rock
New Rocker Rollin'
Posts: 24
|
Post by rock on Feb 2, 2016 20:33:18 GMT
Thanks a million mate... really appreciate your input and help :-)
|
|
|
Post by lazypokerblues on Feb 2, 2016 22:38:01 GMT
Sorry not got round to this yet this evening, will do asap!
|
|
|
Post by lazypokerblues on Feb 5, 2016 8:24:15 GMT
I hope this comes out ok. This is 4 versions of the Caroline and Backwater intro, all played at the same volume. Hopefully you will be able to tell the difference between the versions.
The order they are played in is:
Tim Turan 2005 Japan SHM-CD 2013 Andy Pearce Deluxe 2015 Culture Factory 2015
|
|
|
Post by frozenhero on Feb 5, 2016 14:52:43 GMT
Just found this article regarding SHM CD's and it's quite an interesting read. From a quick read through... I've picked up that the whole SHM thing is nonsense! Obviously, I am not in a position to comment either way (as I have nothing to compare with), but I'll have a good think about what to do... oh, life can be so hard!! LOL www.avforums.com/threads/do-shm-cds-sound-better-than-normal-cds.1666853/All of this is correct. The entire CD process is built around the idea that the CD will sound identical to the original master file. So how can the SHM improve on the file used to master the CD? That doesn't make any sense whatsoever.
|
|
|
Post by frozenhero on Feb 5, 2016 14:57:07 GMT
I hope this comes out ok. This is 4 versions of the Caroline and Backwater intro, all played at the same volume. Hopefully you will be able to tell the difference between the versions.
The order they are played in is:
Tim Turan 2005 Japan SHM-CD 2013 Andy Pearce Deluxe 2015 Culture Factory 2015
I haven't listened closely but to me the CF version sounds like shit as soon as the drums come in...
|
|
|
Post by frozenhero on Feb 5, 2016 14:59:57 GMT
I've got them all Gav. Andy Pearce ones are better than the 2005 ones. The Japanese SHM-CDs are high quality pressings of the 2005 ones. I only want to listen to the CF ones. I'd rank them like this (best first): Culture Factory 2015 Andy Pearce Japanese SHM 2005 Tim Turan Cheers. Still confused as to whether we're talking about the same Japanese SHM-CDS here!! There's the 5-set that were released in 2013, and the Japanese ones that are being released this year. From what i understand, the 2013 ones were remastered by a Japanese guy for Universal Japan, and the 2016 ones as you say are HQ pressings of the Tim Turan remasters. Each to their own of course, but i've read a lot about how the Tim Turan remasters are sonically inferior anyway (and thus the 2016 ones will be too) which is reflected in your ranking. But i've also read a LOT about the Japanese guy's remastering being superior to the whole lot!! And i've read little to nothing on any Quo board about these particular releases so am still wondering whether this carries weight. I'm not much of an audiophile so am really just trying to get a general picture. Cheers for your input. The new Japanese versions should be sonically identical with the regular deluxe editions by Andy Pearce. These masters were also apparently used for the 5 Albums set. There is a discussion of the older Japanese mini-LPs here: forums.stevehoffman.tv/threads/recent-status-quo-japanese-mlps-cds.325458
|
|
|
Post by lazypokerblues on Feb 5, 2016 16:04:58 GMT
I haven't listened closely but to me the CF version sounds like shit as soon as the drums come in... It's difficult to tell from an iphone recording. I really like the CF pressings. It's not the loudness that I like, but it's the extra detail that is just not there in the othe versions. There is that extra weight in the bass and the extra sizzle in the cymbals. The one word that keeps coming back to me when I hear the CF recordings is 'attack'. This may well be down to compression, which I know is not to everyone's taste. If that's the case then I'd probably recommend the Andy Pearce Deluxe versions which sound a bit more refined.
|
|
per
Rocker Rollin'
Posts: 641
|
Post by per on Feb 5, 2016 16:15:40 GMT
I hope this comes out ok. This is 4 versions of the Caroline and Backwater intro, all played at the same volume. Hopefully you will be able to tell the difference between the versions.
The order they are played in is:
Tim Turan 2005 Japan SHM-CD 2013 Andy Pearce Deluxe 2015 Culture Factory 2015
Wow! This is a big wow! I've only listened at your clips through my phone (with head phones though) and I have a flu, but to me it seems very obvious that the fourth version in both clips are LOTS better than the other three! Is that the "culture factory" versions? Where can I order them? They sounds like an absolute must have to my ears!
|
|
|
Post by frozenhero on Feb 5, 2016 16:19:40 GMT
I hope this comes out ok. This is 4 versions of the Caroline and Backwater intro, all played at the same volume. Hopefully you will be able to tell the difference between the versions.
