Mr. Henry Gale

Really good album. I actually didn't listen to it for 2 weeks, and it made me like it more. It held strong. Easily much better than S&A, CP, T4E.

Considering how deep they are into their career, and that I didn't really care for S&A, this album is great! That said, I guess I see where OP is coming from. Is it really "great" - or is it only "great" because it's good "all things considered". I've thought about this quite a lot, and it's something I always ask myself once a band is deep into their career. At what point as a listener do you need to get realistic, and curve your expectations? And if you do start to curve your expectations, is the album only good, because you have lowered your standards/expectations for the band? At the same time, it seems unfair to me to compare this album to say Signals. But if you are trying to rate/weight this album in a general sense (trying to define whether it's good or not) - and thus compare it to the bands past work, and other works outside of the band, then I can't say I fault you for that. Honestly, trying to step away from all this though, I really do think this is a good album. Great? Not sure. I'm in the group of people that think the band has become a bit too comfortable with relying on the generic alt/heavy guitar riffs. I also don't think Peart has been that great of a lyricist in the past 10 + years (compared to his earlier lyrics). So if you are asking me if this album stands up there with the best of their work -probably not. Do most bands later works stand up with their best? No, not usually. I think the problem here is that we aren't talking about this from the perspective of being a critic, who's job is to define albums and place some kind of ranking among their peers in the medium based on the artistic merits of the album. We are talking about this from a perspective of a fan. A fan base. Fans don't really view albums like that. They have way too much personal investment into the band, and their music. And hell, most of the fans have grown old with the band! So I always find this a bit difficult. But I guess for me, it all just comes down to how the album makes me feel. Do you feel good listening to it? Does the album evoke some kind of emotion? Do you just enjoy the music on a very basic level? The melodies, the sound? And if it does, then all the above is non-sense. You aren't a critic. It's not your job to view albums that way. But if you are the kind of fan that has to rank, and has to put technical perspectives on each record, well, it is what it is. Then of course you are going to compare this album to other things. I guess what I would ask you though, is the album not being able to match an earlier sound what makes you dislike it? Or not like it as much? Or are you just saying the album on its own two legs, just doesn't do anything for you?

I like Hyden (he writes for AV Club) but lol his stand out track is "Wish Them Well" Da fook?

QUOTE (Todem @ Jun 14 2012, 04:37 PM) I respectfully and completely disagree with just about everything you wrote. It's how you feel. And I respect that. But these guy's passion is oozing from all their music. The only time I felt like they were tired was on T4E. And I like that album too. Vapor Trails despite it's massive production issues may be one of their most passion filled record ever. You may not connect with the music.....but the passion is so very up front. Snakes and Arrows.....they really wrote some amazing tunes on that one as well and production wise was very tight. CA......I am feeling and hearing a band stretching out again, taking chances on many tracks and throwing caution to the wind and f***ing jamming big time. So.....different strokes for different folks. Peace. Agree with you for the most part. But I still find S&A to be a turd.

QUOTE (ThinkingBig @ Jun 14 2012, 06:17 PM) Here's what I think of the self-proclaimed "expert" audiophiles who think they know better than RUSH and their studio team. http://i.imgur.com/a1ZES.gif Yeah okay buddy. Because Rush are gods who not capable of making mistakes - ever. And don't come back with that crap excuse "they are professionals who have been doing this for 30+ years" - so what. Plenty of long time bands have given into the poor industry practices of the last 15 years. I respect your opinion that you have no issue with the sound of this album. Why can't you respect that others have an opinion this album has some sound issues?

Holy jeebus, this sounds great. As someone that had a lot of issues with the bass (especially the Taurus pedals) on my set up, this sounds a lot nicer with my subwoofer. Original release was just way too harsh in the bass (drove my ears nuts).

