News

Rhino Issues "EAGLES: THE STUDIO ALBUMS 1972-1979" Box Set On Six 180gram Vinyl LPs

Michael Fremer  |  Nov 5, 2013

Rhino has released its long awaited Eagles box set containing Eagles, Desperado, On the Border, One of These Nights, Hotel California and The Long Run.

How big were these guys? The've sold more than 120 million albums worldwide, earning five No. 1 U.S. singles and six GRAMMY® Awards. The band's EAGLES - THEIR GREATEST HITS 1971-1975 album is the best-selling record of all time, with more than 29 million copies sold.

No matter what you might read elsewhere, the reissued vinyl was mastered by Bernie Grundman from 192k/24 bit files. No compression and minimal EQ was applied for this reissue box set. Probably the tapes were too fragile to jockey for an AAA reissue, but then again that's what they said about The Doors tapes and we all know what happened when Analogue Productions offered big bucks to use the tapes at 45rpm. Or as Cyndi Lauper sang "Money Changes Everything".

It's still possible of course that the tapes are not in great shape. On the other hand, Rhino's Hotel California reissue of a few years ago was AAA so why not just use the metal parts already produced?

COMMENTS
Billf's picture
Submitted by Billf on Tue, 2013-11-05 17:45

How do they sound? That's what we're here for!

vinyl listener's picture
Submitted by vinyl listener on Tue, 2013-11-05 18:51

eagles fans will buy them regardless.

J. Carter's picture
Submitted by J. Carter on Wed, 2013-11-06 08:17

It sounds like these are the same masters used for the HDtracks downloads from a few months ago. I have the 24/96 version of these and they sound awsome. Definitely better than I have ever heard them before.

rdh79730's picture
Submitted by rdh79730 on Wed, 2013-11-06 09:51

When I was a kid (7 or 8), my step dad owned a shoe store next door to a record store.  I would stock the shelves and he'd pay me cash.  I'd then take that cash and buy records next door.  I bought Hotel California when it was new.  I played that record on my Realistic all-in-one system (turntable, radio, 8-track) a million times...when a Kiss tape wasn't getting eaten by the 8-track.  The poster was proudly mounted on my wall.  Of course as an idiot 18 year old, I sold all my records to make a life in the new world of CD's.  After getting back into vinyl 10 years ago, one of the first records I bought was Hotel California (Simply Vinyl reissue).  I thought it sounded pretty good on my much better analog setup than my old Realistic.  Then I came across a mint original copy with poster.  The cover had a little wear, but not too bad.  Then right as the Rhino reissue came out, I came across an even mintier original with poster.  So I never bought the Rhino, but I still have it on my wish list.  Yes, Eagles fans will buy this, but why do we do such things?  For a band that sold millions upon millions of albums during the hey-day of vinyl, there are tons of these records available on the used shelves.  This box set is also on my wish list.  I have numerous records of which I have bought three copies (Who's Next, The Wall, and others), but I just haven't been able to bring myself to buy four copies.  Maybe the Rhino issue of Hotel California should be the one to push me over the top.  Vinyl...it's a sickness.  Is there a support group I can sign up for?

Biff's picture
Submitted by Biff on Wed, 2013-11-06 15:57

I'm very satisfied with both the pressing quality and sonics.

Tullman's picture
Submitted by Tullman on Thu, 2013-11-07 07:29

If all they have to work with is 24/96 masters, why not make DVDs? A DVD would sound better than vinyl because the extra noise factor is eliminated. 

I won't be buying this box, just like I didn't buy the Beatles box. Maybe, I might buy a separate lp if they are made available.

Biff's picture
Submitted by Biff on Thu, 2013-11-07 07:55

Tullman - I'm not convinced that digitally sourced material sounds worse when pressed to vinyl. Or that there exists a reason to just skip the vinyl and listen to the files (either from physical media or a computer). I can't explain why.

I'm sure Mr. Fremer could add to this subject.

Michael Fremer's picture
Submitted by Michael Fremer on Thu, 2013-11-07 19:36

Like any kind of signal processing--whether it be transferring a digital file to analog tape before mastering to either analog vinyl or digital discs, cutting lacquers from digital sources alters the sound---most often for the subjective "better" for whatever reasons. When digital recording first appeared studio went on a tube microphone, tube compressor buying spree. Why? Because the sterile digital recordings didn't sound warm and inviting like real music. Why? In part because microphones all pretty much suck. They are not "the holy grail." There is nothing 'religious' about recordings. Microphone feeds to analog tape was a form of signal processing that somehow produced a more musically pleasing result than did microphone feeds to digital recording. This has been demonstrated in some informal experiments I've written about before where engineers got to hear 1) live music in a studio 2) PCM and DSD recordings of the mike feed and 3) analog tape recording and playback. The majority of listeners admitted that the DSD feed sounded the most like the mike feed (virtually indistinguishable) but that the analog tape playback sounded the most like the live music they heard in the studio on the "other side" of the microphone. So you have to decide what's your "holy grail": a microphone feed or the subjective sound of live music. If a record cut from digital sounds more like "live" than a "perfect" digital file choose the digital file if "true to the file and/or mic feed" is your objective.

That's my position on this. If you wish to call the resulting LP sound a "euphonic coloration" be my guest. If that sounds more like live music, that's my choice!

I'm sitting here writing this in Manila as probably the largest typhoon in recorded weather history bears down on the country's southern/eastern-most islands. How absurd is life and our audiophile obsession?

Here in Manila it's cloudly and rainy but hardly typhoon -like!

Biff's picture
Submitted by Biff on Fri, 2013-11-08 07:35

These Eagles LPs were mastered from the original analog tapes by Bernie Grundman. A good friend of mine works for Rhino and was involved in the project. 

Were you told something different?

Michael Fremer's picture
Submitted by Michael Fremer on Sat, 2013-11-09 17:49

Yes, the original analog tapes were used. But not to cut lacquers. They were used to produce 192/24 bit files. This information came from Chris Bellman at Bernie Grundman Mastering, in whom we trust. "Dr. Rhino" told a reader that the source was "the original master tapes." TRUE! But that doesn't mean they were used to cut lacquers and they were not.

Biff's picture
Submitted by Biff on Tue, 2013-11-12 15:24

I think they sound great!

Guy Aoki's picture
Submitted by Guy Aoki on Sat, 2024-05-18 12:16

Michael, long time no talk. We spoke in the mid '80s when I was doing an article on the then-new CD & agreed with you analog sounded better. I was considering buying the Essential Eagles 6 LP box set but saw they're using 2013 masters for it, which ties into the 1972-1979 Studio Albums box set. I know you said they used master tapes but then fed it through digital for some reason. So can I assume it's going to sound the same? And to your ears were they the same or better than the original releases? I'm trying to decide if I want to buy the box, as reviews are scarce & vague. Thanks.

NYBravado's picture
Submitted by NYBravado on Sat, 2021-08-14 18:56

So... it seems that MOFI maybe coughed up enough cash to make the tapes good enough for use?

downunderdude's picture
Submitted by downunderdude on Thu, 2013-11-14 14:53

MIkey, I'd be interested to know if the use of digital files for vinyl reissues has become "de rigeur" these days. One set I'm interested in (which I have varying condition original UK & US copies of) is the Fleetwood Mac 1969-1972 Rhino box. Do you know if the same approach was taken for this, as for the Eagles set under comment above?

X