My Latest Rush album on SHM-CD

[ak2112]

Just got Hold Your Fire on SHM-CD and while not my favorite Rush album, it is one of their most melodic. The SHM version sounds wonderful. I put it through my Audacity software and the waveform is damn near perfect. All of my SHM CD's blow away the overly harsh remasters and I actually like quite a few of those. This SHM is the best I've heard so far. with the possible exception of Hemispheres. I have 4 Rush SHM CD's so far and I think they're the best versions, with the possible exception of the MFSL albums I own. Check them out. Plus, the Japanese Obi strip is pretty cool and each is made to exactly replicate the original vinyl.

[ak2112]

I'm telling ya folks, if you want the best sounding versions of the Rush albums, the SHM releases are the best there is short of the 4 MFSL albums.

[tkdryan]

how much are they and where do you find them?

[Mr. Krinkle]

How does Power Windows sound on SHM-CD?

 

And Hemispheres sounds pretty good? Is it better than the re-mastered Anthem label version?

[shaun3701]

QUOTE (tkdryan @ Dec 7 2010, 12:55 AM)

how much are they and where do you find them?

about $50, and in Japan.

[tkdryan]

hmmmm i would be curious to hear Hemispheres in this format. I stopped buying albums until the new remasters come out. I would be curious to hear how they compare.

 

I dont have Fly by night, COS, AFTK , Hemisheres , VP and CWA

 

I have PW, T4E and Sow of Hands from I tunes or friends on the Ipod

 

I would be interested in replacing my HYF that i bought for $2 , non remastered version

 

 

[ak2112]

QUOTE (Mr. Krinkle @ Dec 7 2010, 01:06 AM)

How does Power Windows sound on SHM-CD? And Hemispheres sounds pretty good? Is it better than the re-mastered Anthem label version?

Power Windows sounds great on SHM and Hemispheres is even better. The dynamics are just plain superior to those of the remasters.

 

I'm not sure of the Anthem remaster of Hemispheres you're talking about. Is it a different master from the "Rush remasters" series? If so , I've never heard it. You cant go wrong with these SHM's though. However, they're now out of print except for HYF and so the prices will probably go up.

 

Does anyone have any details on what the 2011 remasters are supposed to be like? If they make them any louder than the 1997 remasters, it will ruin them!

[Mr. Krinkle]

QUOTE (ak2112 @ Dec 8 2010, 12:27 AM)

I'm not sure of the Anthem remaster of Hemispheres you're talking about. Is it a different master from the "Rush remasters" series? If so , I've never heard it.

I bought my Hemispheres (Rush Remaster) in Toronto at Sam The Record Man in 1997 and on the back of the cd, on the bottom left, there is the Anthem logo. On the right side, like on the rest of my Rush Remasters (bought in the U.S.) the Mercury Records logo that is there is absent on this cd. At the bottom of the disc it says Anthem records with the address. On the rest of my Rush Remasters, it says Mercury Records with their address.

 

Thats why I was wondering if the copy of Hemispheres that I have, bought in Toronto, is any different than the U.S. version.

 

I doubt it, but who knows. I don't have the U.S. version of that remastered cd.

 

 

[reani14]

I want 2 shm's i dont have. Power windows (which is about 50$) on ebay. and the First Rush on shm which goes for at least a hundred bucks on ebay. These are all out of print. I managed to get these titles from cdjaapn when they were available -- -- Moving pictures, signals, 2112. hemispheres (sounds killer) permanent waves , and grace under pressure... They are worth getting. oh and a farewell to kings.. i have..

[shaun3701]

I'm guessing the 2011 remasters will sound like the "Gold" compilation.

[slappa_da_bass]

SHM is generally considered more along the lines of a 'limited pressing' product rather than something that offers superior sound quality. In fact, there's no reason why there should be any difference from a regular CD, given the same source. SHM is just a re-pressing of the same source material onto a "higher-quality" medium, in physical terms only. The bits that get read by the computer or CD player are going to be the exact same. It has nothing to do with (re-)mastering like MFSL does, where you would actually hear a difference in quality since the source is mixed and edited differently than the original release.

 

In short, if you're looking for nice collector's items, okay, but any perceived difference in audio quality is a placebo effect.

