Quoted from CrazyLevi:That's for you to judge, but as they were recorded by a bunch of 60 year olds 20-35 years later with different personnel and different equipment id say yes.
I don't really see it as an issue especially in a pinball machine. But kiss hardcores may have a problem with it. They will certainly be able to tell the difference.
If you guys ever have time, check out the album Little Richard did in the 90's, same thing, he re-recorded all his original songs. It's so good, you can't really tell a difference, other than the recording is cleaner. He was already in his 60's and still able to sing all his crazy shit about exactly the same. Prob. the best re-recording I've ever heard.
In his case, and a lot of artists, the reason they re-record it is because when you record stuff, they split the royalties in half and pay half to who owns the songwriting credits, and half to who owns the recording (which is usually the record label). If you re-record the song, you now own the recording and get that half of the royalties. In Little Richard's case, he no longer owned the songwriting credits but now could get half the royalties because he owned the re-recordings.
If Gene still owns the songwriting credits (I'd imagine he does), and owns these re-recordings (I'd be almost certain he does) then he gets *all* the money.