repeat mix

graham · Post by **graham** » 03 Oct 2005 21:16

I was doing a bit of I pod filling today and got round to pacific 98 with the yellow sleeve, pacific origenal is the same as pacific 303...or is it just me?
its the cd with the monkey mafia mix of cubik (do like that one)

Post by **markus** » 03 Oct 2005 21:39

No not just you, I think that's one of those ZTT things. From the text discog:
CD5: 1998 UK (ZTT; ZTT 98 CD2)
4:43 Cubik:98
6:40 Cubik (monkey mafia remix)
6:28 Pacific 303 ["(Original)"/"6:30"]
6:28 Pacific 303 (diff-e-q mix)
I suppose diff e-q mix means it's slightly differently equalized?

Post by **nickking** » 03 Oct 2005 22:34

Yeah, I played that recently to listen to Pacific Original, but found Pacific 303 instead... Dunno why I hadn't noticed it earlier?

Think someone at ZTT pressed the wrong track on it?

Dunno about the EQ bit - didn't listen to them that closely!

PeteZarustica · Post by **PeteZarustica** » 04 Oct 2005 07:56

Maybe by invertinhg the phase of 303 dif eq mix and adding it to 303 mix will see what's really different.

give me 24 hours.

PeteZarustica · Post by **PeteZarustica** » 06 Oct 2005 00:09

Well here is what I discovered:

I inverted the phases and added them and I realized something really familiar. The result is a woomping track with no mid range and little treble.

After checking the spectrogram and RMS values this is what I got.

Track 4 is Track 3 remastered. By remastered, I don't mean taken from the original tape again and re-recorded from new digital conversors.

I mean they picked Pacific 303 from another cd-source and they made some changes in EQ and compression to release it in accordance to the rest of the single/compilation.

This is often done to maintain the same levels and quality in a cd. So a particular track doesn't sound 'lower' than the rest of the cd.

------------------------------------------------
Now here is guessing - (I myself am pretty sure this is what happened)

By 'original' you can see it was the name the engineer gave the track taken from another cd release, with the original compression and EQ.

So pure incompetence made them release same track twice - 'cause he named the file he needed to remaster original, and he, or someone else figured it was pacific state original.

I hope it helps.

all the best
Peter

Post by **nickking** » 06 Oct 2005 00:10

That sounds like ZTT!

Anyone remember this promo CD?

Various: ZTT - Baktrax
[Oct 1998] promotional compilation album

CD: 1998 US (ZTT/Universal; U5P-1394) [promo; card sleeve]
8:25 Art Of Noise: Beat Box (diversion one)
5:38 Art Of Noise: Close (To The Edit)
3:58 FGTH: Relax
3:57 FGTH: Two Tribes
4:10 808 State: Techno Bell (edit) [mislabeled as Cubik...]
4:18 808 State: Europa
8:07 Propaganda: A Dream Within A Dream
3:29 Propaganda: Abuse
[The badly mislabeled sleeve also lists 808 State: Pacific 202...]

Ancodia · Post by **Ancodia** » 06 Oct 2005 10:09

You can't really blame ZTT on the Baktrax promo, it was originally Cubik (Techno Bell Mix) until the boys removed all remains of Cubik from it. And of course, how many versions of Pacific have we got now, even Graham has to be careful he doesn't start playing the wrong version when out live.

John

Post by **markus** » 06 Oct 2005 11:21

Many thanks for checking this out PeteZ. It sounds perfectly accurate.

Mark · Post by **Mark** » 06 Oct 2005 21:04

Yep, interesting that Pete, perfectly explained!

De Lillie · Post by **De Lillie** » 07 Oct 2005 13:45

Hi all
Be careful when considering ZTT mispressings. Often they are deliberate (to create a collectors market). Remember all those FGTH oddities? I have an old Record Collector Magazine which regards many of these as "carefully pressed mispressings". I saw the same phrase used by the same mag when describing a WEA misspressing of the Smith's 'This Charming Man' 12".
Cheers
De Lillie (no more need for a/k/a Lionel D anymore)

Post by **markus** » 07 Oct 2005 13:53

Pete, could you do your magic with this too please?
CD5: 1991 JP (ZTT / WEA; WMC5-361)
3:53 In Yer Face (edit)
5:03 In Yer Face (in yer face mix)
4:17 In Yer Face (facially yours Mix)
4:01 Leo Leo (featuring Raagman)
4:04 Leo Leo (poonchanting instrumental) [mislabeled "Doonchanting Instr.]
4:01 Leo Leo (featuring Raagman)
[Both "raagman" mixes are identical]

SteveC · Post by **SteveC** » 07 Oct 2005 16:21

markus wrote:Pete, could you do your magic with this too please?
CD5: 1991 JP (ZTT / WEA; WMC5-361)
3:53 In Yer Face (edit)
5:03 In Yer Face (in yer face mix)
4:17 In Yer Face (facially yours Mix)
4:01 Leo Leo (featuring Raagman)
4:04 Leo Leo (poonchanting instrumental) [mislabeled "Doonchanting Instr.]
4:01 Leo Leo (featuring Raagman)
[Both "raagman" mixes are identical]

I think that could be what DeLillie describes as a careful mispressing to aid the collectors market, but instead of a mis-spelling they've opted for the same track to be repeated.

I'm sure Pete will get his techno fingers dirty and provide the real answer.

Post by **markus** » 10 Oct 2005 08:42

Pete Za is on the case as we speak

Post by **nickking** » 10 Oct 2005 11:10

Hi Pete, Apologies for not replying to your MSN Messenger request - wasn't at the computer at that time, and you'd logged off before I could reply!

De Lillie · Post by **De Lillie** » 11 Oct 2005 14:27

SteveC wrote:
markus wrote:Pete, could you do your magic with this too please?
CD5: 1991 JP (ZTT / WEA; WMC5-361)
3:53 In Yer Face (edit)
5:03 In Yer Face (in yer face mix)
4:17 In Yer Face (facially yours Mix)
4:01 Leo Leo (featuring Raagman)
4:04 Leo Leo (poonchanting instrumental) [mislabeled "Doonchanting Instr.]
4:01 Leo Leo (featuring Raagman)
[Both "raagman" mixes are identical]
I think that could be what DeLillie describes as a careful mispressing to aid the collectors market, but instead of a mis-spelling they've opted for the same track to be repeated.

I'm sure Pete will get his techno fingers dirty and provide the real answer.

Hi all

I've waited for years for this question. Firstly, the spelling I believe is deliberate. "Poon" does have certain sexual connotations such as in Poontang etc. So the respelling may have been done to allay any backlash. (Just read the JP backlash against 808 State's 'Yakuza' on the JP websit). Secondly, WEA JP sometimes press their singles (actually more like mini-albums it seems) using the masters from more than one source. Check out the JP 'Cubik/Olympic/Pacific' and you'll see that it is simply an amalgam of the GE CD5 of 'Cubik' and the GE CD3 of 'Pacific'. Perhaps WEA JP did the same for this release or perhaps they used the same master used by WEA UK for the original CSS promo? Why does WEA JP do these things? Check out my next posting some time tomorrow.
Cheers

De Lillie

808 State Discussion

repeat mix

repeat mix

Baktrax

808 ZTT Mislabelling