While of course many CDs have already sold, buyers have the right to know that there are major errors in this release that have now been identified. The two critical problems are widely reported mislabelling of the CDs (as they each represent different tapes of exactly the same sessions and music it's almost farcical) and a clearly identifiable digital transfer glitch sound on one of the versions of 'What You Want.'
It was Analog Loyalist's blog that made the comprehensive case with good analysis, so all credit to him for breaking the story. Here is the litany of woes:
details: My Bloody Valentine Loveless 2012 remasters - manufacturing errors
Pursuant to my other post on critics: notice that no critics until this blog have identified that the CDs were mislabelled, or found this glitch, or indeed attempted to figure out which of the tracks Kevin Shields had digitally limited as alluded to in his interview with Pitchfork.
Pitchfork in their review have now pointed to Analog Loyalist's blog. I have to take issue with some elements of Mark Richardson's review. As lovely as the prose and the history lesson are, I genuinely feel that today's music writers are doing their readers a disservice by not properly holding record labels to account over the quality of remasters they release. Reissuing old material with a new master is often more profitable than releasing new material, and yet the business aspect is hardly ever mentioned. This is at the expense of fans who are seemingly told by a unanimous chorus of voices that the reissue heralds a bold new opportunity to really appraise the artist. Based upon the real level of difference that a remaster brings this is often false.
More after the jump.
