ak2112

The spine of the CD will have the catelog number (in the case of the Japanese versions, they always end in "P").

For vocals, I like the St. Louis version, but only for the really high pitched stuff. I think the DS version blows it away musically and I'm shocked that some think it lacks energy. The drums in particular are just off the hook, especially at the end. Just awesome. Wish I could have seen that tour!

OK fellow Rush freaks. I have now done this exercise with Moving Pictures and Signals, now comes Power Windows. I only have 3 versions of this album myself but have borrowed a friends Japanese version, so here are the competitors: 1. SHM-CD version 2. 97 remaster 3. Japanese 32.8P 4. Japanese 25.8P I limited my comparison to three songs on the album because they are my 3 faves, and thus, I'm most familiar with them and all their wonderful nuances. The songs are: Grand Designs Manhattan Project Middletown Dreams My system consists of two Polk Audio LSi25 speakers with built in powered subwoofers, a NAD T763 reciever serving as my preamp, a Rotel RB1080 two channel amp and a Denon DVD2900 Universal player. All of this is routed through a Monster AVS2000 voltage stabilizer. All speaker cables and interconnects I use are from Audioquest. I listened to each song in its entirety and then played the first 10 seconds of the song again before switching to another disc (dont ask me why I do this but it kind of helps me remember how a given versions sounds right before I switch discs). NOTE" in order to REALLY do this kind of thing justice, I should probably listen to all of every album and pick out which song on which disc songs the best on a given version but right now I'm being lazy and am going for all around sound quality. Here were my results: 1. Japanese 32.8P/Japanese 25.8P 3. SHM-CD 4. 97 remaster The two Japanese versions were clearly the best of the 4 to my ears but they also sounded pretty much identical to each other. I put each disc through the software Exact Audio Copy" to compare each Japanese discs peak levels and, sure enough, they were identical so I think they're from the same mastering. At any rate, they both sounded warm and non-fatiguing at even extreme volumes. The SHM-CD was nice in its own way but it was about 3dB louder than the Japanese versions and thus a little more hard on the ears after a long listening session. The 97 remaster, like all the other remasters I've heard (save for Caress of Steel which is the one remaster that I do like) was about 5dB louder than the Japanese discs and about 2dB louder than the SHM-CD. HARSH, HARSH, HARSH!! Did the people who did these remasters ever hear of the phrase "dynamic range"? Geez!!!!! At any rate, the SHM isnt bad it just is a little too loud for my tastes and not as warm sounding as the two Japanese versions, plus the soundstage of the Japanese discs is wider and more enveloping on my system. However, the SHM is a pretty good sounding disc, much better than the remaster, and the original duplicated artwork is topnotch; a very nice collectable (if you can find them for a decent price that is since it is now long OOP). I'm gld I didnt try to buy the 25.8P myself as it goes for crazy prices. For those that care, the 32.8P seems easier to find and cheaper on the wallet and is the EXACT same master as the 25.8P so save yourself some $$ and get it if you can. They are both gorgeous masters and blow the 97 remaster out of the water. Anyway, short and sweet. For whatever reason, the Japanese sure know what they're doing when it comes to mastering albums with full dynamic range without brickwalling and also adding some nice artwork an liner notes (both the non SHM Japanese discs come with a 16 page booklet with English and Japanese lyrics). Get one if you can folks!!

QUOTE (ghostworks @ May 14 2011, 12:22 PM) interesting research, AK! I did an a/b/c/d test with 'Signals' CD's a few years ago myself when the SHM-CD hype was in full effect here's a link to the full review: Signals - on compact disc, '89, '94, '97 and '09 editions reviewed we both used three of the four same discs for our years-apart independent tests, and the final results are revealing: AK2112 1. Japanese 25.8P 2. MFSL 3. Original US Atomic 4. 97 remaster GHOSTWORKS 1. MFSL 2. '89 W. German (i.e. Original US Atomic) 3. SHM-CD 4. '97 Remaster I'm compelled to start a campaign to buy up those '97 'Signals' remasters on principle and encourage people to snap them in half and ditch them in recycle bins across the world on the 30th anniversary (September 9, 2012) WHO'S WITH ME? Amen to that brother! You took the words right out of my mouth!

