Should Morrissey be allowed to change the album covers of old albums?

[beyondLA]

I personally don't care. I may no longer own Southpaw (I traded mine in at Amoeba along with $600 worth of Smiths/Moz stuff) but if I feel randy I can always stop by Amoeba and buy it for ten bucks or get it online for a cheap price. Believe me, even with a re-issue there are plenty of copies of the original (albeit used) lying around... and that's only if I want a physical copy.

When George Harrison's albums were re-issued by EMI a few years ago, his Somewhere in England album was re-released remastered with an extra track and a new cover, which was actually the original cover WB execs rejected back in 1981.


Also... I don't think Southpaw needs any remastering done. It sounds fine and alot better than older Smiths/Morrissey albums. Ah well.

 

[Ethan Poe]

I'd really say he shouldnt change the art on most albums...Southpaw being an exception. The album art on it is really quite unappealing, and who knows as said above there could have been some better original art planned for it. And come on just be excited for some new unreleased tracks with good sound quality.

 

[xLonelyPlanetBoyx]

All the special editions that are being released these days of albums that only came out a year before always have different cover art, though it's usually a photo of the artist from the same photo shoot that the standard editions cover came from. But I guess it's different in this case, because this albums had the same cover art for many years.

 

[timthemute]

Southpaw Grammar is to Morrissey what Low is to David Bowie. A minor masterpiece that is lovingly underdogged and overappreciated by fans and basically nonexistent or at least underappreciated by casual listeners. Low is one of my favourite Bowie albums and Southpaw is one of my favourite Moz albums. And they're both orange aren't they?

well anyways I don't think it should happen, but it does and it will keep happening as long as there we exist to buy a record that we already own with rare songs we already have and a new sleeve that we hate anyways. oh well! We are the chumps for lining up for this crap.

and by the way I know everyone keeps quoting vulgar picture re, re, re, etc. but I really wouldn't mind a badge! and wouldn't it be clever?

 

[Dave]

As a stopped clock is right twice a day, Theo is right in his assertion that you shouldn't tamper with the classics. It also would be debatable about tacking on three tracks, except for the fact that I want these tracks very much, and hope that they actually are unreleased, and not b-sides.

 

[laughing_anne]

I don't mind if he changes the album cover although I do see where Theo is coming from. Just as long as it's Morrissey who makes the decision to change the cover art he can do whatever he wants. It's his album. If the record company were to change the cover art without his permission, well, that would be a totally different matter.

 

[Piss Me Off]

Southpaw Grammar is to Morrissey what Low is to David Bowie. A minor masterpiece that is lovingly underdogged and overappreciated by fans and basically nonexistent or at least underappreciated by casual listeners. Low is one of my favourite Bowie albums and Southpaw is one of my favourite Moz albums. And they're both orange aren't they?

Not sure about that, even when i was a casual Bowie fan Low was one of the couple of albums i had. Its far more accessible than some of his other albums, whereas relatively Southpaw isn't.
Maybe Station to Station would be a better comparison?

 

[Dow Jones]

Not sure about that, even when i was a casual Bowie fan Low was one of the couple of albums i had. Its far more accessible than some of his other albums, whereas relatively Southpaw isn't.
Maybe Station to Station would be a better comparison?

Yeah Station to Station would be better.

 

[the judge]

You CAN'T change history - if Paul McCartney wanted to call THE BEATLES album the 'Black' album it wouldn't make any difference - It would still be the White Album wouldn't it?

Having said that, if Moz wants to re-release Southpaw Grammar with new tracks and a new cover it doesn't detract from the original - not for me anyhow...

I think you're a right... I know you can't change history, but I don't like the thing anyway. This cover is remarkable, it's the only one not showing Moz in his solo career and that in a way is why I like it. I bet he's gonna put a picture of himself.

 

[King Leer]

For those who haven't seen it, the documentary "Jewel in the Crown" has an interview with the guy who designed the Southpaw album cover under Morrissey's direction.

http://ca.youtube.com/watch?v=DCM3fFC2hps&feature=related

Fast forward to about 5:43

 

[sweet and tender hooligan]

You know what I hate is when a movie version of a novel I like comes out, and then mass-produced paperbacks of the novel have covers with the dopey Hollywood stars from the movie on them.

That really upsets me when they do that!

I do hope that the new artwork willl be something from the Southpaw period becuase otherwise it just won't be right that is the only issue i have with the new cover.

 

[vivabob]

That really upsets me when they do that!

I do hope that the new artwork willl be something from the Southpaw period becuase otherwise it just won't be right that is the only issue i have with the new cover.

i agree it would be nice if it had a cover from that period too

but otherwise its his album he can do what he wants with it

 

[Stephane]

I've also always paralleled "Southpaw Grammar" to "StationToStation". But because it has fewer but longer tracks. Now if Morrissey had removed the spaces and bunched up the words in the titles, it would have been complete.

Stephane

 

[Arsenal]

'be allowed'? No, the music police should step in and arrest him! What kind of a retarded question is that? They are his albums, his songs. If he is unhappy with a past release he has every right to re-do it.

 

[iamkali62]

Allowed?

 

[iamkali62]

'be allowed'? No, the music police should step in and arrest him! What kind of a retarded question is that? They are his albums, his songs. If he is unhappy with a past release he has every right to re-do it.

Exactly!

 

[iamkali62]

That really upsets me when they do that!

I do hope that the new artwork willl be something from the Southpaw period becuase otherwise it just won't be right that is the only issue i have with the new cover.

Theo- this is the ONE thing I agree with you on. I do not like when a film comes out and the original cover is changed to the movie version. Jonathan Franzen, who wrote, "The Corrections", was chosen by the all powerful Oprah, to be involved in her book club. But then future pressings of his book were tagged, "Oprah's Book Club" Franzen fought the decision and won.

 

[donunus]

Morrissey should be able to do whatever he wants with his albums. If the picture he choses is not from the era of the album, i'm sure he has an interesting reason for it. I just hope he's not like George Lucas and wont screw them up too much like when he first added new effects to the original star wars movies in 97 hehehe

 

[beyondLA]

Sometimes things like cover art and album tweaking/remixing/mastering are above the artists control.

I mentioned above that former Beatle George Harrison got his original album art rejected by his label for 1981's Somewhere in England, maybe the same has happened/could happen to Morrissey?

Also, there is the case of how the album will sound like. Wikipedia has a neat article explaining this, check it out by clicking here.

 

[donunus]

Ive noticed the highly compressed audio in mostly hip hop/ r&b stuff. This doesn't happen in audiophile recordings like jazz and classical though unless certain effects were intended to be compressed on purpose musically.

There are loudness and remastering differences in smiths albums for instance ex. comparing queen is dead to singles to the very best of. The newest one was the loudest and wasn't really remastered well. Listen to A boy with the thorn in his side for example. There are out of phase effects that are annoying but this is probably because of bad remastering more than an intended to sound louder thing. I like the sound of 1995s singles better among all three overall.

I think the standard db output of cds were the pefect level around the mid to late 90s. They were loud enough to have a punchy sound while not too much that it is clipping all over the place. Listen to Morrisseys Ringleader album, Its clipping!