 |
The 1972 original -- still the one to beat? |
In
early 1971, the Rolling Stones found themselves in dire financial straits. Despite being one of the most successful rock bands in the world, they owed millions in back taxes to the Inland Revenue (the British IRS.) Since the tax rate in the UK at that time was as high as 90% for very wealthy earners, the group's financial advisors told them their only hope of remaining solvent and keeping some of their earnings was to leave the UK before the end of the fiscal year (which fell on April 5). If they were living abroad, they wouldn't owe British taxes. [Fun fact: The UK's exorbitant wealth tax during this period was also the inspiration for George Harrison's song, "Taxman," which kicks off The Beatles' Revolver album.]
In
addition to their financial problems in the UK, the
last couple of years had been difficult for the band in other ways, as they
dealt with the death of founding member Brian Jones, a series of
acrimonious legal disputes with their manager
Alan Klein, and the murder of a fan by members of the Hell's Angels who
had been hired by the band to provide security at a free concert in
Altamont, California. It's no wonder they were ready to chuck it in and leave England for sunnier climes.
In early April, 1971, the Stones all decamped to France. Except for Charlie Watts, who bought a farm some six hours away in Arles, the rest of the group rented properties within an hour of the resort city of Nice. Mick split his time with his new wife Bianca in Paris (they married in May in St. Tropez) and at a rented house in Biot, south of Nice. Mick Taylor rented a house in Grasse, Bill Wyman found a place in Vence, and Keith Richards rented a 16-room mansion called Villa Nellcôte in Villefranche-sur-Mer, a small port town about five miles up the coast from Nice.
The plan was to find a recording studio somewhere nearby where they could work on their next album. After an unsuccessful search, they decided to bring over the Rolling Stones mobile studio truck from the UK and record sessions in make-shift space at Keith's place, the Villa Nellcôte. Here, over the next five months, in chaotic fits and starts, they
produced a masterpiece, the 1972 release Exile On Main Street.
 |
Keith Richards and Gram Parsons at Nellcôte |
The story of the band's time at Villa
Nellcôte is the stuff of legend. The infighting, alcohol, drugs, sex, groupies, celebrity visitors, guest musicians, drug dealers, record execs, hangers on, and
all manner of excesses have been detailed exhaustively. There is an
entire book devoted to their stay in France: "Seasons In Hell With The
Rolling Stones," by Robert Greenfield, as well as a 2010 documentary film called
"Stones In Exile." In case you don't want to bother reading the book or watching the film, Texas-born sax man Bobby Keys, who played on many of the sessions, sums it all for you: "Hell, yeah, there was some pot around, there was some whiskey bottles around, there was scantily clad women. Hell, it was rock 'n' roll!"
 | |
Cramped quarters in the basement at Villa Nellcôte |
In addition to all the palace intrigue, the band's biggest problem was that Villa Nellcôte was a private residence and was never meant to be a recording studio.
 |
Jim Price on trumpet and Bobby Keys on sax |
An article by writer Colleen 'Cosmo' Murphy on the website Classic Album Sundays
gives an excellent overview of the difficulties the band faced:"The
basement (where much of the recording took place) was hot and humid so
the guitars often went out of tune. Sometimes the electricity went off.
As there wasn’t one big room in which they could record, band members
were scattered in different rooms across the house, with leads going
down hallways and out of windows to the mobile recording studio.
Engineer Andy Johns had to run from room to room to communicate with
each band member. As all of the musicians weren’t always on hand,
sometimes producer Jimmy Miller had to have a go on the drums and
percussion. There were moments when only one or two Stones would be
present to record on a given song. In short, it was chaotic." Keith Richards put it more directly, "Upstairs, it was fantastic. Like Versailles. But down there . . . it was Dante's Inferno."
 |
| Mick and Keith at Sunset Sound |
When the album was released in May of 1972, it was a huge commercial success, topping the charts worldwide. The album's first single, "Tumbling Dice," reaching the top ten in the UK and the U.S.
While critical reaction to the album was initially mixed, within a few years, Exile was routinely being hailed as the Stones' finest effort and one of the greatest rock albums ever. Even though I'm keen on all the band's early records, when Exile came out in 1972, it quickly became my favorite Stones LP (and it still is).