 

http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/index....showtopic=65004

[Mr. Krinkle]

QUOTE (slappa_da_bass @ Dec 10 2010, 03:10 AM)

SHM is generally considered more along the lines of a 'limited pressing' product rather than something that offers superior sound quality. In fact, there's no reason why there should be any difference from a regular CD, given the same source. SHM is just a re-pressing of the same source material onto a "higher-quality" medium, in physical terms only. The bits that get read by the computer or CD player are going to be the exact same. It has nothing to do with (re-)mastering like MFSL does, where you would actually hear a difference in quality since the source is mixed and edited differently than the original release. In short, if you're looking for nice collector's items, okay, but any perceived difference in audio quality is a placebo effect. http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/index....showtopic=65004

I guess the only way to know for sure is to compare the sound quality of the two on a computer display of the freqs. and the levels.

Then hear both versions of any particular album A/B'd.

[micgtr71]

Will any of these digital renderings sound as good as the tried and true vinyl copies that I have? Maybe for others but not for me.

[Mr. Krinkle]

QUOTE (micgtr71 @ Dec 10 2010, 08:59 AM)

Will any of these digital renderings sound as good as the tried and true vinyl copies that I have? Maybe for others but not for me.

Depends.

Is your vinyl in good shape?

 

Do you have a real good needle/cartridge?

 

I always liked the sound of vinyl. When CD's appeared, I abandoned my vinyl.

I should give it a spin sometime.

[slappa_da_bass]

QUOTE (Mr. Krinkle @ Dec 10 2010, 09:40 AM)

QUOTE (slappa_da_bass @ Dec 10 2010, 03:10 AM) SHM is generally considered more along the lines of a 'limited pressing' product rather than something that offers superior sound quality. In fact, there's no reason why there should be any difference from a regular CD, given the same source. SHM is just a re-pressing of the same source material onto a "higher-quality" medium, in physical terms only. The bits that get read by the computer or CD player are going to be the exact same. It has nothing to do with (re-)mastering like MFSL does, where you would actually hear a difference in quality since the source is mixed and edited differently than the original release. In short, if you're looking for nice collector's items, okay, but any perceived difference in audio quality is a placebo effect. http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/index....showtopic=65004 I guess the only way to know for sure is to compare the sound quality of the two on a computer display of the freqs. and the levels. Then hear both versions of any particular album A/B'd. It turns out a couple of tests have already been done on that, and there was generally either no difference, or there was a flat increase in overall volume that actually induced some clipping   Awesome user name btw, they're second only to Rush in my eyes.

[mulletst0rm]

QUOTE (slappa_da_bass @ Dec 10 2010, 04:10 AM)

SHM is generally considered more along the lines of a 'limited pressing' product rather than something that offers superior sound quality. In fact, there's no reason why there should be any difference from a regular CD, given the same source. SHM is just a re-pressing of the same source material onto a "higher-quality" medium, in physical terms only. The bits that get read by the computer or CD player are going to be the exact same. It has nothing to do with (re-)mastering like MFSL does, where you would actually hear a difference in quality since the source is mixed and edited differently than the original release. In short, if you're looking for nice collector's items, okay, but any perceived difference in audio quality is a placebo effect. http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/index....showtopic=65004

 

The mastering found on the SHM-CD's is, IMO, superior to many late eighties, early nineties Rush CD masters(and vastly superior to the '97-2004 Rush Remasters series) because they are exact digital copies of of some really good mid-eighties and nineties Japanese CD masters(different CD pressings made at different times in different countries didn't always have identical sound characteristics--variations in levels and dynamic range for instance) , not because of any inherent superiority conferred upon them by the SHM-CD manufacturing process. These masters could have been burnt to CD-R, and they would have sounded just as good.

[slappa_da_bass]

QUOTE (mulletst0rm @ Dec 10 2010, 02:06 PM)

QUOTE (slappa_da_bass @ Dec 10 2010, 04:10 AM) SHM is generally considered more along the lines of a 'limited pressing' product rather than something that offers superior sound quality. In fact, there's no reason why there should be any difference from a regular CD, given the same source. SHM is just a re-pressing of the same source material onto a "higher-quality" medium, in physical terms only. The bits that get read by the computer or CD player are going to be the exact same. It has nothing to do with (re-)mastering like MFSL does, where you would actually hear a difference in quality since the source is mixed and edited differently than the original release. In short, if you're looking for nice collector's items, okay, but any perceived difference in audio quality is a placebo effect. http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/index....showtopic=65004   The mastering found on the SHM-CD's is superior to many late eighties, early nineties Rush CD masters(and vastly superior to the '97-2004 Rush Remasters series) because they are exact digital copies of of some really good mid-eighties Japanese CD masters(different CD pressings made at different times in different countries didn't always have identical sound characteristics--variations in levels and dynamic range for instance) , not because of any inherent superiority conferred upon them by the SHM-CD manufacturing process. These masters could have been burnt to CD-R, and they would have sounded just as good. Exactly right. But I would just love to source those original CDs, without paying the price for the SHM limited pressing. In the specific case of Rush, would you happen to have any idea where these original 'better masters' might be?

