Hey, Wait a Minute!
Printed From: Progarchives.com
Category: Progressive Music Lounges
Forum Name: Prog Music Lounge
Forum Description: General progressive music discussions
URL: http://www.progarchives.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=97672
Printed Date: April 25 2024 at 22:29
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 11.01 - http://www.webwizforums.com
Topic: Hey, Wait a Minute!
Posted By: Rednight
Subject: Hey, Wait a Minute!
Date Posted: March 24 2014 at 13:26
| I'm sure this topic has been delved into before by somebody else in this forum, but does anyone besides me (surely) have problems with some of the remastered segments on the recent editions of Genesis' Nursery Cryme and Foxtrot? I bought the remastered former (the one without the extras), and the remastering, while being adventurous, is still annoying. Double that opinion for the latter with extras. For instance, the cocktail glass sounds are almost silent in the bar sequence of Get Them Out By Friday. Enough other examples can be offered but won't be because I'd like to hear from anyone else who cares to weigh in on this matter. |
Replies:
Posted By: Metalmarsh89
Date Posted: March 24 2014 at 13:48
I've only heard the remasters, so I am not familiar with the sounds of the originals.  I've noticed a few inconsistencies with the King Crimson remasters though. Steven Wilson did a wonderful job overall, but I've also wondered why a big chunk of Moonchild was cut from the original.Oh, and your thread title is a bit vague. ------------- Want to play mafia? Visit http://www.mafiathesyndicate.com" rel="nofollow - here . |
Posted By: lazland
Date Posted: March 24 2014 at 14:34
|
I have always considered "remastered" releases to be an excuse by record companies, artists, or others merely to squeeze more money out of the poor old punter, and, as such, I rarely bother to get them, unless there is something wholly new that I absolutely must have. By and large, the originals are the best way to taste the goods. ------------- Enhance your life. Get down to www.lazland.org |
Posted By: Slartibartfast
Date Posted: March 24 2014 at 19:09
|
Perhaps this will help to clarify -
------------- Released date are often when it it impacted you but recorded dates are when it really happened... 
|
Posted By: Manuel
Date Posted: March 24 2014 at 19:18
I totally agree with you. I guess during the vinyl era, you would play your record so much, it would eventually get all scratched and you had to get a new copy, something that is not an issue today, so to sell more copies, you see all this remastered, extra track(s) and other stuff editions. So even if you have a perfectly good CD, you are tempted to buy the "new and improved" edition, so they can suck your hard earned cash.
|
lazland wrote:Posted By: chopper
Date Posted: March 25 2014 at 07:29
| The only changes I've noticed on the recent Genesis box set remasters were things I hadn't noticed before such as tambourine in Cinema Show and a change in the sound of the "they're changing everything" part of Supper's Ready. |
Posted By: fs_tol
Date Posted: April 01 2014 at 17:43
|
The issue of the changes in the remaster has been vastly discussed in audiophile forums, the general consensus being that they're bad because of the heavy compression and bright EQ used.
------------- http://www.imageshack.us/" rel="nofollow"> 
|
Posted By: uduwudu
Date Posted: April 03 2014 at 04:41
|
Well they had there career engineer guy doing them, Tony Banks claosely supervised them and (MVHO as we have to constantly have to say) they sound fine. In the olden days they had little time and money to get decent mastering done. Now they can and did. On new technology. Many audiophiliacs don't like things that are different from what they are used to - like many people. And if you have walls full of LPs it's kind of hard to admit that lot (a lifetime of tiume money and listening devotion) is now redundant. The format change was milked by the record companies. Newer recordings (80s onwards maybe don't need so much remastering) but older ones benefit. The old tape sourced media being out through god knows what consumer audio may not cut it. But if you are listening to a record from 1973 on your old Majestic Three In One you should be fine. So many of these audiophile guys moan aboout all the stuff they are hearing makes me think they need to get a new record player. Logically a 24 bit master should sound good. DVDs, Blu Ray, DVD Audio and SACD usually work fine. Classical music is using this a lot and no problems there. But then there is always more investment