CygnusX-1Bk2

No I haven't actually looked at the waveform but describing what it looks like when viewed. I don't have to see it to hear it. Launch said that EQing improved the sound a little to his taste which is different than claiming it "fixes" the problem. It made it more listenable to him. He also likes things brighter than I do which is also a taste thing. Overcompression is occurring regardless of what anyone here says about it. You can disagree all you like but this album is overcompressed, more so than S&A but not as much as VT. It does things to the mix that weakens the overall aesthetic. I don't need to see a waveform to hear it.

QUOTE (Lerxster @ Jun 19 2012, 11:07 AM) It's not overcompressed. Just turn the bass down a hair. Adjust your sub down a bit. Fiddle with the sliders. Turn a knob. It's actually not that bad. There's a thread or three here that intelligently speak to this. Yes it is overcompressed and all the EQing in the world will not rectify it.

QUOTE (EveryNerveAware @ Jun 19 2012, 11:18 AM) Pay the $19.99 for the high definition FLAC lossless master copy of the LP if you are that much of an audiophile. That will only make a higher resolution of a crappy waveform. It doesn't work that way.

There is no implication. The thing is over compressed. Do people not know what this means? Apparently so. The thing about digital recording is that is capable of a wider dynamic range than analog recording with less signal to noise ratio. What this means is that the span from the quietest level to the loudest level is significantly wider than that of analog recording which also has a higher signal to noise ratio. One reason audio compression developed was to compensate for the inherent noise level of tape so the "noise floor" (the quietest level) was raised, but in order to do that the highest level must be reduced and the over all level made up for. So what is happening in the quietest point is being raised up while the loudest level is being reduced and thus the signal is compressed. These days this is not as necessary yet in order to make music seem louder a lot of compression is applied to be competitive with other music in the marketplace. The biggest problem is the damage done to the stereo image and frequencies when over compression occurs, or worse as in the case of VT the transients are essentially destroyed (loud peaks, such as snare and bass drum). When looking at an over compressed waveform it begins to resemble a brick instead of what a waveform should appear and sonically this is not good. Experienced ears hear this immediately and there is no getting around it.

QUOTE (Gedneil Alpeart @ Jun 18 2012, 05:07 PM) QUOTE (Lost In Xanadu @ Jun 18 2012, 05:56 PM) A minor observation that his 'F's sound very wet is nit picking? Wow! Yeah it is....to devote a whole thread to it.....it's more funny to me than anything else...not a bother....it's about as minor of an observation as you can get.... Not trying to be a jerk.... Let's start a thread about Alex's high E string!

Caress of Steel, 2112, Farewell to Kings

F's and S's have been that way for a while, whenever he got his teeth fixed. I notice it more in interviews but S&A and CA have a bunch of denture "enhanced" consonants. As someone with a bridge on my front teeth (long stories) I can attest to how difficult it was to relearn the feel of one's teeth while talking and singing. I have had this thing for years now and I still feel like I have to compensate for certain things. I trip over some things if I'm talking too fast. Damned teeth!

Yeah I want whatever drugs people are on who think this is better than Hemispheres, or even Signals. Seriously?

Really? LP refers to Long Play. It was a term used to describe double sided 12" vinyl releases and was the longest available consumer recording available until cassette tape and 8 track and later the standard CD (650 Mb) which topped out around 60 minutes then the 700 Mb CD allotted up to 74 minutes. Each side of an LP could have just over 20 minutes if lathed well. LPs are played back at 33 1/3 RPM. EP was Extended Play and generally meant 3-5 songs on a 12" vinyl disc but played at 45 RPM instead of 33 1/3. There were some exceptions. A 7" 45 RPM disc was referred to as a Single or a 45. The term Album means a collection of items and in the case of music it means a collection of songs so an EP can be an album without regard to length. LP, EP and 45 are terms that really do not apply anymore. However Singles are truly singles now with the advent of downloadable music. iPods are essentially Albums of multiple artists and the term Library is most applicable because of how much capacity is available. I mean if you have a photo album with only 2 or 3 three pictures it is still a photo album.

QUOTE (pedro2112 @ Jun 17 2012, 02:59 PM) QUOTE (CygnusX-1Bk2 @ Jun 17 2012, 02:51 PM) Pedro! My long, lost friend! How goes it? Not bad.. I was thinking of you yesterday when I was listening to CA on the headphones... I think a bunch of the old Vegas crowd is saving up our funds to have a big meetup at the Vegas show next summer on the second leg. It would be awesome if you could make it! That would be awesome, plus I can probably swing it this time. It's been too long!

Definitely Not better than: Hemispheres Permanent Waves Moving Pictures A Farewell To Kings 2112 Signals Caress of Steel Snakes and Arrows Grace Under Pressure Power Windows Presto Counterparts Might be better than: Fly By Night Rush Test For Echo Vapor Trails Roll The Bones Definitely better than : Hold Your Fire Feedback

Pedro! My long, lost friend! How goes it?

Sorry to disagree but it's cheezy.