At the time I wasn't aware of the painful gestation of the album. But in retrospect, it's a good example of beauty born from chaos. The infighting, sweltering heat, technical challenges, and drug and alcohol-fueled all-night recording sessions somehow resulted in a work of genius. The songs reflect the grimy, gin-soaked atmosphere of the recording sessions, and the album is a microcosm of the first two decades of rock music, drawing from a deep well of blues, roots, rockabilly, R&B, honky-tonk, gospel, and country.
The other thing I remember thinking when I first heard the album in 1972, was that the sound wasn't all that great. Not terrible, but even listening on my modest Radio Shack stereo, the top end seemed rolled off, and the overall sound was muddy, like there was a blanket over the speakers. That impression was widely shared by critics and fans, as well as Mick Jagger himself. He is quoted in the 1993 book "According To The Rolling Stones," as saying "When I listen to Exile it has some of the worst mixes I've ever heard. I'd love to remix the record, not just because of the vocals, but because generally I think it sounds lousy. At the time (producer) Jimmy Miller was not functioning properly. I had to finish the whole record myself, because otherwise there were just these drunks and junkies."
While critical reaction to the album was initially mixed, within a few years, Exile was routinely being hailed as the Stones' finest effort and one of the greatest rock albums ever. Even though I'm keen on all the band's early records, when Exile came out in 1972, it quickly became my favorite Stones LP (and it still is).
 |
| Modern photo of Villa Nellcôte |
The other thing I remember thinking when I first heard the album in 1972, was that the sound wasn't all that great. Not terrible, but even listening on my modest Radio Shack stereo, the top end seemed rolled off, and the overall sound was muddy, like there was a blanket over the speakers. That impression was widely shared by critics and fans, as well as Mick Jagger himself. He is quoted in the 1993 book "According To The Rolling Stones," as saying "When I listen to Exile it has some of the worst mixes I've ever heard. I'd love to remix the record, not just because of the vocals, but because generally I think it sounds lousy. At the time (producer) Jimmy Miller was not functioning properly. I had to finish the whole record myself, because otherwise there were just these drunks and junkies."
Ah, but the music. Influential rock critic Robert Christgau's review of the album captures the discord between the fabulous music and the meh sound quality: "Weary and complicated, barely afloat in its own drudgery, it's a fagged-out masterpiece that explores new depths of record-studio murk, burying Mick's voice under layers of cynicism, angst and ennui." Yet, Christgau gave the record an A+ grade and named it the best album of the year.
 |
Mick and Keith in the dining room at Nellcote |
Where Am Going With This?
I mention all this history mostly because I find it fascinating, but also because not too long ago, I put on my original 1972 LP copy of Exile. The album has served me well for more than 50 years. But, as I listened, I realized that it actually has quite a bit of wear. Exile is such a raucous affair that a little surface noise doesn't detract too much. However, there have been a number of new vinyl remasters in the last 15 years or so, and I thought this might be a good opportunity to pick up a new and possibly better-sounding copy.
[Even though this particular treasure hunt is for the best-sounding vinyl remaster, I should mention that in addition to the 1972 original double LP, I have several remastered digital copies: the original 1987 US CD, a CD copy of the 2010 remastered version by Universal Music, and a copy of the 2011 Japanese SACD which was made as a flat transfer from the original master tapes to DSD.]
There have been dozens of reissues of the LP over the decades. [I don't think Exile has been out of print since it was released in 1972.] But for the first 15 years, there was no effort to remix or improve the sound that everyone agreed was not so great. Every reissue up until 1987 was made from the original mix. (Although there are certainly differences in the sound quality of the many reissues depending on where the albums were cut and pressed.)
 |
1987 CBS remaster |
Finally, in 1987, Columbia Records released the first "remastered" version of Exile to celebrate a new distribution deal with Rolling Stone Records. In addition to the new LP version, this was also the initial US release of Exile on CD. Columbia's LP reissue uses the original jacket art with the original production credits. However, the booklet from the CD release says that it was produced from a digital master made by Greg Calbi at Sterling Sound in NYC. Although I don't know for certain, I would guess that Columbia's "remastered" LP was also cut from Calbi's digital files. I have a copy of this CD, but not the LP. Comparing the CD remaster to the original 1972 LP, the CD sounds, well, digital. The top end is brighter, but not in a good way. It is brittle and fatiguing, while the bass remains muddled. I've not seen much talk about this version of the LP online, but it doesn't show up on anybody's list of best-sounding versions.