to art rather than mere pop music. '8) Now it is interesting making the comparison between the 16 bit (the usual source of audio fan moans) and DVD versions (24 bit). I have feeling 16 bit may have been down-sampled by the machines rather than mastered for this sample rate and this may be the cause of the complaints). Plus digital media should be sourced from one master and have no generational issues (unlike records). Of course there may be editing issues - I have one, not Genesis but Zeppelin's Presence. Back to Genesis - my originals (vinyl has long gone) are mainly the '90s Japanese masters. To me Nursery Cryme sounded like a revelation after my old versions. It comes alive! And Then There Were Three sounded like the original only more present abit like clearing some near invisible cob webs or in my case looking through newly wiped glasses. (Specs, not ones that used to have bourbon). It may depend on what ones you pick up, There are the UK ones with a hybrid / SACD layer plus the DVDs with all the footage and extras. The US ones have no SACD layer. These nearly make the archive sets redundant - but not quite. I've not seen or heard much of the live material but I think my CDs should do. Apparently the drums are a bit lost in the new master of Seconds Out so I shall continue worshiping my Japanese copy. PLus the bass pedal clarity in Live is a little off putting - so I've heard. I think the remasters that are most essential are the earlier ones but the question remains for me; what was the sound Genesis preferred then - given optimal mastering circumstances? The rip offs are everywhere but some good releases do happen. Even movies apparently with extras not on a Blu Ray but the DVD making a consumer buy at least two purchases. But in the music world there are so many versions of releases I give up. Enough. A shocking offender was the Stones' Exile box set. How mean, there was a DVD featuring excerpts from 4 (not 4 DVDs) plus a bonus track only available in Japan. This is supposed to be an archive release, would that have really made such a difference? Same thing with Sabbath's 13. 3 or 4 extras depending on where you are. Many extras are there to fill up space and might not otherwise have been released (The Cure's bonus material is a lot of sub standard for bootleg live recordings. The Sabbath deluxes are fine though as are Purple's. It's just a matter of due care and research before buying. Luckily PA is quite good here, between this, the Al Music guide and the wiki pages a good version fo something might be found. The fun of shopping for music is going, going... gone. Ironic isn't it? The flood of material should be dirt cheap - no new recording costs - and have people flooding into the shops - shop, in my case. (A city of half a million with one retail outlet). So many prefer a physical copy. Yet still the record companies alienate their customers. |
Posted By: Blacksword
Date Posted: April 03 2014 at 04:45
I tend to agree with you. To buy any re-master there needs to be something other than the original album on offer. I bought a couple of Genesis re-masters because the package included DVD concert footage from the respective eras that I really wanted. I'm fairy indifferent to the nominal differences in the albums sound. ------------- Ultimately bored by endless ecstasy! |
Posted By: kingesis2
Date Posted: April 14 2014 at 22:47
|
The remasters sound weak, they sound very clear but everything is spread randomly and the sound is very artificial compared to the original mixes ------------- "Cranberry sauce" The Beatles - Strawberry Fields Forever |
Posted By: Mirror Image
Date Posted: April 14 2014 at 23:42
|
I never liked the 'Definitive Remasters' that have plagued my listening and was thrilled to have some not only remasters, but completely new remixes. I'm thankful for Nick Davis and the work he's done. As someone on Amazon said, The Lamb Lies Down On Broadway comes alive in this remix. Yes, there's clarity and superb instrument separation, but there's so many new sounds that have been brought to the fore that you just don't get with those 'Definitive Remasters.' Anyway, all of our ears are different. There's no right/wrong here. It's a matter of what you prefer to hear in the music. Also, where Nick Davis scores huge brownie points with me is on the 'Definitive Remaster' of Nursery Cryme in Steve Hackett's loud electric guitar passages in Return of the Giant Hogweed and The Fountain of Salmacis there was some harsh clipping in the upper registers that absolutely ruined the whole pieces for me. Thankfully, this has been cleared up.
