deep Purple, he uses the Mr. Crowley intro during his keyboard solo.

detuned wrote:

MetalGuy71 wrote:

The Ozzy stuff was done out of sheer malice and spite. Sharon had a personal gripe with the original guys (sorry, the names escape me at the moment) and was done just to put the screws to them and keep them from receiving royalites.

Bob Daisley, Lee Kerslake & Don Airey.

Don Airey gets a little revenge each night he plays with Deep Purple, he uses the Mr. Crowley intro during his keyboard solo.

Thank you for that. I remembered Bob Daisley, but couldn't think of the others.

Temple of Blood wrote:

It might be necessary in some instances. I'd have to take it on a case-by-case basis.

That's how I feel too. I think the Ozzy thing was a vindictive scam.

With Joshua I think it's much improved. Of course, I was already use to the re-recordings and didn't even know it was a re-recording until recently. I can see how someone who might have loved the original being upset that the CD release was different and even has a different vocalist on one song.

I agree that the Ozzy situation was a vindictive move. I believe that if the bands intentions were to improve the sound, then it's okay. It's their music they can do whatever they want to with it. Sometimes original source tapes are lost, like in the case of So Far...So Good, or a many years have past and a band is with a new and different record company and finally gets to record something the way they originally wanted to but at the time could not. Just my thoughts. Peace.

It depends, I remember when Kevin Dubrow released "The Randy Rhoads Years", he was upfront about re-recording the vocals on the album, he did not re-record any of the bass or drums, but the original master tapes were so damaged they had to fix them and remix the sound.

At first I thought it was cheesy that he re-recorded his original vocal performance and even re wrote some of the lyrics but I have to admit it was a major improvement over the original Quiet Riot Japanese releases. Also it did nothing to harm or alter Randy Rhoads original performances.

As far as Ozzy and Sharon's move, what a bunch of greedy bastards, if it wasn't for Bob Daisley and Lee Kerslake, and of course Randy Rhoads he would have been a homeless drunk who once sang for Black Sabbath instead of the superstar that he became.

Dave Mustaine is guilty of this.

KISS's re-recorded album of KISS classics. The rumor (don't know if it is true or not) is that they did it for licsencing purposes - i.e. a movie, TV show, toothbursh wants to use a KISS song, Paul and Gene collect the royalties, Ace/Peter are cut out since they no longer are part of the licsenced work. More $$ in Gene's pocket

thejokeriv wrote:

KISS's re-recorded album of KISS classics. The rumor (don't know if it is true or not) is that they did it for licsencing purposes - i.e. a movie, TV show, toothbursh wants to use a KISS song, Paul and Gene collect the royalties, Ace/Peter are cut out since they no longer are part of the licsenced work. More $$ in Gene's pocket

That is probably true that is why Blue Oyster Cult re-recorded some of their classics years ago and released them as 'Cult Classics'

SOMETIMES it is necessary, but most of the time its not. I can see why some artists/bands would rerecord certain things. Ozzy ruined his 1st 2 albums doing that, but a few artists have done it very well.

Not sure if anyone remembers this one:

Pink Floyd re-recorded the song Money for the compilation album "A Collection Of Great Dance Songs", because that was a Columbia release and Capitol/Harvest owned the rights to the original recording.

Another Ozzy moment, he re-recorded all the vocals for the Tribute album. (I heard the radio broadcast version once and I can see why he did).

Chairman_Smith wrote:

Dave Mustaine is guilty of this.

Agreed. The remasters have many re-recorded parts in them.

xyz wrote:

Chairman_Smith wrote:

Dave Mustaine is guilty of this.

Agreed. The remasters have many re-recorded parts in them.

due to the fact (claimned by mustaine) that most of master tapes were lost from the recording sessions.

detuned wrote:

Not sure if anyone remembers this one:

Pink Floyd re-recorded the song Money for the compilation album "A Collection Of Great Dance Songs", because that was a Columbia release and Capitol/Harvest owned the rights to the original recording.

Another Ozzy moment, he re-recorded all the vocals for the Tribute album. (I heard the radio broadcast version once and I can see why he did).

I didn't know either of those.

sam wrote:

xyz wrote:

Chairman_Smith wrote:

Dave Mustaine is guilty of this.

Agreed. The remasters have many re-recorded parts in them.

due to the fact (claimned by mustaine) that most of master tapes were lost from the recording sessions.

And in most cases, it's just Dave redoing his vocals (such as several songs on Rust In Peace). I'm pretty sure he cut / changed very little of other members.