marblesmike

QUOTE (ReflectedLight @ Jun 13 2012, 12:10 PM) 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. As I've said multiple times in this thread.

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.

QUOTE (losingit2k @ Jun 13 2012, 11:46 AM) QUOTE (marblesmike @ Jun 13 2012, 10:31 AM) QUOTE (losingit2k @ Jun 13 2012, 11:25 AM) QUOTE (marblesmike @ Jun 13 2012, 08:45 AM) QUOTE (losingit2k @ Jun 13 2012, 09:29 AM) QUOTE (The Mighty Dudad @ Jun 13 2012, 08:00 AM) I am not an audiophile, nor do I care to be one (IMO they seem to spend more time looking for flaws than enjoying the music). On my decent but far from spectacular home system, Clockwork Angels sounds great! That's my point exactly. They are more consumed with finding cracks in the armor than actually enjoying it for all its great qualitites. I'm fed up with it! It's time to call it for what it is: A systematic disruption of Modern RUSH! While I admire your enthusiasm (I don't think I've ever seen anyone use exclamation points as vigorously as you do!!!!!!!!) you need to realize that some people try to be objective, even about their favorite bands. I love Rush, I have all their albums, dvds, blu-rays, etc, and have seen them more times than any other band. However, I'm allowed to be disappointed with a FACET of their new album. It doesn't make me any less of a fan than you. I love the material, and think it is the most consistent effort they've done in years, which makes it even more disappointing to me that the sound quality of this album isn't up to par with some of the 80s output. This is a legitimate gripe, and it has the numbers and algorithms behind it to support it. It deserves to be better. With that being said, if you like the way it sounds and don't have any complaints, then great, I'm happy for you and slightly envious that you haven't been cursed with ears as sensitive as mine. But don't belittle me and others who want to objectively discuss something. You're entitled to your opinion that CA sounds great, and I'm entitled to mine. If this is being a troll, then so be, I'll sit under my bridge and be a troll. Oh, and to be honest, I think most people who are less than happy with the sonics of CA have said they love the material. So I don't know why some people are getting their thongs all up in a bunch. Clockwork Angels sounds spectacular and I would compare my hearing to yours any day of the week! I don't need any algorithms to know that this is RUSH finest effort since the early 80's! Being musically great and sonically great are two separate things. So you think CA SOUNDS better than CP, or HYF, or PoW? Out of those three the only one that you can really compare it too is CP. The other two album HYF and PW. have way to many keyboards which alters the sound, so I'm not comparing it to those. Apples and Apples and Oranges and Oranges. Now that said the production of CP is cleaner because its not as busy as CA. There much more in CA musically and sonically than in CP. CP was more stripped down musically so there much more room for spacing between the instruments. Regardles, I usually compare it to what just came before and in my opinion it sounds as good if not better than S & A! Thats enough for me. When it comes to sound, as long as it's not Vapor Trails its fine. If you want to Nick-pick and use algorithms And Piu36 explosive modulators to determine how an album sounds go right ahead. I'll stay hear enjoying the wonder and amazement that is Clockwork Angels. There's no reasoning with you. I'm talking about the production, mixing, engineering; I'm not talking about whether the album has more keyboard-oriented songwriting. Regardless, if you think CA sonically sounds better than any of those aforementioned albums then I salute you and your ears.

