What is your favourite release?

[KEW]

My favorite release was with Katherine!
First time is always special!

Oh, ... are you talking music??!!!

 

[killdozzer]

My favorite release was with Katherine!
First time is always special!

Oh, ... are you talking music??!!!

You're a little late to that party. We've been thru our share of release/ejaculate jokes. Before this thread I never knew those words are this closely tied. I've never heard anyone use release in such context before.

 

[GrimSurfer]

Thank you all for such precious details. @Joe B I've been through that thread and I liked it, but the point of this thread is somewhat different. Certain records are golden standards for evaluating high fidelity audio, but than there's others, as you don't always listen to a couple of records that are well mastered, and those others you have a hard time finding a decent master/remaster of, but you like them and want to listen to them (Boy & Bear is my example of that - I like their songs, lyrics and ideas, but it's very "ear-gnawing" to listen to them).

This thread is a place where people can recommend their favourite and otherwise bad sounding albums/bands IF they found a decent remaster. It's like; "finally, a good sounding remaster of (insert a name of the band).

@GrimSurfer thanks for the explanation! A question; should I go for the green ones or the red ones?

@Ponzio you're a treasure trove and always so selfless in sharing. Thanks!

Green is good, my friend. Anything (albums or tracks) with a DR of 13 or higher is very good and sound very nice. 16 or higher is exceptional and immediately recognizable as being on a whole different level.

Depending on the genre (well composed music with a range of instruments is better than thrash metal), you're ears will snap to attention with the exceptional stuff. It's like hearing something "bright" at the top end, then hearing warm in the middle, and deep in the low end... all at the same time.

Crank the volume and listen... you'll be surprised how little your ears tire from high spl when there's good dynamic range.

Now all of this sounds like audiophile BS, but it's backed by objective measurement and employed by celebrated audio engineers like Bob Katz and musicians like Steve Wilson. The best part is that it is "free" to those with access to the DR Database and well stocked record store.

PS. Don't use any of the ratings for vinyl. The software used for the database was developed for digital sources and misreads vinyl DR because it thinks it is measuring from the normal noise floor of a CD (which is typically -120 dB versus no better than -70 for virgin vinyl).

 

[Ponzio]

Better than most. It is loud (my foobar says -10db) but it's better than most.

Have you tried finding the first reissue's in 1984 (Germany) / 1985 (USA) on CD? Usually the first CD reissue's have no compression or DSP effects thrown in. Just a straight transfer from the master tape, which can be a good or bad thing, depending on the original SQ.

Here's a link to Discogs database for War
https://www.discogs.com/U2-War/master/48830

 

[KEW]

You're a little late to that party. We've been thru our share of release/ejaculate jokes. Before this thread I never knew those words are this closely tied. I've never heard anyone use release in such context before.

I was wondering about that. Obviously did not read through the entire thread!
I gather English is not your first language, but I assume the translation makes some sense once you put it in that context.

One of my favorites is in German they have a term that translates as "ass creeper" for what seems to be a well established international concept - most commonly referred to as "brown-noser" in English!

 

[Joe B]

.....
I'll start: I came across the first Dire Straits album on an SACD published for Japan. I don't exactly know what happened in the remastering process, but it didn't sound good. Something strange about "upper low frequencies", in the song Six Blade Knife the rhythm section covers everything else. It is over-stressed. The drum and the midds completely eat the entire song. It happens on other songs as well, but here it is most obvious.

Then a friend of mine recommended Bob Ludwig's remasters and those were great. I wholeheartedly recommend all Dire Straits studio albums remastered by Bob Ludwig.

.....I have yet to buy a Pat Benatar CD that is not so overly condensed that I can listen to it for more than a few minutes. The same with Rush. However, at HDTracks.com they have Rush's "Spirit of the Radio" as a 96/24 download. Info on the site states:

Mastered by Andy Van Dette from Masterdisk from the original masters through analog console, equalizers and compressors before being recaptured at 96kHz.

This FLAC file sounds amazing, and for anyone who wants a copy of "Spirit of the Radio" I can promise you won't go wrong with this download.

...@Joe B[/USER] I've been through that thread and I liked it, but the point of this thread is somewhat different. Certain records are golden standards for evaluating high fidelity audio, but than there's others, as you don't always listen to a couple of records that are well mastered, and those others you have a hard time finding a decent master/remaster of, but you like them and want to listen to them (Boy & Bear is my example of that - I like their songs, lyrics and ideas, but it's very "ear-gnawing" to listen to them).

This thread is a place where people can recommend their favourite and otherwise bad sounding albums/bands IF they found a decent remaster. It's like; "finally, a good sounding remaster of (insert a name of the band).

OK, now I'm totally confused. I didn't contribute as you asked?

 

[killdozzer]

OK, now I'm totally confused. I didn't contribute as you asked? View attachment 28663

You have contributed absolutely! I misread your post. Sorry. The wording made me think every Pat Benatar CD sounds good. An honest mistake on my side.

