“It’s true,” claim the Beastie Boys on their website. “Paul’s Boutique is turning 20! So we remastered the sucker. Sign up to be notified.” Done.
I had always assumed that licensing issues/sample clearances would prevent them from ever reissuing this hip hop classic. Guess not. Can’t wait. In other news: I’m old! 20 years? Wow. I’d like to take this opportunity to publicly thank Dr. Paul Ebner for turning me on to this
album tape back in 1990.
MP3: “Stop That Train” (a cappella) from the Beastie Boys A Cappella Download Page.
10 thoughts on “Beastie Boys Paul's Boutique Remastered”
Maybe this is a stupid question, but aside from some conceivably awesome bonus material, why exactly would they need to remaster this album? My CD sounds great – I think – it was originally released on CD (as well as tape and viny) and it should’ve been done right the first time.
I doubt it. The sample rate for digital mastering then was bunk. Listen to that CD next to the vinyl release and I am betting you’ll throw that old cd out the window.
It was originally released in 1989. All CDs released in the 80s sound like ass now (to me). A wise man once told me, “If it was originally released on cassette tape, it needs to be remastered.”
CD mastering has come a long, long way since then (listen to the Stones’ ABKCO reissues), not to mention the whole sample rate issue.
Bonus tracks will probably be limited to the b-sides from the era:
• 33% God
• Dis Yourself In ’89 (Just Do It)
• Caught In The Middle Of A 3-Way Mix
• And What You Give Is What You Get
• Some Dumb Cop Gave Me 2 Tickets Already
• Your Sister’s Def
But it would be dope if they unearthed some more rarities. Or even the instrumentals would be great to have (which they almost released in 1992).
I hope you’re right. I remember whan they used to label CD’s as AAD ADD and DDD (for analog and digital) and, The Talking Heads’ “Naked” was the first DDD I ever came across, and it sounded incredible. If this sounds great, then I’m in. Just don’t let Iggy do it – he tends toward overmodulation.
Not only the sampling rate, but the bit depth and quality of the A->D conversion as well. The processing power available now simply allows for the 16 bit/44.1 audio on the CD to hold much better mastered content. Given that, there’s also the downside that everything seems to be losing dynamic range these days, so what the remaster gains in resolution quality may be lost amongst the mud of compression. Ugh.
Your totally right Hippies, but just to clarify one thing: the extremely common and annoying practice of overcompression is not a symptom of the better mastering quality, it’s because the better mastering quality will Let you do that, but someone (label, artist, etc.) has to Decide to do that. You can have a super sweet sounding disc that has a great dynamic range (and I will also point to Jake’s example of the Stones – those discs sound fucking awesome).
Jake is right: anything released on CD in the ’80s–and in many cases, early ’90s–could use some sweetening. As long as the remastering isn’t done based on current trends–ie tailoring the sound to MP3 players–it should be great.
I enjoyed that.
You remember that tape, Paul? It had the Capitol Records rainbow design on it. I can picture it clear as day.
yes. it was a magical time.