QUOTE (losingit2k @ Jun 13 2012, 11:25 AM) QUOTE (marblesmike @ Jun 13 2012, 08:45 AM) QUOTE (losingit2k @ Jun 13 2012, 09:29 AM) QUOTE (The Mighty Dudad @ Jun 13 2012, 08:00 AM) I am not an audiophile, nor do I care to be one (IMO they seem to spend more time looking for flaws than enjoying the music). On my decent but far from spectacular home system, Clockwork Angels sounds great! That's my point exactly. They are more consumed with finding cracks in the armor than actually enjoying it for all its great qualitites. I'm fed up with it! It's time to call it for what it is: A systematic disruption of Modern RUSH! While I admire your enthusiasm (I don't think I've ever seen anyone use exclamation points as vigorously as you do!!!!!!!!) you need to realize that some people try to be objective, even about their favorite bands. I love Rush, I have all their albums, dvds, blu-rays, etc, and have seen them more times than any other band. However, I'm allowed to be disappointed with a FACET of their new album. It doesn't make me any less of a fan than you. I love the material, and think it is the most consistent effort they've done in years, which makes it even more disappointing to me that the sound quality of this album isn't up to par with some of the 80s output. This is a legitimate gripe, and it has the numbers and algorithms behind it to support it. It deserves to be better. With that being said, if you like the way it sounds and don't have any complaints, then great, I'm happy for you and slightly envious that you haven't been cursed with ears as sensitive as mine. But don't belittle me and others who want to objectively discuss something. You're entitled to your opinion that CA sounds great, and I'm entitled to mine. If this is being a troll, then so be, I'll sit under my bridge and be a troll. Oh, and to be honest, I think most people who are less than happy with the sonics of CA have said they love the material. So I don't know why some people are getting their thongs all up in a bunch. Clockwork Angels sounds spectacular and I would compare my hearing to yours any day of the week! I don't need any algorithms to know that this is RUSH finest effort since the early 80's! Being musically great and sonically great are two separate things. So you think CA SOUNDS better than CP, or HYF, or PoW?

QUOTE (Lost In Xanadu @ Jun 13 2012, 09:54 AM) QUOTE (Merely Space @ Jun 13 2012, 08:50 AM) QUOTE (EmotionDetector @ Jun 13 2012, 08:45 AM) QUOTE (losingit2k @ Jun 13 2012, 09:14 AM) QUOTE (Merely Space @ Jun 13 2012, 07:55 AM) QUOTE (losingit2k @ Jun 13 2012, 07:52 AM) QUOTE (BigBob @ Jun 13 2012, 07:43 AM) It seems like there are a lot topics and discussions talking about trolls and such as apposed to the new album and such. BTW I think Clockwork Angels is awesome! I'm liking the whole sound and vibe off the album. Its an extremely great album! I just gave the trolls a place to congregate and they flocked here like flies to a zapper! You think they would have avoided this thread like the plague, but nope. I guess they just couldn't help themselves! They are so predictable and all their arguements are falling on def ears with Clockwork Angles. Cause we know it awesome! There's no bringing down or systematic destruction of this valient effort by the guys! Dude, I appreciate your enthusiasm for the new album. But you're being kind of an asshole to people who simply have a different opinion than you. You are labeling people as trolls who aren't. That ain't cool. I haven't labeled anyone or called them an @sswhole. They have done it to themselves by attempting to bring down one of rush's best efforts since the early 80's. This only tells me only one thing, they are out to neglect or destroy anything the boys have produced as of late. I saw it with S & A and now with Clockwork Angels. They come out in droves when ever there's a new album. Why? I really don't know and honestly I don't care! All I know is that this is an extremely great RUSH album and I will defend it with all my heart and soul! I do care about contrasting points of views if they're valid. But when you come out with terms like dreadful, meandering, garbage, boring, uninspiring concerning this incredible album upon its release, then I do feel there's something rotten with the whole thing. So if you want to call me an A-whole for that, than so be it! I Wish you Well! Dude...see, you did it again: I haven't labeled anyone or called them an @sswhole. They have done it to themselves by attempting to bring down one of rush's best efforts since the early 80's. Really? So, if you're not a fan of one album, then you're an 'asshole'?Again, YOU might think this way. It's great that you love CA that much. I'm happy for you. Hell, I'm loving CA a ton too. It's awesome...haven't been able to stop listening to it. But with every album, especially new ones, it's possible that others won't share the same opinion. I'm a huge fan of S&A, and I've seen others shit all over it. To be honest, even as a fan, I can see why some might not like it as much. It's mellow in many spots...it's different. I LOVE songs like Neurotica and Virtuality that get absolutely shit on all the freakin' time. I'm not going to about it...or label all of you 'trolls'. I'm not trying to bring anybody back into this, or defending anyone, but I've seen Trenken himself confirm that he was enjoying this album, and I believe he even stated that it was one of their best albums since the late 80's. So what if he doesn't think Ged's voice is holding up? Big deal. There are in fact, obvious trolls on message boards. I remember seeing them come out in flocks during the S&A release...but not everyone who simply doesn't love every second of CA should be considered a 'troll'. That's an unfair assessment in my eyes. As Rush fans, I'd think we are better than that IMO. Glad I wasn't the only one that felt like that, I stopped coming into this subforum because I simply couldn't take the "Rah Rah" BS anymore. Let people have their own opinions. Rah rah! I agree with you. This is what I said to LosingIt2k in the Grundman thread: QUOTE While I admire your enthusiasm (I don't think I've ever seen anyone use exclamation points as vigorously as you do!!!!!!!!) you need to realize that some people try to be objective, even about their favorite bands. I love Rush, I have all their albums, dvds, blu-rays, etc, and have seen them more times than any other band. However, I'm allowed to be disappointed with a FACET of their new album. It doesn't make me any less of a fan than you. I love the material, and think it is the most consistent effort they've done in years, which makes it even more disappointing to me that the sound quality of this album isn't up to par with some of the 80s output. This is a legitimate gripe, and it has the numbers and algorithms behind it to support it. It deserves to be better. With that being said, if you like the way it sounds and don't have any complaints, then great, I'm happy for you and slightly envious that you haven't been cursed with ears as sensitive as mine. But don't belittle me and others who want to objectively discuss something. You're entitled to your opinion that CA sounds great, and I'm entitled to mine. If this is being a troll, then so be, I'll sit under my bridge and be a troll. Oh, and to be honest, I think most people who are less than happy with the sonics of CA have said they love the material. So I don't know why some people are getting their thongs all up in a bunch.