Every time I read one of your posts I realize how much we have in common my friend. You going to Maiden at Shoreline? (as I hijack the thread a little)

QUOTE (ThinkingBig @ Jun 15 2012, 04:34 PM) Another f-ing audiophile thread... http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-nFIjc2-NDAc/Tw4FqQuNNaI/AAAAAAAAAlU/OhuivJ7u6xc/s1600/worf-startrek-facepalm.gif If we just pretend to agree with these audio "experts" that come out of the woodwork, will they go away? Out of the woodwork? Dude, I am a moderator here... Of the audio gear section. Is it too much to ask for a good sounding album? In this day and age apparently so. The material would sink in much better if it were slightly more listenable. I dare anyone who listens to CA and likes it listen to any non Rush recording from 1979 or before and tell me which sounds better. If you say CA then you are "drinking the Kool-Aid" and are not listening with your ears.

I think CA is closer to TFE, some where in the middle. I am with Xanadoood on this one. 2112-Power Windows would be their pinnacle (sorry, I'm from the 70's and 80's). S&A is stronger than everything since Presto. I would rank Presto, CP and S&A very closely and higher up the list, maybe even above FBN for me personally. They still rock, but they sound like they are reaching back rather than moving forward. A "midland" Rush album is still a cut above other bands' "A" material.

Hemispheres is one of the greatest pieces of music ever written. Can't say that about CA.

Also with regard to Jazz there is much less overdubbing going on, if at all in many cases. Not sure about MM's album. I've seen him live and he is more progressive than a lot of Jazz guys. Generally speaking many Jazz recordings are played as a unit live. They may touch a bad phrase after the fact but generally what you hear was a moment in time where rock and pop records are much more manufactured with isolated instruments played in different studios. There is a lot to be said for recording a band as a unit. The vibe will almost always be better. If you recall the hoopla surrounding S&A Alex made mention several times of "recording from the floor" meaning the three of them in the room together playing at once. Usually with rock records this is done to get drum tracks and then overdub all the other stuff but I think much of the S&A basic tracks were used on the final album. What happens when recording isolated players as opposed to a whole band engineers end up trying to shoehorn instruments together into a mix. When you record a band playing all at once you can get a mix pretty close to final from the start.

Not me. I am not a fan of PT.

QUOTE (Snaked @ Jun 14 2012, 11:11 AM) QUOTE (Rushman14 @ Jun 14 2012, 01:47 PM) I think the reason for the loudness war might be due to the invention of the ipod. Everyone is trying to make sure their song volumes arent lacking compared to others. The loudness wars started long before the invent of the iPod. Indeed it did. This has been going on for decades. Listen to some records. Actual vinyl records and you can hear all kinds of compression there as well. It just isn;t as grating as digital compression.

As someone who earns a living as an audio person I can say that part of it is the way things are recorded, part of it is mixing less than stellar recordings and finally part is mastering for iPods. I have recently been a part of an audio engineering forum that has turned me around many degrees where recording is concerned. I have been working in the digital domain since the 90's and with music especially (sound effects are my main trade) I have struggled to come close digitally to even poorly recorded analog recordings I have done on cassette 4 track. The main culprit is the digital medium itself. We've had discussions like this in the MMM section (where I moderate for some of you who don't recognize me). Digital recording is inherently flawed because of how it works, especially when all of humanity is used to hearing analog recordings. This is a fundamental recording issue but it effects things that are frequency dependent like EQ and modulation effects (phase, flange, chorus etc; oh and drums and cymbals and guitars...) because not all frequencies are "created equal" due to fixed sample rates. Higher frequencies lose out the lower the sample rate while lower frequencies are always represented much more closely t their analog equivalent. So when you play back something that wasn't recorded as well as we are used to hearing, then mixing it with other "inferior" recorded material, then smashing it to be as loud as possible there is little wonder why we don't like what we're hearing. There will always be a new technological "advances" that will take us to the next tier. Neil Young is working on a new digital format that will allegedly deal with some of this, but I will believe when I hear it.

I love you Earl! I am pretty much right there with you. It doesn't suck, but it's not near as strong as S&A in my opinion as well. Maybe it's just us Bay Areans...

QUOTE (aharden @ Jun 15 2012, 08:13 AM) @rushtheband just posted a link to the HD Tracks 24/96 "Audiophile" version of Clockwork Angels: HD Tracks - Clockwork Angels. It's $20 and I'm tempted, but I won't touch these unless they've been mastered with more headroom than the CD. If anyone here makes the plunge, could you please scan the FLACs with a player like Foobar2000 and post the ReplayGain values? There is automatically more headroom by virtue of being 24 bit. Bit depth determines dynamic range so there are 8 more bits of dynamic range to play with. Why wasn't the hi res version available as the fanpack is what I want to know!

QUOTE (launchpad67a @ Jun 15 2012, 06:15 AM) One observation I've noticed is, this album sounds great at low to mid volumes, but becomes rough at loud volumes. This is something that none of us can fix.... I was listening on my way to work this morning at a "lower" volume and must admit it sounded much better than my usual "enjoyment" volume. Especially where the drums are concerned but also with guitar definition. Mix issues. Has anyone else gotten Sectors? I was looking forward to the surround mixes but was a little let down by them. Part of it is the source, especially with Fly By Night. I wonder where Rich is mixing these projects...

The line "surrounds me like a cage" make me cringe. Any lyric that says one thing is like another, which is my biggest issue with HYF. So many "like" things on that album. Tell me what something is, not what it's like.