QUOTE (Rush Cocky @ Jun 13 2012, 09:19 AM) QUOTE (Mr. Henry Gale @ Jun 13 2012, 01:15 PM) So why are we listening to a crappier version of what was actually recorded? How do you KNOW that this statement is true? Again, I cannot see how such a statement is not 100% conjecture. Many seem to be imagining this perfect mix exists, when it's entirely conceivable that it does not. And I agree 100% with the OP: this album is the best Rush album in at least 25 years, I don't give a damn what the trolls think. They put it all together (finally) in this offering. Soak it in people, this is greatness on display. If you read my past posts, I'm not a troll. Lol in fact, I actually like Clockwork Angels a lot (not saying if you don't you are a troll). But the point is, I don't even think the mix is that big of an issue. But I also don't think it's great either. But to answer your question. I was referring to the original recording previous to the mixing/mastering. Since I do not like the way this album is mixed/mastered - it's of my opinion we are listening to a crappier version of the album, since this is not the original files before all of that stuff is done. But you are right, it's a big assumption to make, seeing as none of us will ever get to hear what it sounded like before the final stages. Just my opinion though. If you don't agree with it, that's totally cool. But FYI just because you don't agree with someone, doesn't make them a troll.

One thing else I would like to throw out there (this will be my last post. Getting sick of talking about this stuff, especially since most don't seem to care. Or are getting annoyed by us talking about it). But, everyone has unique hearing. Some have more sensitive hearing than others. So that's something else to factor into all of this. I still strongly believe this is not a great mix. Especially if you compare it to actual great mixes. But I also get that not everyone has the same hearing, or even cares about this sort of thing. So yeah, that is all.

QUOTE (Rushman14 @ Jun 13 2012, 09:17 AM) Well it's been a sad day for the music industry for the last 10 years, but Rush isnt sweating my nitpicks of the mix. in case I haven't made it clear I STILL LOVE THE ALBUM. This! Clockwork Angels is one of my favorite releases from this band. Enjoying the shit out of it.

QUOTE (losingit2k @ Jun 13 2012, 09:14 AM) We used to listen to RUSH for their musicianship, their composition, their lyrics, their passion towards playing. Now it seems we care more about the sound and quality of the recording than the recording itself. Rush has handed us one of the best albums since the early 80's and we seemed more consumed about the mixing and mastering of the project than the project itself. Give yourself a break from yourselves and allow yourself to soak in the brilliance of this album! It has so much more to offer other than the sound. Which isn't all that bad at all! If anything, I think it's sad that people don't care about it. I mean you are right - it is about the music. So why are we listening to a crappier version of what was actually recorded? Shouldn't we get to hear all the hard work the boys put into creating this album in its purest form? Also, no one is forcing anyone to read threads about this sort of thing. If you don't think the album has any problems (technically speaking) then just don't read the threads. Either way, technical complaints aside - this album is awesome.

Bought the CD/Vinyl and also bought the digital version on Amazon for $6.99. I bought the last one because why not? It's only $6.99 and it helps go towards their sales. I feel like at the VERY LEAST (if you downloaded this for free) you can buy the digital Amazon version to show support.

QUOTE (Mr. Henry Gale @ Jun 13 2012, 08:51 AM) QUOTE (marblesmike @ Jun 13 2012, 08:47 AM) The reason so much contemporary music is mixed/mastered so poorly is because most people don't listen to it dedicated settings (IE hi-fi system vs on an ipod on a train, etc) and therefore can't tell the difference. Great post - and spot on. I guess maybe it is a moot point to talk about this stuff. 99% of everyone won't care about this or be able to hear what we are talking about. =/ But I still think even on an iPod or standard system, this album could have sounded better (more clear etc.). But that's just me though.