Thank you!

 

[John Parks]

Has anyone heard/compared Peter Gabriel's So, CD vs remastered CD (2012) vs SACD? I am in a bit of a PG mood and never upgraded from the rather dismal CD I purchased back in '86. I know So has been re-released on vinyl (with "In Your Eyes" in its proper place at the end of side 2) but I want to explore digital editions - I'll most likely buy the vinyl later on. Listening on Tidal or Qobuz to the remaster already sounds better than my well worn CD...

Speaking of Peter G, the SACD for Passion blows the CD out of the water, if you are interested @killdozzer
I have not researched what went into the remaster, but it sure sounds great.

 

[GrimSurfer]

http://dr.loudness-war.info/album/list?artist=Peter+Gabriel&album=So

 

[John Parks]

http://dr.loudness-war.info/album/list?artist=Peter+Gabriel&album=So

I have seen the DR ratings before - thanks! The question is still, has anyone on here listened to and compared the aforementioned releases. "dr.loudness-war" is a great reference and tool but, unfortunately, does not tell the whole story. Like I said, the 25th anniversary remaster of So via streaming sounds (subjectively) better than my original CD even though the DR ratings are lower. Since the SACD is so close in DR rating to the original release, I would love to hear it for myself, but am unwilling as of yet to fork over $90 or so.

 

[GrimSurfer]

Frankly, I'd be unwilling to fork over $90 for any album, regardless of the format.

 

[John Parks]

Frankly, I'd be unwilling to fork over $90 for any album, regardless of the format.

 

[GrimSurfer]

https://www.sa-cd.net/showtitle/859

Review by gregs1104 January 30, 2010 (3 of 4 found this review helpful) Performance:

Sonics:

This SACD is a disappointing step backwards from the quality of the earlier Gabriel albums on SACD. The "Melting Face" SACD sounds immensely better than this one does. SACD "So" seems a touch cleaner for some reason than the original CD, but it's not a big change. And I hate the running order on this version. Definitely an optional purchase.

Review by dobyblue July 25, 2007 (4 of 5 found this review helpful) Performance:

Sonics:

Despite the rather odd change in the running order I am continually impressed by this disc which has been in my collection for some time now.

I remember looking forward to hearing Mercy Street in SACD and it did not disappoint. The quality of this recording is excellent from start to finish. The bass lines in Sledgehammer, That Voice Again and In Your Eyes feel like Tony Levin is right there in your living room.

Cymbals and high end are crisp and have great resolve. There are no issues with cranking this recording, it is clean and clear, an excellent example of stereo SACD.

My only fault with this recording is that they did not make a multi-channel mix of it. The SACD multi-channel mix on "Up" is brilliant. On "Play The Videos" Daniel Lanois and Peter Gabriel did some excellent 5.1 mixes and every video is presented in DTS 96/24, but to put it in persepctive if I'm going to listen to In Your Eyes I'll take the 2 channel stereo version over the DTS 96/24 version because the fidelity is noticeably better.

Review by jose1964 March 21, 2007 (6 of 14 found this review helpful) Performance:

Sonics:

Sometimes I wonder why some records are released in sacd format since they are not worth while. In this record, the fact of being in this format doesn't improve anything, it is a waste of time. The master is really bad. If you see recording from the 80's, don't rely on the good quality.

Mixed reviews on Steve Hoffman forum too, which is one of my go-to sources for this sort of thing.

https://forums.stevehoffman.tv/threads/peter-gabriel-so-sacd.15604/

On balance, it might be slightly better or slightly worse than the 86 CD version. Given nobody is freaking out because of its sound quality, one has to ask whether the $90 and up on discogs listing is worth it.

 

[John Parks]

https://www.sa-cd.net/showtitle/859

Review by gregs1104 January 30, 2010 (3 of 4 found this review helpful) Performance:

Sonics:

This SACD is a disappointing step backwards from the quality of the earlier Gabriel albums on SACD. The "Melting Face" SACD sounds immensely better than this one does. SACD "So" seems a touch cleaner for some reason than the original CD, but it's not a big change. And I hate the running order on this version. Definitely an optional purchase.

Review by dobyblue July 25, 2007 (4 of 5 found this review helpful) Performance:

Sonics:

Despite the rather odd change in the running order I am continually impressed by this disc which has been in my collection for some time now.

I remember looking forward to hearing Mercy Street in SACD and it did not disappoint. The quality of this recording is excellent from start to finish. The bass lines in Sledgehammer, That Voice Again and In Your Eyes feel like Tony Levin is right there in your living room.

Cymbals and high end are crisp and have great resolve. There are no issues with cranking this recording, it is clean and clear, an excellent example of stereo SACD.

