DIY edits to others' albums

[DBL]

The topic title is a little vague as I didn't know how to concisely sum up what I'm asking about. Some years ago I saw a post on a heavy metal forum where someone complained about an album he thought was great, but that had some minor sound issues or mastering errors. Or, well, not really errors, but things he didn't like. His solution was to make some minor remastering to it himself, and now he listens to this new DIY version instead of the original version. Maybe I'm just missing out on it, but this was perhaps the only time I have seen someone mention they're listening to a self-improved version of an album.

I've seen posts where people have improved lousily dubbed tapes by re-dubbing the material themselves, but I don't really consider that to be the same thing. Of course it's altering the release, but in all possibility it's more about making the release what it should've already been like, instead of making it what YOU like with some disregard to the artist's or publbisher's sentiments.

Of course, youtube mashups and other plain entertainment things are a chapter of their own that I'd prefer to disregard in this context, and focus on edits you make for your own enjoyment and not public amusement. Mixtapes too, as they're more about creating a new work instead of re-working an existing one. A while ago I read about a punk guy having made a mixtape of metal songs for gig trips, but he had carefully edited out all guitar solos, heheh. Maybe that would be an example of something in between.

So: have you customized or "improved" any albums you have obtained from some artist or label, and if yes, how?

This could be extended to the physical release as an object too, although I am more interested in the sound side of things. For example if you add rpm's, A/B-side markings or artist/title texts to records or tapes if they don't have them for them to be more convenient, or is there a worry about the release becoming either less authentic, or less re-sellable with additional markings. Temporarily storing a difficultly packed release is one thing, and visibly altering or destroying the original packaging is another - or if you're making a wholly new artwork or packaging to an already existing release just for your own pleasure.

[SSRI]

To me that sounds rather disrespectful towards the artist. On the other hand, if you do it for your own private listening I guess it's no big deal.

As for a/b markings etc, I've sometimes written them down on a piece of post-it sticker and put that on tape or vinyl. For other info like RPM you can just slip a piece of paper in the sleeve.

[Stipsi]

Never made something like that.

[Goat93]

Actualy i do it every Day with all Music i listen to. I change the Bass to Zero and pitched up the Highs in my Soundsystem. So it sounds absolutely not like intended and a lot of People complain when they have to listen to the Music.

On the Commercial Side, Tons of "Rereleases" are remastered. Won't say its common in Noise, but its absolute common in Metal or general Commercial Music.

[HateSermon]

Years ago I thought about extending the ending to Deathkey's "BTS" track. Such an intense track and I really wanted like 30 seconds more of that loop. I never ended up doing it though.
Otherwise, I've only ever redubbed tapes. Nothing else.

[thevomitarsonist]

the only time this is ok: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6kqTcLwUYj8

[Leewar]

The topic title is a little vague as I didn't know how to concisely sum up what I'm asking about. Some years ago I saw a post on a heavy metal forum where someone complained about an album he thought was great, but that had some minor sound issues or mastering errors. Or, well, not really errors, but things he didn't like. His solution was to make some minor remastering to it himself, and now he listens to this new DIY version instead of the original version.

1. How did he remaster it unless he owned the master tapes?

2.He sounds like some kind of Metal archives type cunt.

[DBL]

The topic title is a little vague as I didn't know how to concisely sum up what I'm asking about. Some years ago I saw a post on a heavy metal forum where someone complained about an album he thought was great, but that had some minor sound issues or mastering errors. Or, well, not really errors, but things he didn't like. His solution was to make some minor remastering to it himself, and now he listens to this new DIY version instead of the original version.

1. How did he remaster it unless he owned the master tapes?

It was a random post I saw years ago, so I don't actually remember if he talked specifically about re-mastering it. It was just an example to illustrate what kind of things I meant for this topic to cover, so there's no need to take the term 100% literally.

the only time this is ok: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6kqTcLwUYj8

Heh, a pretty good example!

To me that sounds rather disrespectful towards the artist. On the other hand, if you do it for your own private listening I guess it's no big deal.

I don't disagree with you. I would just assume that if someone finds an album that would be almost exactly what they're looking for, and they would have to skills to tweak it to their own preference, there would be some temptation to go for it. Of course it could feel like drawing a moustache to Mona Lisa or whatever, but if you do it privately (unlike the above linked Metallica album for example), it's not like your edit has some openly disrespectful or malicious intent to it.

I guess this partially crosses over with the issue of if you view an album as a work of art, or something more mundane. Sounds as just sounds. Or raw material for your own remix/re-edit purposes, like books torn for collage art. Then again the line can be thin: if you heavily edit something, it might become a new work of its own, like collage pieces or albums Emil Beaulieau made by playing pre-existing works by other noise artists.

[groesk]

never would think of doing that, but it sounds like a special thought process that i don't have.
i'm more of a "let there be mistakes in music" type of guy, since it makes it feel more human. like others have mentioned it does feel disrespectful to the artist and especially to the person mixing/mastering it. fixing music exactly how you like it just makes things sterile.

for example, there are a lot of albums that i feel the mixing could have been done different. but i live with it and accept that music is not catered exactly to my wants.
in the end i get it a little. but not really.

[Atrophist]

To me it just seems weird. More than just selfish or disrectful (although it's that too), just weird. Like I can't quite picture what type of person would do something like that, or think it's okay to do.