QUOTE (marblesmike @ Jun 13 2012, 08:47 AM) QUOTE (Mr. Henry Gale @ Jun 13 2012, 12:40 PM) My thing is, I don't think Clockwork Angels sounds bad. Let me make that clear. In fact, I think most will not notice any issues, because they aren't playing this out of a system that has dedicated power for bass - or a system that is beyond just your standard stereo unit (ie. Laptop, or basic stereo set up). We were talking about this in another thread when discussing FLAC/LOSSLESS vs. MP3. FLAC/Lossless (or CD) is kind of a moot point for a lot of people, because most people don't have the systems to really tap into the full quality of these. So let's say you download a LOSSLESS copy of CA and are playing it through laptop speakers (or through basic headphones). You literally would not be able to tell the difference between the CD/LOSSLESS and V0 (or 320) mp3 rip. The same goes for those that put losssless on their iPod. So there is a certain level of human hearing that just can't tell the difference - especially when you don't have the power to fully juice up the lossless source. Conversely, if you are playing CA (CD) in a car stereo, or again a basic CD unit, you wouldn't be able to tell the difference if you plugged in your iPod or had a 320 (or V0) MP3 version playing through those systems. So the point I'm arriving at is - the average listener (the basic consumer) is not going to have these issues. But the reason I complain about this (and not because I'm a hardcore audiophile. I do care about sound, but I'm not THAT batshit crazy like those people can be) - is because I do not think just because the album sounds competent (and isn't awful like VT with clipping and distortion) - it means it was mixed great. I do not think this can be objectively true, if you look at past albums (from Rush or other bands) that sound infinitely better. So do I think CA is unlistenable? No. Of course not. Do I think it sounds good (what really matters is the music itself, and what they wrote) - yes. But I don't think we can say this is a great mix. Because it's not true. The bass really is too loud and bloated in spots. And there are some other little nitpicks I have, but won't get into. And my thing is - there is no reason for any of this. It's not like the older you get, the less capable you are of mixing/mastering something. It's not like playing an instrument, where you can slow down, because your technical playing is no longer at its peak. These are studio practices, and there is no excuse for why so many producers mix this stuff this loud. I honestly ask anyone to A/B CA to any Signals for instance, and tell me CA sounds great. It will sound bloated and loud - whereas Signals will sound much more crisp and clear (a clear separation and representation of the instruments and vocals). Awesome post. You put it more eloquently than I could have. Except, you can tell the difference between lossless vs mp3 in the car or on a portable device--you just need high end speakers or headphones to do so. I have Infinities in my car and I can tell the difference between mp3 and lossless, but before I got those speakers and in other people's cars the difference was less earth shattering. The reason so much contemporary music is mixed/mastered so poorly is because most people don't listen to it dedicated settings (IE hi-fi system vs on an ipod on a train, etc) and therefore can't tell the difference. True. I just assume that your average person doesn't have nice speakers in something like a car. So I just go off the "basic" units. If that makes sense. I just assume most are using what comes standard. I haven't done anything to my Honda for instance (all my audio purchase are for my home) - so there is no way I could tell the difference between a CD or 320 digital (if I plugged my iPhone directly in). Then again, I'll be honest and say it's not something I've tested out extensively. So maybe that part of my post was a bit of an overstatement. I have compared on my home stereo unit though (and laptop).

QUOTE (malnar @ Jun 13 2012, 08:29 AM) QUOTE (Mr. Henry Gale @ Jun 13 2012, 11:13 AM) QUOTE (marblesmike @ Jun 13 2012, 08:11 AM) QUOTE (Mr. Henry Gale @ Jun 13 2012, 12:09 PM) My biggest gripe with this album - is just the bass. I really do feel it's a bit muddy/bloated in spots. Especially if you have a subwoofer and a really nice set up. Maybe it's not as noticeable if you are using a laptop, or driving in the car. But if you have a nice set up, the bass is really overpowering and annoying in spots - as it will bleed into the vocals in a couple spots. But outside of that boomy bass, I don't really have any issues with how this album sound. Some have said the vocals sound too low in the mix, but I think everything else (instruments, vocals) all sound more than fine. True. It's hard to listen to in my car (even my vinyl rip) because of my sub. I have a feeling most people listening to this are just listening on basic stereo units. So they aren't hearing the full power of the music (I know that sounds cheesy). But seriously, if you have a sub and the proper set up, you start to notice how some albums are way too loud. I just had to turn my subwoofer to - 10 to even it out. What's really annoying is, not every song has this problem (and sometimes the boomy bass just comes in certain spots, so not through out the entire song). So you would have to keep adjusting your settings. Just too much hassle. I just basically turn off my subwoofer when listening to this album. The boomy bass you're hearing is the taurus pedals utilized sporadically throughout the album. I'm not very good at explaining technical stuff - so I often refer to it as "stuff".