------------- “Music is enough for a lifetime but a lifetime is not enough for music.” - Sergei Rachmaninov |
Posted By: Chris S
Date Posted: April 14 2014 at 23:56
This  ------------- ...As I venture through the slipstream, between the viaducts in your dreams...[/COLOR] |
Posted By: uduwudu
Date Posted: April 15 2014 at 00:39
|
Original what? CDs (non remastered)? LPs? It's not really as simple as that. Depends on the source and media playback. I compared the remaster of Songs From The Wood to the original CD issue. There's no comparison. The remaster is heaven; the original CD sounded like it was played in glue. The LP sounded fine. Digitally remastered LPs versus no remastered LPs (not sure). I do wonder how the progress made with Aqualung has been going. My remaster is the one with the interview and some BBC sessions and sounds only a little better than the LP i.e. one of the worst production jobs ever in Tull's catalogue but still easier on the ear than Broadsword and The Beast. Alot depends on whether someone has 10s of 1000s of LPs and do not want to recognize that they are or may be redundant. Nor do we want these record companies abusing the their consumers (expensive remasters often issued with bonuses best not included). These can ruin that album experience. We have a wave of progression and the collective thought is a retreat from progress - seems things are happening too fast and expensively for people to keep up. Anyone comparing classical LPs to the DVD / SACDs and good 16 bit versions? I recently got LvB's 7th and 8th Symphonies on DVD Audio and they sound fine - as I expected I suppose. But rock and pop records were often made under economically precarious conditions and now (after financial success and tech advancement) the best versions (albeit different to what a listener is used to) emerge and adjusting hearing and emotional memory may be a trying experience. MFSL did some nice remastering of everyhting they did. Once I get my turntable fixed (needle and the damage done... stylus fell off) I'll look for those old half speed mastered LPs (e.g. Aja has a good LP reputation). Preparing audio for DVD or CD playback is required as is converting the signal back to analogue for an LP playback of a remaster. Of course the technology has changed but digitally remastering the already digitally remastered (the new batch of Zeppelin releases) sounds likely to be unnecessary. I understand the Mother ship compilation is a different mastring to the 1990 mastes as well. Things can get a bit over egged and silly. If an old LP sounds better than a new CD remaster chances are there's the possibility the remaster was intended for the most common playback consumption - mp3 (a concern Jimmy Page noted making me wonder about these new masters (thinking of over compressed audio). Test before you buy I think. The best way of comparing is like comparing video tape to a DVD or Blu Ray (which I don't have). Both should be good but clarity and depth perspective should be a more enhanced experience. |
Posted By: Logos
Date Posted: April 15 2014 at 16:16
| In general - If it sounds different, it's not the same album anymore. |
Posted By: jude111
Date Posted: April 17 2014 at 22:46
I heard the "original" Genesis albums on CD (not vinyl) - and hated it. Really terrible sounding. It wasn't until I heard the remastered versions that I was able to discover and get into Genesis. EDIT: Reading others' responses, I can see I'm not the only one who thought the Genesis remastering was badly needed.
|
Posted By: Kentucky_Hawkwindage
Date Posted: April 18 2014 at 07:21
|
Observation on my part-I think my remastered version of Black Sabbath Born Again sounds alot better than the original LP or the 1st CD issue.My opinion only. ------------- "Nobody's Gonna Change My World That's Something To Unreal" Lyrics that i live my life by-from Black Sabbath's Technical Ecstasy's track You Won't Change Me |
Posted By: Dayvenkirq
Date Posted: April 18 2014 at 12:33
|
The original Cryme is somewhat muddy, but that's OK. The remaster chaps my ass. There is some sort of inconsistency in the mix of some tracks, esp. "Hogweed". Some parts are too loud or too clean compared to the rest of the mix. I'm fine with the Foxtrot remaster. There are some noticeable changes on "Supper's Ready", but that's fine with me. |
Posted By: moshkito
Date Posted: April 18 2014 at 12:47
In the early days, and we're talking almost 40 years ago, the "imports" of the Beatles, Pink Floyd, and Rolling Stones, were VASTLY DIFFERENT from the American versions of the LP, which were very poor copies.
As I stated before, I found a lot of these "remasters", to be the same as those better quality recordings that the Americans have never heard!
As for Steven's doing of KC, I find it sad and pathetic and poor at the same time and would prefer that he stuck to his own work and Porcupine Tree. There is ABSOLUTELY NOTHING in the redo that he did that makes the original any better whatsoever. It makes it look like, however, that the only thing that was done is that the guitar now sounds completely separated from the others, and they are all more isolated, which in the end, for my tastes did not make the music any better at all.
This part is "subjective". The visual side of the music, for me, did not change, which kinda tells you that it did not matter that someone goofed with it or not. The feeling was too strong to be ignored and not understood, or appreciated. End of story. For me Steven did not improve anything!
