snowdog2112 Posted January 11, 2011 Share Posted January 11, 2011 QUOTE (Oracle @ Jan 10 2011, 11:10 PM) I could definitely see this happening. Would definitely be my major music purchase of this year. However, why not make a huge box set of all the albums (including live) like Genesis did a few years back? Make a box set of remastered albums, add in a DVD which contains the album in a Dolby 5.1 and DTS mix along with any promotional videos/live stuff and maybe a few interviews about the process into making that album. For those of us plebeians who would be unable to buy this huge collection, release the remastered albums individually with said extra DVD with the same features. Of course, it doesn't have to be something as big as this. Releasing them in a standard CD or SACD format is just as good. Exactly, there are a lot of possibilities. The range could be anything from simply a disappointing (for us) more-or-less reissue of exactly what we already have all the way up to a complete box set with 5.1 and other audio options with a bunch of unreleased live versions or alternate takes of songs from each album or anything in between. If it's something great then we can get excited, if it's really nothing new then it's still a good place for all their younger/new fans to jump in and we can skip it, no harm done. I just don't understand some of the anger at this point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ak2112 Posted January 11, 2011 Author Share Posted January 11, 2011 QUOTE (Majestyk @ Jan 10 2011, 01:33 AM) QUOTE Absolutely not true about the MFSL of 2112. I own it and it is hands down the best master of the album. I don't get those who call it shrill. For gods sake, it's Geddy Lee in 1976! Shrill, by definition was how most people heard his voice back then. No, the 2112 MFSL is like all the others, a stunner. If they would master all of Rush's albums, I'd buy them all; they're that good!! I'm not just talking about Geddy's voice, but everything including symbols. In any case, I've read over 20 posts from people saying they hated the MFSL 2112 and that's enough for me to stay away. I'm very picky about sound and I know my ears will pick up what they are reporting. Believe me, I'm as picky as they come when it comes to sound quality. I spent 7 years and about 14K putting together my dream sound system and I love all of the MFSL Rush releases. 2112 is no exception. Of course, your ears will be the final judge but I wouldnt discount it out of hand until you hear it for yourself. Maybe you know someone who has a copy that you could listen to? As far as the 2011 remasters, if they dont release them on SACD or DVD-Audio, I wont be getting them. It's high time they released Rush in high rez!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Majestyk Posted January 14, 2011 Share Posted January 14, 2011 QUOTE I found the 2112 MFSL to be too bright for my tastes. Probably best to test for yourself and see how you feel about it. Well that's 21 posts now that I've read stating this. It's too expensive for me to try myself and I prefer the levels (which I can post here if anyone wants...which I doubt you do) of the older releases. Anyway, today I got the West German Atomic Moving Pictures. Not the first issue with the missing Tom Sawyer beat, the second issue ending in 03. Again, I've read many posts stating how this is superior to all the other releases and I decided to judge for myself. I discovered today that the remastered Moving Pictures is HORRIBLE sounding. I've actually never listened to it a whole lot but after comparing the two, it wasn't so much that the WG Atomic was way better, it was the remastered sucked. I cranked these beyond what I normally turn the volume up to, using a pair of Sony MDR-7506 headphones. The RM is just grating and harsh sounding...For headphones anyway. The WG Atomic is smooth and warm sounding. My ears fatigue very easily with loud rock music and I would never be able to make it through the MP RM with the level I was playing it at. That's my 2 Cents on the Moving Pictures. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ak2112 Posted January 14, 2011 Author Share Posted January 14, 2011 I can understand why so many don't like the RM Rush and your views on Moving Pictures are pretty much in line with what I've heard others say. However, I love it! It just has more balls and the bass is very strong. Yes, it has serious compression and it probably would sound grating on the ears after a while but I still like it for some songs. That being said, my go to version (at least until I can snatch up the MFSL) is my SHM-CD version. It is a gorgeous master...much less harsh than the 97 RM. I'd be interested to hear what you think of the SHM-CD's. I love the four that I own! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shaun3701 Posted January 14, 2011 Share Posted January 14, 2011 The 97 remasters do sound a bit harsh at times, especially MP. I noticed that the first time I heard them almost 14 years ago. Unfortunately they're the ONLY versions in print right now (in the US), so I'm anxiously awaiting to hear the new and improved 2011 versions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ranger J Posted January 14, 2011 Share Posted January 14, 2011 The only Rush albums I can get my hands on here are the Rush Remasters from '97 (i think). I'm glad I seen this thread before I started collecting. I'm hoping for a big ass box set with 5.1 sound. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Majestyk Posted January 14, 2011 Share Posted January 14, 2011 QUOTE Unfortunately they're the ONLY versions in print right now (in the US), so I'm anxiously awaiting to hear the new and improved 2011 versions. I just hope they've learned from the last RM's or they will probably peak them even louder. I'll comment on Farewell to Kings next, followed by a 3-way comparison of Permanent Waves. (Original vs Remaster vs MFSL). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kooma Posted January 14, 2011 Share Posted January 14, 2011 Who needs all that remastered stuff?? What is the wrong with the good old material? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mystic Slipperman Posted January 14, 2011 Share Posted January 14, 2011 QUOTE (shaun3701 @ Jan 13 2011, 08:31 PM) The 97 remasters do sound a bit harsh at times, especially MP. I noticed that the first time I heard them almost 14 years ago. Unfortunately they're the ONLY versions in print right now (in the US), so I'm anxiously awaiting to hear the new and improved 2011 versions. If you've got any used record/CD shops near you, you might want to look for the original discs... just a suggestion Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Show Don't Tell Posted January 14, 2011 Share Posted January 14, 2011 QUOTE (Mystic Slipperman @ Jan 14 2011, 01:56 PM) QUOTE (shaun3701 @ Jan 13 2011, 08:31 PM) The 97 remasters do sound a bit harsh at times, especially MP. I noticed that the first time I heard them almost 14 years ago. Unfortunately they're the ONLY versions in print right now (in the US), so I'm anxiously awaiting to hear the new and improved 2011 versions. If you've got any used record/CD shops near you, you might want to look for the original discs... just a suggestion I'm still trying to hunt down the original pressings, which are the best, in my opinion. If these 2011 remasters sound any more compressed and bright than the 1997 ones, consider this purchase skipped. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shaun3701 Posted January 15, 2011 Share Posted January 15, 2011 QUOTE (kooma @ Jan 14 2011, 05:00 AM) Who needs all that remastered stuff?? What is the wrong with the good old material? well for starters, they don't make it anymore Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Majestyk Posted February 5, 2011 Share Posted February 5, 2011 Just for the 'record' I recently found a copy of the Atomic German (or West German) Permenant Waves CD. Back in this thread I was hyping up how much better the MFSL was to the Remaster. Well, I'm disappointed to say that my WG Atomic is even better than the MFSL. Why disappointed? Because I like my nice gold CD, with the individual number, that I paid $25, including shipping, for. But the Atomic just kills it. There is more of a dramatic difference between it and the MFSL than the Remaster and the MFSL. The MFSL (I'm getting tired of repeating these words) is bright and harsh in comparison and the Atomic is more like the vinyl I heard years ago. To be fair, the MFSL on it's own, when I first heard it, did not sound as harsh or bright but now I can't listen to it. CD's have a lot more potential, vs LP, than most give them credit and it's amazing what proper mastering can do. So if anyone wants my mint MFSL copy for $20 shipped, let me know. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cuiaba Posted February 9, 2011 Share Posted February 9, 2011 QUOTE (RodrigoAltaf @ Jan 4 2011, 11:14 AM) Rumour has it that Clockwork Angels will be released in November, followed by the Clockword Angels - Remastered Edition in December. That's hilarious Kind of like, did we really need a remaster of T4E?! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cuiaba Posted February 9, 2011 Share Posted February 9, 2011 QUOTE (Majestyk @ Feb 4 2011, 08:14 PM) Just for the 'record' I recently found a copy of the Atomic German (or West German) Permenant Waves CD. Back in this thread I was hyping up how much better the MFSL was to the Remaster. Well, I'm disappointed to say that my WG Atomic is even better than the MFSL. Why disappointed? Because I like my nice gold CD, with the individual number, that I paid $25, including shipping, for. But the Atomic just kills it. There is more of a dramatic difference between it and the MFSL than the Remaster and the MFSL. The MFSL (I'm getting tired of repeating these words) is bright and harsh in comparison and the Atomic is more like the vinyl I heard years ago. To be fair, the MFSL on it's own, when I first heard it, did not sound as harsh or bright but now I can't listen to it. CD's have a lot more potential, vs LP, than most give them credit and it's amazing what proper mastering can do. So if anyone wants my mint MFSL copy for $20 shipped, let me know. Interesting. I've never heard the atomic version but love the MFSL. I've read comments on the web where folks say it is the best sounding CD ever, and it is indeed crystal clear. Plus I do love the numbered edition! Thanks for your thoughts! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cuiaba Posted February 9, 2011 Share Posted February 9, 2011 QUOTE (Majestyk @ Jan 6 2011, 10:25 AM) Here's a good thread on the remastered vs original CD's and it even gets detailed as to which exact CD's to get...None of which are the remasters, for the 70's, early 80's CD's. http://www.stevehoffman.tv/forums/showthread.php?t=213809 Thanks for sharing! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.