QUOTE (losingit2k @ Jun 13 2012, 09:29 AM) QUOTE (The Mighty Dudad @ Jun 13 2012, 08:00 AM) I am not an audiophile, nor do I care to be one (IMO they seem to spend more time looking for flaws than enjoying the music). On my decent but far from spectacular home system, Clockwork Angels sounds great! That's my point exactly. They are more consumed with finding cracks in the armor than actually enjoying it for all its great qualitites. I'm fed up with it! It's time to call it for what it is: A systematic disruption of Modern RUSH! While I admire your enthusiasm (I don't think I've ever seen anyone use exclamation points as vigorously as you do!!!!!!!!) you need to realize that some people try to be objective, even about their favorite bands. I love Rush, I have all their albums, dvds, blu-rays, etc, and have seen them more times than any other band. However, I'm allowed to be disappointed with a FACET of their new album. It doesn't make me any less of a fan than you. I love the material, and think it is the most consistent effort they've done in years, which makes it even more disappointing to me that the sound quality of this album isn't up to par with some of the 80s output. This is a legitimate gripe, and it has the numbers and algorithms behind it to support it. It deserves to be better. With that being said, if you like the way it sounds and don't have any complaints, then great, I'm happy for you and slightly envious that you haven't been cursed with ears as sensitive as mine. But don't belittle me and others who want to objectively discuss something. You're entitled to your opinion that CA sounds great, and I'm entitled to mine. If this is being a troll, then so be, I'll sit under my bridge and be a troll. Oh, and to be honest, I think most people who are less than happy with the sonics of CA have said they love the material. So I don't know why some people are getting their thongs all up in a bunch.

QUOTE (trenken @ Jun 13 2012, 08:01 AM) QUOTE (Terrapin @ Jun 12 2012, 06:38 PM) For mastering a brilliant album so dreadfully... I'm sorry, but I have listened to the ACTUAL CD several times now and it really, truly sucks as regards the sonic clarity. I can almost forgive Nick R and all his enthusiasm, "conducting" prowess, but whatever multi-tracks he passed on to Bernie have been sonically destroyed with over compression. Do the boys care? I don't know. Perhaps they're thinking that having done their collective best in the studio, Nick and Bernie would sort it all out for them... On the other hand, maybe this mess of a production is par the course these days and Rush are just going along with it as a Foo Fighting, "measure of the time" Regardless, the album is a complete and utter sonic mess... Over to you Peter Collins ... Ted Jensen at Sterling Sound is known to be the absolute best, but he's not cheap. Only bands that sell millions of albums use him usually. Guess Roadrunner didnt want to spring the bill. George "Porky" Peckham is really good too. Whenever I buy an old 70s album and see his signature in the deadwax I know it is probably mastered really well. Bob Ludwig used to be good in the 70s and 80. Actually, his mastering of Moving Pictures on vinyl is stellar. Kevin Gray and Steve Hoffman also do stellar jobs. Too bad Rush didn't get Bernie Grundman himself to master the album or one of the aforementioned engineers.