 |
1994 Virgin remaster |
The next attempt to tweak the sound of the original album was made in 1994 by the legendary engineer Bob Ludwig, who remastered the album at his Gateway Mastering studio in Portland, Maine. There is a lot of love for the sound of the CD version of Ludwig's remaster. Unfortunately, the consensus is that the LP made from Ludwig's digital files and released as a limited edition on Virgin Records, somehow lost it's mojo in the transfer to vinyl. There is near unanimous agreement among fans and critics that the LP version does not sound good. Even so, the 1994 remastered album will still set you back $100 or more for a near mint copy, which must be more a tribute to Bob Ludwig's street cred than to the resulting sound. I have not heard this version of the album, but don't think it's a contender.
 | |
2010 Universal remaster |
In 2010, Universal Music (which by then had acquired Rolling Stones Records), released a new version from digital files remastered by Stephen Marcussen. The vinyl was cut from these digital files by (another) legendary engineer, Doug Sax, at the Mastering Lab in Los Angeles. The 2010 remastered version was reissued in a bunch of different packages, including a double LP, a deluxe CD with bonus tracks, a super deluxe package with LPs, CDs, a DVD, and a hard-cover book, and yet another package with CDs and a limited edition tee-shirt.
Audiophile and vinyl guru Michael Fremer panned the vinyl reissue, saying that it is "Compacted, spatially flattened, deliberately dynamically compressed and shockingly bass-shy. The horns that are supposed to cut through with a mean edge on “Rocks Off” were limp, Charlie’s signature snare sound was soft. I mean it really sucks. . ." I've not heard the vinyl release, but after listening to my digital copy, I would have to say that Fremer's not wrong.
 | |
2016 Universal remaster |
Since hope springs eternal, in 2016, Universal tried again, using the same digital files cut by Marcussen, but this time the vinyl was cut at 1/2 speed by Miles Showell at London's Abbey Road Studios. Cutting the lacquers at 1/2 speed can result in a smoother and more detailed sound. And while this version was not as harshly criticized as the 2010 release, most fans and music writers agreed that it offered only a slight improvement. The sound is still too compressed and flat. I have heard this version. In the end, it is disappointing. Although I have to say that if you hadn't heard a better copy, you wouldn't immediately say it was a bad sounding record. But I hoped we could do better.
Universal is nothing if not persistent. Their next try was in 2018 as part of a remastered box set of the Stones' entire 1971-2016 catalog, including, of course, Exile. This time, Universal provided high resolution, flat, digital files transferred from the original master analog tapes to engineer Miles Showell at Abbey Road. Showell says, "I was given free range to just ‘do my thing’ which was remarkable freedom. I had no instructions from the band’s management or from Universal other than to do it as well as I could. At no point was any digital peak limiting applied to these albums. My goal was to make these new cuts at least as good as the originals and hopefully better. This is not easy. . . for the original cuts, the tapes were obviously in mint condition. . .but I have a far cleaner signal path than was available to the original cutting engineers. I am happy that I achieved my goal."
 |
2018 Universal remaster |
Guess what? Most critics and fans love it. Even Fremer agrees. He says that "If you've suffered with the last limp, squashed remastering of Exile, you'll be in drunken/drugged out heaven with the Stones when they recorded this sloppy, debauched masterpiece as tax exiles in a France Chateau." One online reviewer hit the nail on the head with his comment that, "All the sweat, dirt, and heat from Nellcôte is still there, it's just clearer." Which is to say, the music hasn't been sterilized, and doesn't sound at all manipulated; it's still gritty and grimy, but the haze has been lifted. [NB: This 2018 remaster was originally only available as part of the box set. Since 2020, it has been available as a separate release.]
So, the search is over, right? Not so fast. Fremer says that while this new version is very good, he still thinks that the sound of the original 1972 U.S. pressing is better. (NB: Specifically, U.S. copies mastered at Artisan Sound.)
Maybe so. But original U.S. copies in top condition are going for anywhere from $100-300 online. And since I already have an original copy (albeit not in top condition), I plumped for the 2018 remaster. About 30 seconds after cuing up side A, I knew I had a copy that would serve me for the next 50 years. Don't tell Fremer, but I think I like it even better than the original.
Enjoy the music!
No comments:
Post a Comment