And even better, its getting the audiophile treatment by Audio Fidelity to be released on July 19th. I've already pre-ordered my copy!

QUOTE (Oracle @ Jul 2 2011, 07:45 PM) No! They haven't been to Anchorage, Alaska yet! They can't end the tour now! Amen to that. They need to come here so I dont have to keep travelling down to the lower 48 to see them!

Louder = less dynamic range, and that's a fact. However, I enjoy your wit as always!

That's easy. Anything off of VT....an absolute disaster of a record.

My wife is getting her Masters degree in Psychology and I have often told her she should do her thesis on this kind of thing; the emotionlessness (not a word I know) of the internet and what it brings out in people. I had one guy totally ream me on here about one of my posts; very personal type stuff...and then he was gone. never seen him on here since. very bizzare! Everyone is entitled to their opinion but to post just to be a jerk...I dont get it. I actually pity people like that.

For some people, louder = better. Not me. I'll stick with the 25.8P and MFSL when I want the best sound.

I already did this once for Moving Pictures and I'll soon do this again for Power Windows, but the following is my review of several different masterings of the album Signals. The versions reviewed are as follows: 1. Original US Atomic (810 002-2) 2. Japanese 25.8P 1st pressing (25.8P-5169) 3. The MFSL (Mobile Fidelity Sound Labs) master (UDCD 614) 4. The 1997 remaster (314 534 633-2) I didnt listen to the whole album for this review, but rather 3 songs, Subdivisions, The Weapon, and Losing It (my all time favorite Rush song). I played each song all the way through without interruption, then had my wife switch out the CD's and play the sojng on the next master. I did not know which version I was listening to but merely kept track of them as disc #1, #2, etc and had my wife keep track of the true identity of each. I also had her switch up the order of which disc she played with each song so that things stayed as random and blind as possible. For each song and each CD, I made notes on things like overall sound stage, detail, loudness, perceived warmth and overall tonal quality. The results are in and here is how thet ranked out! One note should be made. I knew during The Weapon when I was listening to the MFSL as it has the missing vocal towards the end. However, other than that, I really didnt know which verison I was hearing at the time. Anyway, here is my final ranking: 1. Japanese 25.8P 2. MFSL 3. Original US Atomic 4. 97 remaster First off, I wish I could rank the 97 remaster something like #158 or something because it truly was not in the same league as the other 3 verions. It was a loud, brickwalled mess and I could tell when it was being played EVERY SINGLE TIME because it was so friggin terribly loud...about 8dB louder than any other disc in the group. Just terrible. it sounded tinny and harsh and it didnt matter what song was playing. Although you could make a little more detail because of the loudness, that didnt make up for the overall sonic mess...just terrible! The other three were much MUCH harder to choose a ranking for. However, the biggest surprise for me was that the MFSL got beat. It was my go-to version for this album for a while. I only recently won the 25.8P version off of ebay so it was the new kid in the house. However, the warmth and overall sound quality of this version makes it my new fave. It is the closest I have heard this album get to vinyl and was a true wonder to behold. It is the loudest of the three (though nowhere near as loud as the 97 remaster) but that didnt hurt the overall presentation, rather it seemed only to enhance it. Now, I still prefer thee MFSL for "The Weapon" just because I love that verson without the vocal line and it is the original version, not the one that was eventually released in 1982. The MFSL is a close 2nd to the 25.8P and the US Atomic is very nice as well. The only downside for the Atomic is that is actually TOO quiet in my opinion and you really have to crank it up to hear any detail. Still, it does sound nice and it will remain in my collection, as will the horrid 97 remaster, if, for no other reason than to help show just how bad a BAD remaster can be! Well, there you go folks. I would say, if you ever get the chance to pick up the Japanese 25.8P do not hesitate as it is the definitive verions of this album. However, the MFSL is no slouch either, its just that it tends to be a tad pricey these days! Anyway, that was a quick and dirty review. If you want any more specific details, just ask! ENJOY!!!

