Search - John Lennon :: Plastic Ono Band

FINALLY a proper CD release

Charles F. Held Jr. | Charlotte, NC United States | 10/05/2010

(5 out of 5 stars)

"As was the case with some other major artists (cough - DAVID BOWIE - cough), the John Lennon solo catalog has had a difficult CD history. The original Capitol/EMI releases of his Apple (i.e. pre-"Double Fantasy") albums were smothered in noise reduction. The 2000 remixes helped a few albums, but had some major flaws (such as the climax of "God", where Lennon's voice is supposed to emerge from the mix stripped of echo on the word BEATLES). The third time is the charm: original mixes transferred with the same care afforded the Beatles' remasters of 2009. So yeah, there's tape hiss on the piano opening of "Love". So what? That's how it's SUPPOSED to sound!"

Disappointing Mobile Fidelity Sound Labs Release

Russell Sharp | Cream Ridge, New Jersey | 10/13/2010

(2 out of 5 stars)

"This is a review of the MFSL gold disc release of this album. (Unfortunately, Amazon doesn't sort the reviews by edition.) Musically, I think the album is fantastic. But there are over 200 other reviews of it on Amazon, so I won't bother to share my thoughts on why I think it's great. I feel like there isn't much I'd add about it.



I will share my thoughts on this particular edition, though, because with the addition of the 2010 re-master, this gold disc is one of two in-print and one of four readily-available versions of the album. And my thoughts on the MFSL version are this: Spend your $30 elsewhere. My concerns with the edition are two-fold.



First, this particular version of the album suffers from digital compression, limiting the dynamic range of the songs. I realize that this is a common phenomenon with new albums and re-mastered CDs alike (indeed, I have ranted about it elsewhere on Amazon), and this CD by no means the worst offender I have encountered. Nevertheless, that trait of this version warrants discussion. As a preliminary matter, I should point out that it's particularly disappointing to get a Mobile Fidelity album only to find it full of digital compression. I'm not alone in my attempt to escape the loudness wars, and one of the main reasons that people like me are willing to drop three times the normal cost on an album is the hope that the MFSL version will have the same dynamic range as the original version of the album. Apparently this is a false hope.



But more importantly, a critical source of this album's emotional effect is its use of dynamics, and limiting the dynamic range takes away from that effect. To cite a few examples, the crescendo throughout "Mother" is lessened; the contrast between the soft and heavy songs is reduced (the piano at the beginning of "Hold On" is nearly as loud as much of the aforementioned "Mother"); and the bridge between verses two and three of "Isolation," which I still find startling and unsettling in an older mastering of the album despite many listens, has almost completely lost its impact.



If I wanted digital limiting, I would have gone and gotten the regular 2000 version (which would have cost a lot less!).



That last point brings me to my second problem with this version. There seems to be little difference between this and the regular 2000 re-issue of the CD. It uses the same Yoko Ono-commissioned digital re-mix that was on the regular re-release. Why? It couldn't have included the product of a better sounding re-master of the original mix? Maybe Ono refused to allow any Lennon re-releases that didn't use her official mix (I have no idea -- just speculating). But if so, then what was the point of this CD at all? It seems to me that this is really just the same CD as the regular re-issue from 2000, right down to the two bonus tracks (which, as at least one other reviewer pointed out, don't fit the mood of the album at all). The only noticeable differences are the gold plating and the much higher price tag.



I should have gone with the 2010 re-master, which some commenters have claimed does not suffer from compression. Or even tracked down a cheap used copy of the 1988 release. In any event, I should not have picked this one.



Review update: I submitted a similar review of this item to MoFi's website several days ago, and -- surprise! -- it was never posted. (I wonder how many other people have tried unsuccessfully to publicize similar complaints on that site.) So, if you're buying directly from the Mobile Fidelity website, be skeptical of items that get only 4- and 5-star reviews."