The order they are played in is:
Tim Turan 2005 Japan SHM-CD 2013 Andy Pearce Deluxe 2015 Culture Factory 2015
Wow! This is a big wow! I've only listened at your clips through my phone (with head phones though) and I have a flu, but to me it seems very obvious that the fourth version in both clips are LOTS better than the other three! Is that the "culture factory" versions? Where can I order them? They sounds like an absolute must have to my ears! It's a bit sad to see that the old remastering trick still works. Subconsciously, we tend to prefer something that's louder. It's only during long-term listening and changing the playback volume to something more overall consistent that we can actually evaluate the sound quality. That's why loudness normalizing during comparisons is so important.
|
|
|
Post by frozenhero on Feb 5, 2016 16:36:17 GMT
Meant to ask, on the deluxe RAOTW, is the original album version re-remastered? Or is it the Tim Turan remaster still? Thanks. Andy Pearce, right? See how confused i am. Yes, Andy Pearce.
|
|
|
Post by lazypokerblues on Feb 5, 2016 20:09:58 GMT
Per, I posted a link to the CF CDs on Amazon on Page 1 of this thread.
I'm happy to burn copies for anyone who wants to try before they buy, including frozenhero!
It may well be that they're compressed and therefore louder, I still think they sound great and are my preferred versions.
PM me if you want copies, cos they ain't cheap to buy.
|
|
|
Post by frozenhero on Feb 5, 2016 22:11:01 GMT
Per, I posted a link to the CF CDs on Amazon on Page 1 of this thread. I'm happy to burn copies for anyone who wants to try before they buy, including frozenhero! It may well be that they're compressed and therefore louder, I still think they sound great and are my preferred versions. PM me if you want copies, cos they ain't cheap to buy. Haha! I'll think about it. Perhaps a compilation of one track from each album would be interesting. But personally I am happy with Andy Pearce's remasters and don't really think I need more versions.
|
|
Xland
Rocker Rollin'
Posts: 357
|
Post by Xland on Feb 5, 2016 23:27:50 GMT
I went ahead and purchased the CF albums, all four, from Amazon the other day and arrived next day. I've only briefly put on Hello!, actually only Reason For Living, compared with the 2005 remasters. Volume, that's the word, it stands out a mile. I have no idea about dynamics, but it's far louder as others have mentioned, I'd say on same volume compared with the 2005 remaster CF was 3-4 turns louder, maybe even 5. By turns, I mean either on your hifi volume knob or remote, just in case! I will give it a proper listen over the weekend, but maybe a touch more detail/treble coming through with CF too, or maybe that's just due to the volume, I will know more when I play over the weekend and compare to the 2005 remasters. As I've said, I've hardly listened at all, but the CF ones do seem to have plenty of kick and a freshness, if that's the right word. I've often wondered why when listening to say a 2005 remaster of a 70's Quo album followed by say a new Quo album like Quid Pro Quo, a new Bonamassa album or whatever, just say something new from the last decade or so, it's as if I've turned the volume up a notch or two, not on about tune quality, just cd volume. Always put it down to recording technology at the time, I have no idea about this kind of thing. I'm guessing somehow modern technology has enabled CF to raise the volume of these recordings without losing sound quality as if they had been recorded during the last 10 -20 years? I've no idea, but it's interesting!
|
|
|
Post by lazypokerblues on Feb 6, 2016 8:29:23 GMT
There's an interesting discussion on Radio 4 about the loudness wars. If you've got 4 minutes, give it a listen: bbc.in/23OlNLV
|
|
|
Post by frozenhero on Feb 6, 2016 10:26:48 GMT
I went ahead and purchased the CF albums, all four, from Amazon the other day and arrived next day. I've only briefly put on Hello!, actually only Reason For Living, compared with the 2005 remasters. Volume, that's the word, it stands out a mile. I have no idea about dynamics, but it's far louder as others have mentioned, I'd say on same volume compared with the 2005 remaster CF was 3-4 turns louder, maybe even 5. By turns, I mean either on your hifi volume knob or remote, just in case! I will give it a proper listen over the weekend, but maybe a touch more detail/treble coming through with CF too, or maybe that's just due to the volume, I will know more when I play over the weekend and compare to the 2005 remasters. As I've said, I've hardly listened at all, but the CF ones do seem to have plenty of kick and a freshness, if that's the right word. I've often wondered why when listening to say a 2005 remaster of a 70's Quo album followed by say a new Quo album like Quid Pro Quo, a new Bonamassa album or whatever, just say something new from the last decade or so, it's as if I've turned the volume up a notch or two, not on about tune quality, just cd volume. Always put it down to recording technology at the time, I have no idea about this kind of thing. I'm guessing somehow modern technology has enabled CF to raise the volume of these recordings without losing sound quality as if they had been recorded during the last 10 -20 years? I've no idea, but it's interesting! The problem with digital audio is you cannot increase the volume without losing sound quality, once the loudest parts are normalized at 0 dB. You have to compress dynamics to go beyond, which is futile IMO as I always adjust the playback volume so that I'm getting a more or less constant RMS (average volume). Utilities like SoundCheck or ReplayGain do the same. And once you're comparing at the same RMS, the sacrifices in sound quality become very apparent.
|
|