QUOTE (thebernreuter @ Apr 25 2011, 02:14 PM) QUOTE (ak2112 @ Apr 14 2011, 09:52 PM) QUOTE (greg2112 @ Apr 14 2011, 06:54 AM) Ill take the 97 remaster...nice and loud. Thats exactly like you'll get it, nice and loud....and distorted. There is absolutely no distortion on the '97 remaster. You guys are nuts. Find me a vinyl copy with equal or greater signal to noise ratio as any CD version, equal or greater dynamic range, consistent fidelity from edge to center, equivalent or greater stereo separation to that of any CD version, and equal wear on both sides of the groove or no wear at all. Then, after I've fed my unicorn and watched a few episodes of the 4th season of Arrested Development, I'll listen to it, blindfolded, interchangeably with the '97 master, and the '97 master will always sound better, because in the digital vs. analog tractor pull, digital always wins. Except for Vapor Trails. I'm not sure what kind of mind altering substances you're using but all you need to do is look at a waveform of any track of the 97 remaster and you'll see it is brickwalled to shit. There are multiple sections, particularly on Tom Sawyer, where it goes to clipping. This sucker is loud and louder. There is NO dynamic range. Get a copy of the original US Atomic or better yet, the MFSL and you'll hear what real dynamic range sounds like. Your statement above is pure fantasy. You've been spending too much time hooked up to an iPod my friend. However, I do enjoy your posts as you have a fantastic sense of humor. I think we could have some very lively debates about music, so carry on please

The MFSL is THE definitive version of this album. The new DVD-A version isnt even high rez, its an upsampled 16 bit/44.1lHz master. No idea why they did this. Its not like it would have been that difficult to do this correctly. There are older albums that have been remastered to DVD-Audio that blow this albums sonics out of the water. Whats worse, repeated attempts by myself to contact Rich Chycki and management for the band to answer questions about the methods used to remaster this album have gone unanswered. They could just not want to be bothered but it also could look like they're trying to hide something. Why, I have no idea but they really screwed the pooch on this one and I have very little faith that the remainder of the remasters will be done any better. Look, I know all this audiophile stuff that I've been posting may come across as snooty but I really dont mean it to be so. I simply know that better quality control at all phases of the remastering process could have led to a much better sounding product and I dont understand why they didnt take the time to do so. I pray that they'll let Steven Wilson handle the next DVD-A release...that guy is a sonic genius!

One of the few songs I really like from T4E. Never understood why so many on here dont like it. The first line is classic : In a dogs life, a year is really more like seven. And all too soon, a canine will be chasing cars in doggie heaven". Hilarious.

QUOTE (thebernreuter @ Apr 24 2011, 10:56 AM) QUOTE (ak2112 @ Apr 13 2011, 03:23 PM) The main thing that irritates me about this release is that it's been advertised as a high Rez 24 bit/96kHz remaster when in fact it is not. It is an upsampled 16 bit/44.1kHz master. Now, many on here might not care about this kind of thing but myself and many others do since it is false advertising, bordering on fraud. It may be 5.1 folks, but it is not high Rez. Very sad. None of you guys are going to be able to hear the difference between 16/44.1 and 24/96 anyway, especially on a rock record. Oh really? I dont think so. I did a blind comparison between the new DVD-A 2 channel and my MFSL copy of Moving Pictures as well as a comparison between my redbook copy of Becks Sea Change and its 24bit/192kHz DVD-A companion and I could pick out each copy every time. If you listen to these albums a lot and on a good system, you can pick them out readily. At any rate, that wasnt the point of the post of mine you responded to anyway. My point was that we are not getting a truly high-rez product, rather it is an upsampled 24/96 release. Either way, it doesnt matter. The new Moving Pictures is fun to listen to in 5.1 but it doesnt come close to being a high-rez, high quality audio release.

