Ad

LushSpooky

Label:4AD – 4ad0451LP
Format:
Vinyl, LP, Album, Reissue, Remastered, Stereo
Country:UK & US
Released:
Genre:Rock
Style:Indie Rock, Shoegaze

Tracklist

A1Stray2:07
A2Nothing Natural5:54
A3Tiny Smiles4:26
A4Covert3:34
A5Ocean4:49
A6For Love3:29
B1Superblast!4:07
B2Untogether3:33
B3Fantasy4:27
B4Take3:28
B5Laura3:22
B6Monochrome5:05
Ad

Credits

Notes

Remastered from original analogue tapes

Barcode and Other Identifiers

  • Barcode: 191499945118
  • Matrix / Runout (Side A): 4AD0451LP A KEVIN@CURVEPUSHER 262775E1 1595967
  • Matrix / Runout (Side B): 4AD0451LP B KEVIN@CURVEPUSHER 262775E2 1595964
  • Barcode (Scanned): 191400045118

Other Versions (5 of 51)

View All
Title (Format)LabelCat#CountryYear
New Submission
Spooky (LP, Album, Test Pressing)4ADCAD 2002UK1991
Recently Edited
Spooky (CD, Album)4ADcad 2002 cdUK1992
Recently Edited
Spooky (LP, Album)4ADcad 2002UK1992
Recently Edited
Spooky (2×LP, 10", Album, Limited Edition)4ADcad d 2002UK1992
Recently Edited
Spooky (CD, Album)4ADcad 2002 cdBelgium1992

Recommendations

Reviews

  • radmobile's avatar
    radmobile
    Edited one month ago
    I’m on my 2nd black copy and both have had dimples in the vinyl. In this era, I don’t know what the hell they’re doing. 4AD used to have fantastic pressings but it seems those days are long gone. Where did they even get these pressed, Jamaica in the 70s?
    • patientot's avatar
      patientot
      Edited 7 months ago
      UPDATE:

      I tried 2 black copies of Spooky and both had some rice crispies across side A as I mentioned. Side B was definitely cleaner sounding on each. Ultrasonic cleaning didn't help that much either. It's just a pressing defect. Not sure if I will try any others at this point. If I do, I'll comment on them.

      ...................................................................................................................................................................

      Just finished listening to a copy of the Spooky LP remaster. I listened with my modded Technics 1200, AT 150 cart ( custom loaded), GS Reflex M + PSU-1, CA 351 integrated, and Wharfedale speakers.

      Before anyone asks, hours are good on my cart. I track that stuff and don't run my styli as long as most people. No cleaning was done other than brushing the record with a CF brush and spraying off with compressed air. Same procedure as with almost any new record I buy. I have cleaning machines but mainly use them for old records. A brand new record should not need aggressive cleaning IMHO.

      Mastering info:

      -The master used for the vinyl is slightly different than the one used for the digital download, but fundamentally the same. I got this info from the horse's mouth, but didn't want to press further. Interpret it as you will...

      The good:

      -Care was taken to avoid sibilance and IGD in the lacquer cutting. Not easy, especially with a ~48 minute album that has a lot of high vocals. I detected no IGD at the inner tracks on my system, and I was listening very carefully for it. I'm hypersensitive to that stuff too and even notice sibilance in actor's voices on TV. I cannot promise you won't hear IGD with some cartridges though if you are sensitive to this stuff.

      -Mastering is well balanced in terms of EQ for people that know the album well. It doesn't sound like anything radically different compared to the '92 CD.

      -Record is pressed fairly well-centered, better than a lot of stuff these days.

      The bad:

      -Overall pressing quality isn't the best. This copy came with a large piece of edge trim sitting on the grooves which scratched the surface of the record inside the inner sleeve. I've requested another copy to account for this.

      -There is noise here and there across side A that shouldn't be there, especially as tracks fade out and in between tracks. Not good for this type of album. Maybe the next copy will be better on this front.

      Observations and opinions:

      -Do I think it sounds better than the '92 CD? Nope. That's my personal opinion. Other people are welcome to their own opinions. To me it is lacking something that I cannot quite put a finger on.

      -Jacket artwork looks a little pixelated on close inspection. It doesn't bother me that much but people with a design background may find it annoying.

      -Jacket stock is thin and kind of cheap looking, even for a direct to board print. It appears to have some kind of matte finish, not glossy. That's okay by me. I don't prefer the glossy covers.

      -Jacket inner sleeve is just a thin basic printed inner-sleeve, not the best to avoid record scratches, but this is something you can easily replace.

      -Weight of vinyl is 171.1g according to my Acaia coffee scale.


      • LumpyJ's avatar
        LumpyJ
        I'm weighing in on this pressing because it's not only one of my favorite all-time albums but, I also own an original pressing and it's rare I buy an album twice. I also did a side by side with its digital counterpart. For me I get a more subdued midrange in favor of a lower noise floor (it's definitely quieter and that's nothing to do with the age of my original), with better instrument and channel separation. I know the band worked hard during the remastering process. Just because I'm used to hearing Spooky (Split, and Lovelife) a certain way doesn't mean that this new version is better/worse, just different. Specifically, they've added subtlety back to the mix. Spooky, like so many albums suffered from the "loudness wars" with everything pushed way up. The remaster pulls the midrange back but not to the point of a U-shaped sound curve, I have to say it's just right! If you want a sense of the original and, you have an EQ, you can bring the midrange back into focus around the rhythm/backing guitar. With the remaster, there's less growl in the lower-mids and the drums are clearer, although a little quieter on some tracks. In general, it's not the swoony shoegaze mix of the 90s. This mix definitely elevates the band's talents, especially Miki and Emma's vocals. If you want loud and guitar driven, with a bit more angst, the original has you covered. A quick note on packaging: it's a bit darker than the original, color variation in the oranges, blues, and the Lush logos sprinkled throughout are more silver on the original. Someone with a copy of Vaughan Oliver's Archive book will have to speak to the cover-art topic😀I guess not knowing which version you prefer of one of your favorite albums, isn't such a bad problem to have.
        • Batwingsforever's avatar
          Like the split repress, this one is outstanding! Well done!!

          Release

          For sale on Discogs

          Sell a copy

          35 copies from $20.99

          Statistics

          • Have:584
          • Want:93
          • Avg Rating:4.76 / 5
          • Ratings:34

          Ad

          Videos (3)

          Edit

          Lists

            Ad
            Ad