My thing is, I don't think Clockwork Angels sounds bad. Let me make that clear. In fact, I think most will not notice any issues, because they aren't playing this out of a system that has dedicated power for bass - or a system that is beyond just your standard stereo unit (ie. Laptop, or basic stereo set up). We were talking about this in another thread when discussing FLAC/LOSSLESS vs. MP3. FLAC/Lossless (or CD) is kind of a moot point for a lot of people, because most people don't have the systems to really tap into the full quality of these. So let's say you download a LOSSLESS copy of CA and are playing it through laptop speakers (or through basic headphones). You literally would not be able to tell the difference between the CD/LOSSLESS and V0 (or 320) mp3 rip. The same goes for those that put losssless on their iPod. So there is a certain level of human hearing that just can't tell the difference - especially when you don't have the power to fully juice up the lossless source. Conversely, if you are playing CA (CD) in a car stereo, or again a basic CD unit, you wouldn't be able to tell the difference if you plugged in your iPod or had a 320 (or V0) MP3 version playing through those systems. So the point I'm arriving at is - the average listener (the basic consumer) is not going to have these issues. But the reason I complain about this (and not because I'm a hardcore audiophile. I do care about sound, but I'm not THAT batshit crazy like those people can be) - is because I do not think just because the album sounds competent (and isn't awful like VT with clipping and distortion) - it means it was mixed great. I do not think this can be objectively true, if you look at past albums (from Rush or other bands) that sound infinitely better. So do I think CA is unlistenable? No. Of course not. Do I think it sounds good (what really matters is the music itself, and what they wrote) - yes. But I don't think we can say this is a great mix. Because it's not true. The bass really is too loud and bloated in spots. And there are some other little nitpicks I have, but won't get into. And my thing is - there is no reason for any of this. It's not like the older you get, the less capable you are of mixing/mastering something. It's not like playing an instrument, where you can slow down, because your technical playing is no longer at its peak. These are studio practices, and there is no excuse for why so many producers mix this stuff this loud. I honestly ask anyone to A/B CA to Signals for instance, and tell me CA sounds great. It will sound bloated and loud - whereas Signals will sound much more crisp and clear (a clear separation and representation of the instruments and vocals).

Yes, it certainly does. But I'm okay with it. It's not awful, or as bad as VT (not even close). And it's also not as bad as a lot of modern rock albums. Chances are, most won't even notice the issues. But as someone that has a really nice stereo system w/ a subwoofer, this albums bass is way too loud in spots. It becomes boomy/bloated/muddy - and will even bleed into the vocal mix. If you are playing this out of a basic unit (like a laptop, or a system without bass power) - then you probably won't notice it. I think it's time we stop saying this a great mix though. It might be competent to you, but it's not "great" when compared to their past albums. And yes, I see nothing wrong with comparing this to past albums. Mastering/mixing has nothing to do with getting older (like technical skills do). There is no excuse for them mixing this shit so loud.

QUOTE (ReflectedLight @ Jun 13 2012, 08:16 AM) anyone else listening on a ihome mini reachargeable speaker? inb4 someone recorded this on casette. Listening through a tape deck.

QUOTE (marblesmike @ Jun 13 2012, 08:11 AM) QUOTE (Mr. Henry Gale @ Jun 13 2012, 12:09 PM) My biggest gripe with this album - is just the bass. I really do feel it's a bit muddy/bloated in spots. Especially if you have a subwoofer and a really nice set up. Maybe it's not as noticeable if you are using a laptop, or driving in the car. But if you have a nice set up, the bass is really overpowering and annoying in spots - as it will bleed into the vocals in a couple spots. But outside of that boomy bass, I don't really have any issues with how this album sound. Some have said the vocals sound too low in the mix, but I think everything else (instruments, vocals) all sound more than fine. True. It's hard to listen to in my car (even my vinyl rip) because of my sub. I have a feeling most people listening to this are just listening on basic stereo units. So they aren't hearing the full power of the music (I know that sounds cheesy). But seriously, if you have a sub and the proper set up, you start to notice how some albums are way too loud. I just had to turn my subwoofer to - 10 to even it out. What's really annoying is, not every song has this problem (and sometimes the boomy bass just comes in certain spots, so not through out the entire song). So you would have to keep adjusting your settings. Just too much hassle. I just basically turn off my subwoofer when listening to this album.