I have only been able to listen to the whole album once. To me it is painfully bad...their worst album easily. Unfocused and bad need of editing. S&A is leaps and bounds better and more melodic.

QUOTE (2112freak @ Apr 19 2011, 01:31 AM) i didnt know there were sooooo many versions! is the MFSL version still available? Its out of print but is available on places like ebay....for a price. Some are asking ridiculous amounts of $$ for it but if you're patient you can get it for around $30 or so.

QUOTE (Show Don't Tell @ Apr 15 2011, 08:29 PM) ak2112 : Do you have the Canadian Anthem 1st Pressing CD of Moving Pictures? I'm actually really curious to how it sounds. My preferred version right now is the original France pressing, but being a Canadian, I'd like to hear this Canadian release (which has proven to be quite elusive)! I do indeed have the Canadian 1st pressing and it iss AWESOME! It is right up there with MFSL. I won it on ebay for a pretty good price so you should look on there frequently and I think you'll find a copy for sale. The Anthem Canadian has some wonderful dynamic range and a nice warm sound. I can tell you this much, it totally blows the new DVD-A version out of the water. That thing is a compressed, loud mess! BTW, how do you like the French pressing? I didnt even know there was one! There are a ton of versions of this album but I dont know how many of them are unique masterings.

QUOTE (Hear Again @ Apr 14 2011, 07:42 AM) From the liner notes......"Mastered by Andy VanDette at Masterdisk, New York." Rich Chycki mixed it. It was mastered elsewhere. Take Care My bad. You are 100% correct. Still, the DVD-A still sucks. Could have been 1000% better. I suspect most wont notice and will think its the best thing since sliced bread.

QUOTE (greg2112 @ Apr 14 2011, 06:54 AM) Ill take the 97 remaster...nice and loud. Thats exactly like you'll get it, nice and loud....and distorted.

MP was recorded in analog amd mixed/mastered digitally. Even though thats the case, this DVD-A falls FAR short of other DVD-A's of older albums that I own. Two that come to mind are the Eagles Hotel California and Fleetwood Macs Rumours, both of which pre-date Moving Pictures and both of which blow it out of the water in terms of audio quality. The more I listen to this new Moving Pictures, the more disappointed I feel. This is not a knock on Rush but I do feel like they need to get someone else other than Chycki to remaster their albums. Steve Wilson from Porcupine Tree comes to mind. All of PT's albums sound amazing on DVD-A and the remastering of King Crimsons albums that he did sound just awesome. This new MP is a major sonic bummer for me, though I hope all the new remasters come out in DVD-A...I just hope Rich Chycki isnt the one mastering them all, though I have a sickening feeling he will be

QUOTE (ioc @ Apr 13 2011, 04:13 PM) QUOTE (ak2112 @ Apr 13 2011, 03:23 PM)The main thing that irritates me about this release is that it's been advertised as a high Rez 24 bit/96kHz remaster when in fact it is not. It is an upsampled 16 bit/44.1kHz master. Now, many on here might not care about this kind of thing but myself and many others do since it is false advertising, bordering on fraud. It may be 5.1 folks, but it is not high Rez. Very sad. Woah, woah. Hold the phones. It's not 24/96??? Sources, I need sources. Please spill. Any music waveform software can show you frequency response (DVD audioextractor is one program). Anyway, I should clarify my statement. The new 5.1 mix is full 24/96 but not the stereo, which was upsampled. They clearly didn't care about the 2 channel which is a bummer but I understand since this was always touted as a 5.1 release.

The main thing that irritates me about this release is that it's been advertised as a high Rez 24 bit/96kHz remaster when in fact it is not. It is an upsampled 16 bit/44.1kHz master. Now, many on here might not care about this kind of thing but myself and many others do since it is false advertising, bordering on fraud. It may be 5.1 folks, but it is not high Rez. Very sad.

Absolutely. All that really matters is how good it sounds to YOU. Any views I've posted about it are my own personal opinions. shocking that some dislike my opinion so much that they find it necessary to be insulting about it. Pathetic.