To be perfectly hones with everyone, to me this is like 4 different versions of the same piece, one conducted by Karajhan, the other Bernstein, the other Ozawa, and the other Leinsdorf! ... and then another by Tomita ... in the end, I don't think that it re-shaped the original music that much! But we keep saying that the technology is better. So what? The technology did not create the music, the people/persons DID ... which means that what Steven or some other folks try to do that is "different" is just an ego exercise, and not a reality for my tastes! ------------- Music is not just for listening ... it is for LIVING ... you got to feel it to know what's it about! Not being told! www.pedrosena.com |
Posted By: claugroi
Date Posted: April 19 2014 at 16:49
The Genesis remasters were needed indeed. If anyone disagrees with this, I invite him/her to listen to the original Trespass. Terrible ! The whole atmosphere of the album is weak and muffled. The remastered version sounds as if they had recorded the exact same album in another studio at a different time. I also enjoyed all the other remastered albums, but this is the greatest example because it is the most different. ------------- Symphonic Prog Master |
Posted By: progbethyname
Date Posted: April 20 2014 at 05:46
Couldn't agree more. Very much needed. :) ------------- Gimmie my headphones now!!! 🎧🤣 |
Posted By: progbethyname
Date Posted: April 20 2014 at 05:50
Chaps your ass indeed! I appreciate your enthusiasm here. I think your right, but for some reason I really prefer the original, muddy mix of The Musical Box. I think that classic, hollowed out sound really works with that track. :) ------------- Gimmie my headphones now!!! 🎧🤣 |
Posted By: progbethyname
Date Posted: April 20 2014 at 05:54
How do you feel about IQ's remaster of The Wake, 25th Ann. Box set?? I think there is a major difference in that album from the original recording and especially the other remix/remaster they did of Tales For The Lush Attic. Overall though. I believe some things needed a nice, digital touch up. :) ------------- Gimmie my headphones now!!! 🎧🤣 |
Posted By: progbethyname
Date Posted: April 20 2014 at 06:13
Depends weather you have the proper audio equipment to support these digital formats. If you spin a 24bit by 96k cd in just a regular CD player you will not notice much, but if you pump the music through a quality DAC or Digital Receiver it's a night and day difference. Probably stating the obvious here, but its really worth it spending the extra $$ on high end audio equipment. You definitely get more out of your albums. ------------- Gimmie my headphones now!!! 🎧🤣 |
Posted By: progbethyname
Date Posted: April 20 2014 at 06:16
You can't say this definitively. Some yes and some no for audio remastering.  ------------- Gimmie my headphones now!!! 🎧🤣 |
Posted By: progbethyname
Date Posted: April 20 2014 at 06:18
Which version are you referring to? The studio recording or the live versions like seconds out? ------------- Gimmie my headphones now!!! 🎧🤣 |
Posted By: chopper
Date Posted: April 20 2014 at 06:30
I was referring to the green 1970-1975 box set compared to the original CDs and vinyl.
|
Posted By: progbethyname
Date Posted: April 20 2014 at 09:23
Yeah that's a pretty cool set. A bit overpriced though. Anyway, I find there are quite a few differences in all the recordings. Mainly though, the sound isn't hollowed out like tin can sounding. A worthy buy and necessary.  Also. Noticed the 'playlist' in your sig. SoundGarden are touring with Nine Inch Nails this summer all through North America. Maybe, depending where ya live, you can catch them. :) ------------- Gimmie my headphones now!!! 🎧🤣 |
Posted By: claugroi
Date Posted: April 21 2014 at 15:59
About the remastered boxes, does anyone know the true reason why the blue box (1976 - 1982) was taken out of shops ? It's as rare as a diamond nowadays (and costs almost 1000 dollars). I've heard a rumor about copyright issues with some TV footage. Would it be true ? Also, the green box (1970 - 1975) became very expensive recently. Is there a copyright problem there as well ?? I feel glad for having bought the green box when it was 80 dollars and the brown one when it was 50, but it's really a pity that I'll never buy the blue.  ------------- Symphonic Prog Master |
Posted By: progbethyname
Date Posted: April 24 2014 at 11:02
That is very strange how those sets got artificially jacked-up pice wise. Personally, I only have the Genesis live set (1973-2007) cause I bought some of the albums that I wanted a 5.1 mix of individually, so I guess I avoided a big headache. Have you checked all countries pricing for these items or just here you live(Brasíl) ?? ------------- Gimmie my headphones now!!! 🎧🤣 |
Posted By: claugroi
Date Posted: April 24 2014 at 12:02
My country doesn't even have this kind of product. If it had, the price would be multiplied by 5 or 10 and the excuse would be "well, you know, it's imported...". Anyway, I check both the UK and the US. See for yourself: http://www.amazon.co.uk/Genesis-1976-1982-Hybrid-SACD/dp/B000MTOQKE http://www.amazon.com/Genesis-1976-1982/dp/B000P46P82 ------------- Symphonic Prog Master |
Posted By: claugroi
Date Posted: May 19 2014 at 11:18
|
No ideas about why the green and (mainly) the blue Genesis boxes are so rare and expensive now ?? ------------- Symphonic Prog Master |
Posted By: prog4evr
Date Posted: May 20 2014 at 03:22
Indeed...