Just because the redbook and hd versions have the same DR doesn't mean that the hd is simply upsampled. It just means both were mastered similarly. If you want the clearest sound get the vinyl. That has an average DR11 rating versus the cd/hd having a DR6 rating.

QUOTE (losingit2k @ Jun 12 2012, 11:08 PM) QUOTE (Terrapin @ Jun 12 2012, 07:12 PM) I'm sorry, but the mastering is appalling. I'm a massive Fanboy or "Fanboi" whatever... but this thing sounds like a carefully executed fart trying to escape from a well weaved, 3-ply piece of perfumed toilet paper... Songs are great, performances are great as well. Such a shame, it could have been immense! If you'd mix it right? No, if you'd mix it, you would have this thing sounding like a carefully executed tart trying to escape from a Well while trying to remove a 3-ply piece of perfumed toilet paper from your @ss! Dude no need to be a prick. All this because some people don't like the way an album sounds production-wise? This is a Rush forum and we're discussing a Rush album. Where else would you have us do it? Sometimes I feel the collective age of this place is 12-17. And for the record, Grundman mastered Aja, one of the best sounding LPs ever. No need to be snarky. Brian Gardner mastered Clockwork Angels.

Also, while I agree with the general gist of the OP, Berne Grundman himself didn't master the album. He did master (speaking of Fagen) some Steely Dan lps in the 70s. And how is honestly expressing an opinion trolling? Some of you fanboys need to lighten up when people criticize the Holy Trinity.

To be fair it's pretty bad but not unbearable. Someone ran a dynamic range test on it and it had a DR6 rating... That's pretty bad. Meanwhile, the vinyl has a DR11 rating. Who's unarmed now? For the record I love the album; I just wish it didn't give me a headache every time I want to crank it :-)

QUOTE (ak2112 @ Jun 12 2012, 07:48 PM) What I'm hearing is that HD tracks has merely upsampled the 16/44.1 tapes to 24/96...waste of time if this is truly the case. They wouldnt be high rez if this is fact. Where did you hear that? I heard the exact opposite over on the Stevehoffman forums.

QUOTE (Gedneil Alpeart @ Jun 12 2012, 05:02 PM) Can you convert flac files to play on ipod? Im guessing no.... You could convert it to 16/44.1 redbook wav files and then to mp3, but there would be no point.

Yes! Open and let us know how it sounds and if it suffers from the same issues as my copy. Lotssssss of sssssssibilancccccceeeeee.

QUOTE (Rushman14 @ Jun 12 2012, 04:17 PM) QUOTE (marblesmike @ Jun 12 2012, 01:14 PM) So apparently the 24/96 doesn't sound any less compressed than the regular cd. Still has a DR rating of 6. That's pretty compressed folks. Some might not hear it, but it is. I hear it, and doing my best to ignore it because I love the album. Me too, it's just disappointing. I've listened to it 6 times in the last couple days, so obviously it's not completely in the way of me enjoying the album.

So apparently the 24/96 doesn't sound any less compressed than the regular cd. Still has a DR rating of 6. That's pretty compressed folks. Some might not hear it, but it is.

QUOTE (IEATZ28 @ Jun 12 2012, 03:22 PM) I heard a digital file download code comes with the 2 LP. Anyone know if this is (a) true; ( if these are HD files or MP3s? Thanks, T Download card comes with vinyl. It gives you the option of mp3 or standard flac. Not high-res flac, but standard redbook, cd quality lossless.

