|
|
Post by lazypokerblues on Dec 7, 2015 8:29:56 GMT
Folks, don't waste money on Hello and Quo. But do get RAOTW for the remix. If you want to get a good quality remaster CD, please get the Culture Factory versions. So far they've released Blue For You, Hello, Quo and On The Level and they sound fantastic. How do the new remasters by Andy Pearce compare to the CF releases?
I don't know yet. I've only listened to the 2nd CDs in all the deluxe versions. The bootlegs on Hello and Quo are shockingly bad. Like listening to an old bootleg tape on a mono long wave radio, broadcasting from Radio Luxembourg at 1 in the morning. Just appalling.
I'll rip the Andy Pearce remasters to my Linn and post up some video comparisons with CF later this week.
|
|
whoami
Rocker Rollin'
Posts: 288 
|
Post by whoami on Dec 8, 2015 17:18:39 GMT
Got the link from frame66 and i dont think the official release sounds better?  !!! |
|
rock
New Rocker Rollin'
Posts: 24
|
Post by rock on Dec 9, 2015 0:01:41 GMT
They're like mini replicas of the vinyl, so BFY is a gatefold, and Hello has got the poster. They are the best sounding CDs you can get. Loads more detail and dynamics. Vinyl is still king but if you want digital, get Culture Factory. Nobody has ever posted dynamic range values for any of the CF releases. It would be useful in order to compare to the 2005 and 2014/15 remasters without having to buy them. Also, they cost almost twice as much compared to the deluxe editions, which also feature nice sounding remasters from what I've heard. I second that! I'd be VERY interested to see a dynamic range comparisons between the above release... even more so the comparisons between the CF and Official releases. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 9, 2015 0:09:38 GMT
To hell with all that dynamic range pish. Stick it in and turn it up to 11!!!
|
|
|
|
Post by Mustang Bass on Dec 9, 2015 12:18:22 GMT
To hell with all that dynamic range pish. Stick it in and turn it up to 11!!! I agree. The sure way to ruin the listening experience is to over annalyse the music. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 9, 2015 13:24:38 GMT
As a Quo fan, I'd never heard of 'dynamic range values and comparisons' back in 77 when the original album came out - let alone considered they might exist one day in the future  I just wanted to have a great time  |
|
|
|
Post by Whoppa Choppa on Dec 9, 2015 15:57:23 GMT
 Watch the language......
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 9, 2015 16:01:27 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by Victor on Dec 9, 2015 17:39:54 GMT
As a Quo fan, I'd never heard of 'dynamic range values and comparisons' back in 77 when the original album came out - let alone considered they might exist one day in the future I just wanted to have a great time Yea back then it was the same for me lol |
|
|
|
Post by funk2thebone on Dec 9, 2015 20:11:20 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by frozenhero on Dec 15, 2015 19:37:19 GMT
As a Quo fan, I'd never heard of 'dynamic range values and comparisons' back in 77 when the original album came out - let alone considered they might exist one day in the future I just wanted to have a great time That's because the stupid loudness war wasn't ruining albums back then. |
|
|
|
Post by frozenhero on Dec 15, 2015 19:38:47 GMT
To hell with all that dynamic range pish. Stick it in and turn it up to 11!!! Well, the irony in your statement is...the best way to "turn it up to 11" is if the CD has its dynamics intact. The louder mastering gets, the more I turn it down because it sounds annoying. When the drums don't punch anymore against the rest of the music, there must be something wrong... |
|
|
|
Post by frozenhero on Dec 15, 2015 19:43:01 GMT
To hell with all that dynamic range pish. Stick it in and turn it up to 11!!! I agree. The sure way to ruin the listening experience is to over annalyse the music. The sure way to ruin my listening experience is to put out compromised remasters like the 2005 ones. In fact, once I actually knew what compression was all about I finally understood why some CDs gave me a headache. So my listening experience is actually improved, as this knowledge has helped me in avoiding flat, crappily produced / mastered CDs. And I'm not over analysing the music, just trying to find out which version sounds best. Andy Pearce's remasters sound nice to my ears; the DR numbers confirm this. Tim Turan's remasters sound harsh to my ears; again the DR numbers are a testament to that. If somebody who has the CF remasters could do the quick DR analysis it would tell me a bit more about the sound than just subjective impressions. Hence me asking. |
|
|
|
Post by Mustang Bass on Dec 15, 2015 20:22:31 GMT
I agree. The sure way to ruin the listening experience is to over annalyse the music. The sure way to ruin my listening experience is to put out compromised remasters like the 2005 ones. In fact, once I actually knew what compression was all about I finally understood why some CDs gave me a headache. So my listening experience is actually improved, as this knowledge has helped me in avoiding flat, crappily produced / mastered CDs. And I'm not over analysing the music, just trying to find out which version sounds best. Andy Pearce's remasters sound nice to my ears; the DR numbers confirm this. Tim Turan's remasters sound harsh to my ears; again the DR numbers are a testament to that. If somebody who has the CF remasters could do the quick DR analysis it would tell me a bit more about the sound than just subjective impressions. Hence me asking. Whatever gets you by FH, personally I'm with QQ on this one. Bung it on and turn it up and just enjoy it! I've never suffered a headache after listening to cd's so maybe I'm one of the lucky ones that can listen to them without any adverse effects. |
|
|
|
Post by frozenhero on Dec 15, 2015 20:33:20 GMT
The sure way to ruin my listening experience is to put out compromised remasters like the 2005 ones. In fact, once I actually knew what compression was all about I finally understood why some CDs gave me a headache. So my listening experience is actually improved, as this knowledge has helped me in avoiding flat, crappily produced / mastered CDs. And I'm not over analysing the music, just trying to find out which version sounds best. Andy Pearce's remasters sound nice to my ears; the DR numbers confirm this. Tim Turan's remasters sound harsh to my ears; again the DR numbers are a testament to that. If somebody who has the CF remasters could do the quick DR analysis it would tell me a bit more about the sound than just subjective impressions. Hence me asking. Whatever gets you by FH, personally I'm with QQ on this one. Bung it on and turn it up and just enjoy it! I've never suffered a headache after listening to cd's so maybe I'm one of the lucky ones that can listen to them without any adverse effects. We're talking psychoacoustics here. Admittedly Quo aren't among the worst offenders but the trend starting in the 90s has been to CDs that have waveforms looking like brick walls (hence the term brickwalling) and because our brain perceives this kind of music like noise(no variation in volume), it's known to have seriously (and often subconsciously for a long time) affected a lot of people's love for music. When it's not dynamic, it's not exciting anymore. That's why I applaud the release of the deluxe editions, no matter how good the bonus material is. I'll stop now (perhaps I'll do a separate thread, to get people to fill in the holes on the DR database) but for anybody interested, there's plenty of interesting articles that have opened many people's eyes (and ears) and this is one of the best, written by a pro: www.cdmasteringservices.com/dynamicrange.htm |
|
!!!
I just wanted to have a great time 
Watch the language...... 