[mulletst0rm]

QUOTE (slappa_da_bass @ Dec 10 2010, 02:12 PM)

QUOTE (mulletst0rm @ Dec 10 2010, 02:06 PM) The mastering found on the SHM-CD's is superior to many late eighties, early nineties Rush CD masters(and vastly superior to the '97-2004 Rush Remasters series) because they are exact digital copies of of some really good mid-eighties Japanese CD masters(different CD pressings made at different times in different countries didn't always have identical sound characteristics--variations in levels and dynamic range for instance) , not because of any inherent superiority conferred upon them by the SHM-CD manufacturing process. These masters could have been burnt to CD-R, and they would have sounded just as good. Exactly right. But I would just love to source those original CDs, without paying the price for the SHM limited pressing. In the specific case of Rush, would you happen to have any idea where these original 'better masters' might be? Japanese AMCY-*** editions from the early 90's make up the bulk of the older albums, in that they have identical track peak levels as the SHM-CD releases.   Lots of good info on different Rush CD pressings here: http://www.wellers.demon.co.uk/rushpage.htm http://www.wellers.demon.co.uk/Compact%20Discography.htm   IMHO, there are pressings that are even better than the AMCY editions, for instance, the French Moving Pictures Mercury 800 048-2, and the Japanese Hemispheres Epic/Sony 25-8P-5168 are pretty sweet if you can find them. Oddly enough, The Rush Remasters Caress of Steel is probably the pick of the bunch.

[Mr. Krinkle]

QUOTE (slappa_da_bass @ Dec 10 2010, 11:22 AM)

Awesome user name btw, they're second only to Rush in my eyes.

[Mr. Krinkle]

QUOTE (mulletst0rm @ Dec 10 2010, 01:06 PM)

......because they are exact digital copies of of some really good mid-eighties and nineties Japanese CD masters.......

My copy of Different Stages is a Japanese import.

With the bonus track: Force Ten.

[Mr. Krinkle]

QUOTE (mulletst0rm @ Dec 10 2010, 01:39 PM)

The Rush Remasters Caress of Steel is probably the pick of the bunch.

[micgtr71]

QUOTE (Mr. Krinkle @ Dec 10 2010, 10:04 AM)

QUOTE (micgtr71 @ Dec 10 2010, 08:59 AM) Will any of these digital renderings sound as good as the tried and true vinyl copies that I have? Maybe for others but not for me. Depends. Is your vinyl in good shape?   Do you have a real good needle/cartridge?   I always liked the sound of vinyl. When CD's appeared, I abandoned my vinyl. I should give it a spin sometime. I have a good turntable and a good cartridge. The album is in fantastic shape and has virtually no noise. My wife was born after the cd revolution and found my vinyl collection interesting and started listening to albums she had on cd and actually heard them differently. She liked them better. I have always preferred the sound of vinyl. I have Rush through Presto, Feedback and S&A and they are all in pristine condition. I got the remastered Fish out of Water by Chris Squire and played it against my near mint vinyl copy from 75 and enjoyed the vinyl better. Now, if I can only get it in my car...

[shaun3701]

what is with all this love for vinyl? I understand the nostalgic value, but do people really think vinyl sounds better than CD? CDs are crystal clear, vinyl pops and cracks. One reads the music with a laser, the other with a needle.

[micgtr71]

QUOTE (shaun3701 @ Dec 10 2010, 09:40 PM)

what is with all this love for vinyl? I understand the nostalgic value, but do people really think vinyl sounds better than CD? CDs are crystal clear, vinyl pops and cracks. One reads the music with a laser, the other with a needle.

If you have a good system, there are few scratches and pops unless the vinyl is damaged. The cd is harsh and abrasive in comparison. Crystal clear definitely, but the sound is sometimes in your face. I remember working in a record store in the late 80s early 90s and had cds on all day and at the end of the day the boss would put on a record and we all noticed how noticeably warmer it was.

[reani14]

go for a sealed copy of vinyl if possible. it has less wear and tear than a used one.. And a good system and needle.. i listen to both for different reasons