QUOTE (ReflectedLight @ Jun 13 2012, 08:10 AM) QUOTE (tangy @ Jun 13 2012, 11:08 AM) read the liner notes, grundman did not do the mastering although it was done at his studio....... so basically grundman is off the hook and this thread means nothing. OP could change it to - whoever did the mastering. Because, while he's off the hook, doesn't change the fact that this could have been mastered better.

My biggest gripe with this album - is just the bass. I really do feel it's a bit muddy/bloated in spots. Especially if you have a subwoofer and a really nice set up. Maybe it's not as noticeable if you are using a laptop, or driving in the car. But if you have a nice set up, the bass is really overpowering and annoying in parts - as it will bleed into the vocals in a couple spots. But outside of that boomy bass, I don't really have any issues with how this album sounds. Some have said the vocals sound too low in the mix, but I think everything else (instruments, vocals) all sound more than fine.

Great interview. Like I said, regardless what you think of Billy Corgan - he's a really intelligent guy that holds a good conversation. Glad he was the one to interview them.

QUOTE (GUP1771 @ Jun 12 2012, 05:12 PM) QUOTE (Mr. Henry Gale @ Jun 12 2012, 08:08 PM) QUOTE (RushIslander @ Jun 12 2012, 05:04 PM) Is this a joke thread? It seems like a joke that people are actually defending the album as sounding great. Definitely. I actually enjoy this album, and am not even bothered by the mastering. But how anyone can say the album sounds "great" is beyond me. Seems peoples standards for good sounding albums has really gone down. I never said it sounds amazing, but I don't get why people are screaming bloody murder and calling for the guy who mastered it to be hung. Saying that it sounds "dreadful" is just crazy and blowing something out of proportion. EDIT: If you argue it's a joke that people are arguing people who think it's "great", shouldn't the same be said for those who say vice versa? Isn't it a joke how people are blowing it out of proportion using words "dreadful"? We are on the same page then. Sorry if my posts came out sounding super defensive. I actually don't have an issue with CA's mastering (the way I have an issue with VT). I can listen to this album and enjoy it. I just kind of get irritated that people say it's "great' mastering. And as much as some of you get annoyed by people complaining about this stuff - I actually wish more people WOULD complain, so that they would stop mixing and mastering shit so loud. But alas, that won't ever happen. It's always going to be the minority that complains, and the rest not caring. But I think that's really unfortunate. Because people don't realize that they aren't getting the best sounding version of the album that they could have. I can't think of any other art medium, where the art is purposely degraded on a mass level (as a common practice) - and where no one does anything about it. It's absolutely insane to me. Mostly because it's audio (sound) - something a lot easier to tweak without people getting upset. But imagine if movies had a practice where it made the film look worse (no one say 3D i'll smack you lol) - you better believe more people would notice and complain (as visual is obviously more upfront than audio).

I saw someone on what.cd comment about this... QUOTE HDTracks released this with 05 Carnies and 06 Halo Effect's titles swapped, and wait until you see how loud they made it. You'll be able to hang your Rush posters on that brick wall. And you would think they'd know the importance of leading zeros in track numbers, seeing that their sole business is the distribution of numbered audio files. Botched. But that sounds more like a complaint of the ID tags. The loudness of the album is going to be the case regardless. So this really tells us nothing. Kind of curious about this as well. Hopefully some people on TRF post impressions.

QUOTE (RushIslander @ Jun 12 2012, 05:04 PM) Is this a joke thread? It seems like a joke that people are actually defending the album as sounding great. Definitely. I actually enjoy this album, and am not even bothered by the mastering. But how anyone can say the album sounds "great" is beyond me. Seems peoples standards for good sounding albums has really gone down.

QUOTE (Snaked @ Jun 12 2012, 04:47 PM) RUSH could release an album that sounds like The Nightfly and people on these forums would spout off nonsense like "zOMG! It's got teh brIckwAllzzzz!" Relax people.. it's fine. Wonder if anyone tried defending VT when it first came out. What you guys talking about, this shit sounds great.