|
Posted By: Chris S
Date Posted: May 20 2014 at 04:32
I can say this definitively and I will. In fact I am going to stick a big fat  here too. Well done me------------- ...As I venture through the slipstream, between the viaducts in your dreams...[/COLOR] |
Posted By: claugroi
Date Posted: May 20 2014 at 06:13
As a listener who appreciates audio quality, I have to disagree. No way I would listen to my favourite bands only on those old LPs (or even the original CDs, from 1988 or something like that). I have to agree, though, that some remasters are pure crap. Companies have to find a way to make money in a capitalist world, don't they ? I guess it's up to us to analyse the remaster and conclude if it is worth buying or not. I don't think we can say all of them are this or that... ------------- Symphonic Prog Master |
Posted By: Slartibartfast
Date Posted: May 20 2014 at 06:18
|
^ I second that. LP's used to be state of the art, but they really aren't any more for me. And the early CD's were put out were from the original LP masters and were not adapted for CD. ------------- Released date are often when it it impacted you but recorded dates are when it really happened...
|
Posted By: cstack3
Date Posted: May 20 2014 at 12:11
I actually prefer older CDs to the remastered, re-engineered ones for the most part. My CTTE CD seems like it was cut from original tapes or a master vinyl disc, so it has background hiss etc. Just like Eddie Offord would have heard it. The remastered TFTO includes all sorts of ambient music in the beginning of "Revealing Science of God" which I find annoying. |
Posted By: progbethyname
Date Posted: May 20 2014 at 23:23
|
Once again...in some cases ''yes' and others 'no.' Some albums need major restoration. I think my latest example and experience of quality album overhauling(remastering) would be IQ's Tales Of The Lush Attic. Listen to the 2013 remastering and remixing of that album as apposed to the 1983 pressing. The 83' pressing is marred by absolutely sh*t audio engineering and production. I feel this is a good example of an album that needed a digital facelift. ------------- Gimmie my headphones now!!! 🎧🤣 |
Posted By: richardh
Date Posted: May 21 2014 at 00:58
|
^That is an interesting one. I'm not convinced that its much better if I'm totally honest. The first 2 IQ albums were shrouded in murkiness and atmosphere like something evil emerging from the slime. I reckon that might be part of their appeal. IQ were well aware of the restrictions of their recording studios at the time but made the best of it. Later on they fixed this by creating their own record label and building a state of the art recording studio. Remixes can end up sounding hollow like you are stretching the sound beyond its elasticity. I get this sometimes from the Genesis remasters which are often hailed as being the best. That all said I am still a sucker for a remaster and will be getting my 10th or so remaster of BSS shortly.
|
Posted By: npjnpj
Date Posted: May 21 2014 at 05:48
| My personal definition of prog is when everyone else says: that sounds crap. |
Posted By: chopper
Date Posted: May 21 2014 at 08:14
You mean the guitar intro that was cut from the original vinyl release and restored again for the remaster?