My only fault with this recording is that they did not make a multi-channel mix of it. The SACD multi-channel mix on "Up" is brilliant. On "Play The Videos" Daniel Lanois and Peter Gabriel did some excellent 5.1 mixes and every video is presented in DTS 96/24, but to put it in persepctive if I'm going to listen to In Your Eyes I'll take the 2 channel stereo version over the DTS 96/24 version because the fidelity is noticeably better.

Review by jose1964 March 21, 2007 (6 of 14 found this review helpful) Performance:

Sonics:

Sometimes I wonder why some records are released in sacd format since they are not worth while. In this record, the fact of being in this format doesn't improve anything, it is a waste of time. The master is really bad. If you see recording from the 80's, don't rely on the good quality.

Saludos / Regards

Thanks!

 

[GrimSurfer]

No problem!

The reason why I keep going back to the DR Database is that it is objective. It is also indicative, given that increasing loudness is one of the biggest errors in mastering/remastering according to guys like Bob Katz.

So when I hear about a remaster, I consult with the database. If it checks out fine, then I look for reviewers comments talking about clarity or things that can be heard better than the original or other copies.

I've been burnt so many times on remasters and reissues... whenever I've checked when I've thought an issue to be lacking, the DR Database seems to agree. Not 100% of the time, but at least 75-80% of it.

Conversely... when I think that I'm listening to something exceptional, the DR Database confirms this to about the same degree.

I listen to mostly rock/program rock, for which one doesn't need golden ears to tell whether it's compressed or not. (Most of it is.). I suspect that my ears aren't good enough to differentiate between a really good classical album and an exceptional one... probably because relatively few are f*ucked up from the start.

So apologies if I keep providing links to the database. It's the best rough filter I've found out there, and its lack of subjectivity absolves me of any guilt I would otherwise feel if my ears steered y'all to an expensive product that didn't meet the standards you seek!

 

[Ponzio]

In honor of St. Patrick's Day and our remastered fanaticism I thought I'd share my current Pogues discography for a limited time.
https://1drv.ms/f/s!AuzzS1BGAuKtiOEIyG7lumJFzibFiQ

Póg Mo Thóin and Happy Saint Patrick’s Day

 

[killdozzer]

In honor of St. Patrick's Day and our remastered fanaticism I thought I'd share my current Pogues discography for a limited time.
https://1drv.ms/f/s!AuzzS1BGAuKtiOEIyG7lumJFzibFiQ

Póg Mo Thóin and Happy Saint Patrick’s Day

I just learned the other day it means kisses. I'm probably the last one to learn that. It was in some Brit TV quiz, I think. I watch a lot of their television.

When I saw you generous offer, the though that I'm perhaps late for it startled me. I was away on a wine fair in Dusselfdorf. It's the biggest European wine fair. A lot of Americans came and Ford Coppola's winery was visiting.

Anyway, thank you!

 

[killdozzer]

Has anyone heard/compared Peter Gabriel's So, CD vs remastered CD (2012) vs SACD? I am in a bit of a PG mood and never upgraded from the rather dismal CD I purchased back in '86. I know So has been re-released on vinyl (with "In Your Eyes" in its proper place at the end of side 2) but I want to explore digital editions - I'll most likely buy the vinyl later on. Listening on Tidal or Qobuz to the remaster already sounds better than my well worn CD...

Speaking of Peter G, the SACD for Passion blows the CD out of the water, if you are interested @killdozzer
I have not researched what went into the remaster, but it sure sounds great.

Of course I'm interested. Thank you. When I saw the loudness wars table I went to check the CD I got as a gift from a lady friend (my very good friend's better half) and it was Toshiba, but as you said, even if the magic number is 15, it still sounded just a little bit thin and "metalic" and I honestly preferred the Annyversary Edition.

 

[Ponzio]

Has anyone heard/compared Peter Gabriel's So, CD vs remastered CD (2012) vs SACD? I am in a bit of a PG mood and never upgraded from the rather dismal CD I purchased back in '86. I know So has been re-released on vinyl (with "In Your Eyes" in its proper place at the end of side 2) but I want to explore digital editions - I'll most likely buy the vinyl later on. Listening on Tidal or Qobuz to the remaster already sounds better than my well worn CD...

Speaking of Peter G, the SACD for Passion blows the CD out of the water, if you are interested @killdozzer
I have not researched what went into the remaster, but it sure sounds great.

I love the So album too and I don't doubt the SACD sounds great but at an average price of $60 that's quite an expensive proposition.
https://www.discogs.com/search/?q=peter+gabriel+so+sacd&type=all

 

[killdozzer]

A rather interesting twist to this story, if I may; I've named a band here a couple of times - Boy & Bear - that I really like but they don't sound very good. I remember @lovinthehd saying something along the lines of; mids this bad will not go through my system

I found myself looking for a vinyl copy just to lower the "glare" (excuse my French) of the CD. But the vinyl goes for 60$ (nooo way).