If one were to ague that the concept of “subtlety” was not in the original blueprints for Grunge, then certainly you’d have myriad evidence to bandy that point; for example, have you ever seen a Grunge music video? However, now, where at a certain point one only knew headbanging and big riffs and few guitar solos, one confronts the existence of the nebulous, unquantifiable nuance of going back to a seminal recording and having a big-time producer twiddle the knobs. It’s a way of going back to see what may have been, had we not been confused and blinded by improbably long hair and the abundance of plaid, in that hangover just after hair metal’s demise.
As you may know, Pearl Jam has just released what some would call a stopgap between releases proper (being 2006’s self-titled affair and whatever they’re working on for 2009) in the form of a remastered/remixed/redone version of their debut full-length album, 1991’s Ten. Regardless of which version you settle on – there are four: two- and three-disc versions, a double vinyl, as well as a mammoth, surfboard-sized boxed set that includes the three aforementioned discs plus an actual audiocassette of their demo, plus the whole thing on vinyl, etc., etc. – you will end up with the original version of Ten remastered, as well as a fully-remixed version produced by Brendan O’Brien, titled, appropriately enough, Ten Redux.
In short terms, the remastered version is what you’d expect. The album is louder and clearer, with little change as far as actual content. It’s a nice spit-and-polish to a great album, but really unnecessary if it was the only thing available. Luckily, there is more to this 17-year anniversary than just a nice dinner out.
The Redux remix is, to say the least, impressive. The subtleties of Grunge that may not have been initially noticed – or of which one may not have even been aware – are presented here with the deft authority of someone finally getting a nagging job done.
Taken as a whole, the project has done something that has been a problem even way back in the days of Ten’s original release – reverb. For the uninitiated, reverb is basically an undesirable echo which, for example, comes from recording music in a studio that’s not properly insulated. Conversely, it may be artificially added later in mixing, although only God knows why. It creates the effect of poor sound, even when the subject matter is listened to through high-quality sound systems. Here, with the new mix, O’Brien has ruthlessly gone through and removed every trace of audible reverb.
With the reverb removed, three things are immediately noticeable: one, that everything sounds so much clearer. It is a revelation. Two, that Eddie Vedder sounds as if he’s in your fucking living room, sitting next to you on your couch. And three, that the bass guitar is so clean, so gloriously clean now. The bass, in the original mix, was so washed-out and smeared and concealed by the rest of the music that it may as well have been left off the final master track.
As for the mixing itself, the differences are many and, to someone who has heard this CD literally a hundred times, maintain different levels of audibility. Overall, two of the more noticeable differences between the original and the new is that the jangling, electro-acoustic guitar has been mercifully turned down in the mix, letting that early-‘90s electric guitar riffage stretch itself out across the soundscape, and the bass, instead of sounding big and bloated and reverb-y is now tight and clean, beyond any wildest hope.
Taken individually, the songs have all seen some kind of drastic overhaul. “Evenflow,” for example, has noticeably more prominent opening guitar licks. Interestingly enough, O’Brien included (or maybe clarified) some vocals Eddie Vedder had laid down of begging for change, which are now clearly audible in the bridge; they are not in the original recording. Also of note is that the guitar solo, somewhat disappointingly, is buried in the left speaker and turned down now, so that the rhythm guitar’s choppy chords come through in a much more obvious way.
“Why Go,” too, in addition to being much more of a “powerful” mix, has had some rather startling and totally inexplicable echoes added to Vedder’s voice in the chorus; not a bad thing, mind, but definitely rather abrupt. “Jeremy,” too, has stronger vocal harmonies in the chorus and a more “aggressive” sound, although that may be more attributable to the newfound clarity, which is absolutely brilliant.
In addition to the original 11 tracks are six bonus tracks. These are basically throwaway tracks – two demos of full songs available elsewhere, two rather dull-b-sides, and two other totally disposable, previously-unreleased songs that only die-hard Pearl Jam fans will care about. These are not the reason to get this CD, and can be easily ignored while ripping the original 11 tracks to high-bitrate mp3s for portability’s sake.
Pearl Jam, to a man, has said publicly that they’ve always disliked the mixing on Ten, and now, finally, they’ve made good. Overall, this set – either the two- or three-disc version, is definitely worth picking up (the surfboard edition may be a bit expensive for what you get in it). I guarantee that, once the comparison is made between the two mixes, the first disc will not be listened to again.
Included in the three-disc and surfboard editions of Ten is a DVD copy of the band’s controversial 1992 appearance on MTV’s Unplugged. Until now, this performance of a scant seven songs hasn’t been available commercially in any form, seemingly because seven songs (36 minutes) isn’t really album-length but too long for an EP. Finally, though, we see it as a bonus disc, if for nothing more than nostalgia and/or historical value.
“Controversial” may have been a bit of an overstatement. Really, the major issue (aside from the content of the lyrics – murder, incest, obsession, etc.) was that Vedder wrote the phrase “pro-choice” on his arm in black magic marker. Today, that’s about as shocking as watching ice cream melt in the sun, but back in 1993 it was apparently a bit confrontational for low-tier cable programming.
The other odd thing is that this “pro-choice” marking appears and disappears through the concert; during the second-to-last song (“Evenflow”), the marks are visible under the end of Vedder’s sleeve. However, when he takes his jacket off for the last song (“Porch”), the arm is clear and he proceeds to write on it. The only conclusion I can come to is that the producers somehow switched around songs, or perhaps had Pearl Jam re-record “Evenflow” for some reason, and made Vedder put his jacket back on for continuity.
From a technical standpoint, the disc winds up as a mixed bag. The video has a lot of video noise in it; it was recorded using cheap magnetic tape, apparently, and this makes for a lack of sharpness, even for standard-definition material. The sound is, for a show originally broadcast on television, very good. Comparing the PCM 2.0 and the newly-created 5.1 Dolby surround mix, it’s evident that some care has been put into mastering both tracks. To nitpick, the master is quite loud – louder than regular DVDs and even newer blu-rays – and the drums are turned up too hot, but otherwise, a very good presentation.
While understandable, it’s still a shame that this never got the wide release that Pearl Jam’s contemporaries saw; the legendary full-length Unplugged sets from none other than Nirvana and Alice in Chains, but again, at a slim seven songs it’s difficult to justify this as a separate release. It is, however, the perfect extra addition to a decently-priced boxed set.
[this is good] Nice article. I'm going through the two albums (Ten and Redux) now trying to spot the differences. Like you said, the main difference is that is just sounds...better. I just got through "Why Go" and agree, the echo is kind of abrupt. You mention the drums being "hot" in the Unplugged release. That's actually how they were in the original show and it always drove me crazy--they're way too prominent.
Posted by: Aaron | 03/28/2009 at 12:01 PM