|
Posted By: progbethyname
Date Posted: May 23 2014 at 23:36
Hey Richard. Yeah I remember Peter Nicholls in an interview saying that everyone in the band were pretty well aware of the studio recording originally didn't fly well with the band. I guess in some cases that 'murkiness' can yield some character, but I am a firm audio enthusiast when it comes to taking remastered albums and running them through a pure warm analogue signal, especially through the use of DAC. My best listening experiences are with this format, which is why I love remastered albums in high resolution like 5.1/stereo mixes and DTS 24/96k playback or as you Brits like to use mostly (SACD's.) It is all worth it, so enjoy your next remaster purchase!!  ------------- Gimmie my headphones now!!! 🎧🤣 |
Posted By: richardh
Date Posted: May 24 2014 at 02:03
I suppose at my age there is this element of Nostalgia regarding IQ for me that the remasters doesn't really address. I think fans love the imperfections. I'm not that down on remasters though. ELP - Welcome Back My Friends live album is an example of a good remaster. It was never a perfect album soundwise and would never satisfy audiophiles (is that the correct expression?) like yourself but its nice and clear and has the dynamics intact. The one that makes my angry is BSS as up to now its been horribly massacred by people attempting to resurrect the quality of the original. I really can't understand why there has been such a trail on ineptitude following my favourite ever album. Oh well here's hoping that the latest attempt can put it right. The guy doing it was also responsible for Anathema's album Weather Systems so I have a bit more hope than usual.
 |
Posted By: claugroi
Date Posted: May 24 2014 at 10:34
I also noticed that when listening to that song last week, when I received my "Studio Albums 1969 - 1987". The older CD version I have goes directly into "Dawn of light lying between...". Do you remember which is the original version ? I do have the LP from1973, but I'm too lazy to go take it and listen to it now... Anyway, I prefer the direct intro. ------------- Symphonic Prog Master |
Posted By: chopper
Date Posted: May 24 2014 at 10:46
the original LP goes straight into "Dawn of light", the extended intro was added for the Rhino remaster.
|
Posted By: progbethyname
Date Posted: May 26 2014 at 00:41
So BSS is your all time fav huh? Incredible high praise there. Can I be honest, I've only heard Karn Evil 9 off that album. Maybe I should treat myself to this latest remaster, especially to honor the great H.R Giger for his fantastic album artwork on BSS. . ------------- Gimmie my headphones now!!! 🎧🤣 |
Posted By: richardh
Date Posted: May 26 2014 at 05:35
release date is now 31 May per Amazon Jerusalem , Toccata and Karn Evil represents ELP at their peak .That's 40 minutes of the best prog imo. The other two tracks are inconsequential really (about 5 minutes inc Lakes worst ballad to that date and a throwaway excuse for Emerson to play de-tuned piano) but that accounts for why the album is lowly ranked on PA in case you were wondering.
|
Posted By: AtomicCrimsonRush
Date Posted: May 26 2014 at 07:22
   ------------- 
|
Posted By: cstack3
Date Posted: May 26 2014 at 11:50
I agree! The original LP and early (pre-remastered) CDs eliminated nearly all of the ambient noodling, although you can hear just a trace of it preceding "Dawn of light lying"... Apparently, the noodling bits were originally recorded, but left on the cutting room floor for brevity's sake. I don't think they add much to the song, and dilute the impact of the choral opening. Just me, mind you!
|
Posted By: Epignosis
Date Posted: May 26 2014 at 14:35
|
TFTO's beginning with the wash of sound and Steve's guitar swells add much to the piece. It builds the anticipation for greatness.
------------- https://epignosis.bandcamp.com/album/a-month-of-sundays" rel="nofollow - https://epignosis.bandcamp.com/album/a-month-of-sundays |
Posted By: cstack3
Date Posted: May 26 2014 at 16:03
There are, of course, generous areas in which we can agree or disagree! I understand your sentiment, it's just that after forty years of listening to the original work, I find it somewhat distracting. I was playing music exactly like that (volume swells using volume pedal on guitar) at about that same time. I'm not sure who "invented" that, but Robert Fripp and Peter Banks were early adopters of that style. You've pointed out Banks' progressive guitar style in the early Yes song "Every Little Thing," and he uses volume pedal extensively. Our discussion raises an interesting question - who within the band "signs off" on the addition of these elements to the recording? Did Anderson, and/or Howe etc. approve, or was this done separately? I'm not sure....with King Crimson, I believe that Fripp has a hand on the tiller throughout the process. |
Posted By: progbethyname
Date Posted: May 26 2014 at 17:11
Hey. It's an album I feel now is worth lending a kind, open ear to regardless of some poor reviews on here. ------------- Gimmie my headphones now!!! 🎧🤣 |