Note, the version of 'Crescent' on the second playlist below, featuring songs from Dead Can Dance, is from DCD's concert in The Hague. Apparently Brendan was fiddling with it all through the tour; the version found on the "Best of North Amercia" CD from the same tour is markedly different lyrically, and I think clearly superior. If this song does make it onto Perry's forthcoming album Ark, you can be pretty sure it will be a bit different from even that later version.

He seems to be like one of those kids who can't stop adding legos on and taking other parts off, or an oil painter who doesn't know when the painting is 'finished' and never really ends up satisfied. I've seen this happen with almost all the songs off his first album, and well as with many DCD tracks. They're different depending on which year you hear them. When I saw Brendan playing solo about ten years ago, he did an incredible version of 'In Power We Entrust The Love Advocated' with about half the lyrics altered, a slightly slowed down cadence, and it seemed to me different guitar tunings than the LP version, although I'm no expert when it comes to guitar tuning. I do have a good ear though, I think. He also changed several songs slightly from the "Toward the Within" concert (which I only saw on VHS) and their 'reunion' tour in 2005, which I was lucky enough to see in person. For example: "I'm in love with a Canadian girl" - rather than "American."

Lisa tends to stick to her vocal melodies very closely, but pitches them up or down occasionally live, and of course the band (and thus she) sometimes modify the tempos of her songs, though again, not to the extent of Perry's. One of my favourite songs of his (with DCD) is 'Black Sun' off the Aion LP, but the recording on that and all DCD albums before Into The Labyrinth is pretty muddy. The live version of that song from 2005 on the other hand sounds terrific, but I don't like the sped-up tempo and Brendan's vocals quite as much. Grr! They need a completely remastered set of CDs - Maybe 4AD will do this for them. Especially on their eponymous first album: That album is a virtual masterpiece buried under shoddy recording (reflecting their non-status in the business and lack of money for good studio work, one would assume) and is almost painful to listen to because it could've sounded so much better. I still listen to it from time to time, as it's markedly more Joy Division-y than anything else they went on to do, but I just wish it didn't sound like it was recorded onto a cassette tape. I'd happily buy it again if was remastered.

That reminds me to blog about the art of remastering. It's not simple, and it's not usually done right. Most of the time, "remastering" old material to make it sound louder, clearer, and more expansive fails, introducing unwanted digital reverb, destroying the sound stage†, and messing around with the delicate balance of instruments and overdubs that already exist on the master tapes. Case in point: Johnny Marr recently released a CD of Smiths songs (including some live versions they had stored away), and Morrissey (by fax of course) approved of it and gave it the name "The Sound of the Smiths." It makes me wonder if Morrissey can even hear anymore. And as great a guitar player as Johnny is, don't let him in at the mixing board! That album has way too much dynamic compression and a very spacious, airy feel to it, whilst the voice and guitar are brought to the fore. Sounds ok on paper, except that the intimacy of a very tightly integrated rhythm section provided by Joyce and Rourke gave the Smiths their trademark sound (think of the bouncing bassline in 'Pretty Girls Make Graves,' for instance); Johnny's jangling guitar arpeggios and Morrissey's broken-hearted winking and crooning all sounded much better when it felt like you were in a very small room with them, which the original releases conveyed much better than this awful 'remastered' album does. It tries to bring a a perfectly good 1980s sound into the 2000s, with disastrous results, in my opinion.

So the technical side of remastering will be something I'd like to touch on at some point soon. I'm no studio technician, but I read a lot about how this stuff is done on audiophile message boards (like audioasylum, stereophile, and many others) and just happen to know quite a bit about remastering specifically, as I've been reading about the upcoming remastering (the first since CDs were introduced) of the entire Beatles catalogue, and people hopes and fears regarding the final product. I'd be lost if you asked me a lot of other sound engineering questions. I do know that if were in charge of some great act and had a formidable body of work, I would only allow two people to remaster any of it: David Gilmour of Pink Floyd or Alan Parsons, studio engineer extraordinaire - he was the unchanging piece in the constantly changing Alan Parsons Project group, getting his chops down before that with the Floyd on albums like Dark Side of the Moon. Pink Floyd remasters always sound perfect. To get back to the beginning, I think Brendan Perry could do a good job scrubbing the layers of dirt of his old band's old songs, but it would be quite a project. It's like a delicate fossil - you need to use a tiny brush and etcher to do the job, not a jackhammer.

Oh, and I'd let George Martin too remix and remaster anything of mine he wanted.

†From Wikipedia: “Soundstage also refers to the depth and richness of an audio recording (usually referring to the playback process). According to audiophiles, the quality of the playback is very much dependent on how one is able to pick out different instruments, voices, vocal parts, etc. exactly where they are located on an imaginary 2D or 3D field. This can enhance not only the listener's involvement in the recording but also their overall perception of the stage.”