QUOTE (rushgoober @ Jun 12 2012, 03:23 PM) QUOTE (marblesmike @ Jun 12 2012, 12:14 PM) QUOTE (mandydog @ Jun 12 2012, 03:13 PM) QUOTE (marblesmike @ Jun 12 2012, 02:04 PM) QUOTE (mandydog @ Jun 12 2012, 02:59 PM) I'm considering this download. A question for the knowledgeable. How does one get these files burned to a listenable format? Thanks! They don't. They get played back through a home stereo system that is set up through a computer with a sound card capable of outputting the high resolution format. This is not made for portability. Portability is the reason why stuff like this needs to exist. Sound/mixing/mastering quality has deteriorated so much over the years due to the need to be portable. I have a DVD audio player and many DVD audio discs in 96/24 an 5.1. Surely there is a way to burn these files to a DVD for playback. Sorry I called you "shirley". Good point. Perhaps you can burn to a DVD-A. That would be the way I'd guess. For me though I know going through my pc would be easiest. Yeah, but that for me defeats the whole purpose of having a supposedly "audiophile" version. If you can't play it through a high-quality amp/pre-amp/intergrated amp & CD player, you're losing a tremendous amount by having to play it through a crappy computer CD player. I have high definition analog and digital out on my pc, so it's going into my home stereo which is capable of outputting 24/96 :-)

QUOTE (mandydog @ Jun 12 2012, 03:13 PM) QUOTE (marblesmike @ Jun 12 2012, 02:04 PM) QUOTE (mandydog @ Jun 12 2012, 02:59 PM) I'm considering this download. A question for the knowledgeable. How does one get these files burned to a listenable format? Thanks! They don't. They get played back through a home stereo system that is set up through a computer with a sound card capable of outputting the high resolution format. This is not made for portability. Portability is the reason why stuff like this needs to exist. Sound/mixing/mastering quality has deteriorated so much over the years due to the need to be portable. I have a DVD audio player and many DVD audio discs in 96/24 an 5.1. Surely there is a way to burn these files to a DVD for playback. Sorry I called you "shirley". Good point. Perhaps you can burn to a DVD-A. That would be the way I'd guess. For me though I know going through my pc would be easiest.

QUOTE (mandydog @ Jun 12 2012, 02:59 PM) I'm considering this download. A question for the knowledgeable. How does one get these files burned to a listenable format? Thanks! They don't. They get played back through a home stereo system that is set up through a computer with a sound card capable of outputting the high resolution format. This is not made for portability. Portability is the reason why stuff like this needs to exist. Sound/mixing/mastering quality has deteriorated so much over the years due to the need to be portable.

Please report back about the high res tracks. The dynamics and mastering on the vinyl is better than the cd, but at least my copy is plagued by QC pressing issues (sibilance, fingerprints all over, etc). So I'm hoping the 24-96 tracks will be an improvement over the murky cd. This album is too good to not have sounding as good as possible.

No prob, I understand. I'm defensive of my favorite bands too. Like I said in another thread, I guess I'm just used to my ears being spoiled by Steven Wilson. Let him mix the next Rush album.

QUOTE (EmotionDetector @ Jun 12 2012, 01:42 PM) QUOTE (marblesmike @ Jun 12 2012, 01:41 PM) I'm not a troll. I love the album. It's amazing. I'm saying the pressing quality of the vinyl sucks. Not the mastering/mixing, but the actually pressing from the pressing plant. How is that trolling? Some of you people really drink the kool-aid. Nope...no kool-aid here. As per my previous post, I gathered that you were most likely referring to the sound of the vinyl! Ironically, I don't have a record player, so my vinyl will be sitting on the shelf for awhile...beside the Feedback and S&A vinyls! It's a shame too about the vinyl. It came fresh with tons of grime and fingerprints from the pressing plant. I love the album and was hoping the vinyl would sound better than the mediocre sounding cd. I hope my copy was just a dud. I'm anxious to hear what other people say about it so I can determine whether or not it's worth returning for a better copy.

I'm not a troll. I love the album. It's amazing. I'm saying the pressing quality of the vinyl sucks. Not the mastering/mixing, but the actually pressing from the pressing plant. How is that trolling? Read the post that I quoted (about the vinyl copy looking great) and me responding "except it sounds like crap," it being the vinyl. Some of you people really drink the kool-aid.

Except that it sounds like crap. QUOTE Yep...and these pictures really don't do it justice. They came out kind of crappy actually...too grainy. Anyways...for those who ordered the vinyl, you should be happy. It looks stellar.