tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-38548109.post7814901554847902393..comments2024-02-13T10:20:04.888+00:00Comments on David Hepworth's blog: You can't take a record back once you've made it, Def LeppardDavid Hepworthhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05973053694541321308noreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-38548109.post-56265027444447957242012-07-13T09:29:36.140+01:002012-07-13T09:29:36.140+01:00I once had an argument with somebody about the pro...I once had an argument with somebody about the pros and cons of Hank Marvin employing a digital version of the Vox AC30 amp that he was famous for using. The other guy said it was an exact digital copy, therefore acceptable, and I said that it didn't matter - I could just 'tell'. It really does get right down to that level - accept no substitutes.RPhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03278008450567751646noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-38548109.post-33857037379112853682012-07-08T07:48:09.710+01:002012-07-08T07:48:09.710+01:00I completely agree. Fans know every nuance of ever...I completely agree. Fans know every nuance of every vocal and instrument line so well that, as Mike Church suggests, only *different* versions work. People really *do* know Beatles songs inside out and want to examine that creative process. This explains the appetite for the Anthology and the 'Let It Be Naked' album. But these were *different* versions (remixes and out-takes); they weren't re-records. Closer inspection of the new Def Leppard recordings will surely reveal differences. It's simply not possible for Joe Elliott to sing with the same voice he had back in 1987.Philhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10907197523471136697noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-38548109.post-7736118803650163072012-07-08T06:35:53.550+01:002012-07-08T06:35:53.550+01:00Yes I agree with both of you. Indeed, I think re-r...Yes I agree with both of you. Indeed, I think re-recordings only work when they are totally *different* versions, though none spring to mind right now.Mike Churchhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05503749721449886415noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-38548109.post-50301559819196778792012-07-07T17:22:38.321+01:002012-07-07T17:22:38.321+01:00I agree with all of this. I can understand the con...I agree with all of this. I can understand the contractual reasons why a band might re-record their big hits but to me it doesn't work. You can never replace that original recording and expect a new one to become the "go to" one. It's like when you go on Spotify and search out a track - you know within a few seconds if it's a re-record. Squeeze did a similar thing a year or so ago. The new versions were fine but they lacked the feel of the originals and they were not something I would buy. I'll pay to see them re-create the songs on stage...but not on record.Richardhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05058258068826981596noreply@blogger.com