Is the '97 Signals remaster worth getting?

[ak2112]

QUOTE (fordgt99 @ Jan 13 2012, 11:21 PM)

Regarding the shm discs, I assumed they were the same mastering as the 97 discs since the Kiss ones from what I've read are. Maybe, maybe not. I checked out a couple and the only big difference I saw was in the packaging. If you want to add another version into the mix, the great pbthal just posted a vinyl rip.

The SHM's are not the same mastering as the 97 remasters. You can use a free software package like Exact Audio Copy that will show you the peak levels of each track for a CD. This will show you that these masterings are different from one another. I dont own all of the SHM's, but the ones that I do own (Hemispheres, Moving Pictures, Power Windows, and Hold Your Fire) are all different masterings from the 97's. They have more dynamic range and aren't nearly as loud. I prefer them to the 97's but I still tend to like the Japanese masterings of Rush's catelog to most of the remasters. The MFSL's for Signals, Moving Pictures, and Permanent Waves are also awesome, though the MFSL of 2112 is too loud and harsh for my tastes.

[fordgt99]

QUOTE (ak2112 @ Jan 14 2012, 04:31 PM)

QUOTE (fordgt99 @ Jan 13 2012, 11:21 PM) Regarding the shm discs, I assumed they were the same mastering as the 97 discs since the Kiss ones from what I've read are. Maybe, maybe not. I checked out a couple and the only big difference I saw was in the packaging. If you want to add another version into the mix, the great pbthal just posted a vinyl rip. The SHM's are not the same mastering as the 97 remasters. You can use a free software package like Exact Audio Copy that will show you the peak levels of each track for a CD. This will show you that these masterings are different from one another. I dont own all of the SHM's, but the ones that I do own (Hemispheres, Moving Pictures, Power Windows, and Hold Your Fire) are all different masterings from the 97's. They have more dynamic range and aren't nearly as loud. I prefer them to the 97's but I still tend to like the Japanese masterings of Rush's catelog to most of the remasters. The MFSL's for Signals, Moving Pictures, and Permanent Waves are also awesome, though the MFSL of 2112 is too loud and harsh for my tastes. Ok thanks for the info.   You should've added "I think" in the last sentence of your prior post. To you the 97 remasters are garbage but not for ALL of us.

[gudbuytjane]

QUOTE (rushgoober @ Jan 10 2012, 08:08 PM)

While it's probably blasphemous to you, the thing I liked the most about the remaster was the increased ability to hear the guitars, which was what was always lacking in the original IMHO.  The guitar was just a bit too buried in the mix, overwhelmed slightly by the keyboards.  The remaster brings out the guitars to a very satisfying degree.  Whether that's "unpleasantly brightened" or "overdriven" or whatever is fine by me, because for me the whole thing just plain sounds better.  The first time I put it on, I was like "Thank God, they fixed Signals!."  Of course you won't be convinced as you sound very sure of your interpretation being objective and correct, but that's my take - a marked improvement over the original and MFSL.  I say let people listen and decide for themselves.

I have always struggled with Signals because of how (to me) the guitars sounded so buried. I have never been able to give the songs the attention they deserve because I have been so distracted by the mix. I picked up the 97 remaster the other day because of the conversation in this thread, and wow, it was a revelation for me too. I still would like to hear more guitar and less synth, but the 97 feels like a step in the right direction (again, for me, I realize these things are incredibly subjective).

 

-Jane

 

[Rockosmith]

QUOTE (ak2112 @ Jan 14 2012, 04:31 PM) QUOTE (fordgt99 @ Jan 13 2012, 11:21 PM) Regarding the shm discs, I assumed they were the same mastering as the 97 discs since the Kiss ones from what I've read are. Maybe, maybe not. I checked out a couple and the only big difference I saw was in the packaging.

 

If you want to add another version into the mix, the great pbthal just posted a vinyl rip.

 

The SHM's are not the same mastering as the 97 remasters. You can use a free software package like Exact Audio Copy that will show you the peak levels of each track for a CD. This will show you that these masterings are different from one another. I dont own all of the SHM's, but the ones that I do own (Hemispheres, Moving Pictures, Power Windows, and Hold Your Fire) are all different masterings from the 97's. They have more dynamic range and aren't nearly as loud. I prefer them to the 97's but I still tend to like the Japanese masterings of Rush's catelog to most of the remasters. The MFSL's for Signals, Moving Pictures, and Permanent Waves are also awesome, though the MFSL of 2112 is too loud and harsh for my tastes.

 

Ok thanks for the info.

 

You should've added "I think" in the last sentence of your prior post. To you the 97 remasters are garbage but not for ALL of us.

 

 

You are partially incorrect. The SHM releases are a grab bag of copies and possibly a seperate masterings. The 2112 SHM is identical to the 97 remaster, Hemispheres is identical to the AMCY CD. Hold Your Fire appears to be it's own version. Here is a great thread on this.

 

http://forums.stevehoffman.tv/threads/the-rush-cd-mastering-thread-part-2.290440/

[GeminiRising79]

IMHO, the 97 remaster sounds MUCH better than the original AND the MSFL version. A significant improvement in clarity and punch.

 

Does it still retain that warm, fuzzy analog sound?

[Rockosmith]

If you simply go by Dynamic Range numbers and waveform images-not a good idea-, one could say original releases are best, but after listening to original, MFSL, 97 and Sectors remasters, I would conclude there is no right answer. Some originals sound better, some MFSL, some 97 and some Sectors sound great. If money can allow it, I would get all of them and choose a release for each album.

[Spindrift82]

I've only heard the 97 remaster, and it is very, very clear.

[Majestyk]

Ha, the '97 remaster is the worst of the worst. Not only is it the worst Signals, it's one of the worst CD's I've ever heard in general...A real ear bleeder which led to an array of ear difficulties for me, because I played it so much, before I knew better. (IE: Over EQ'd and compressed to the max). If you guys are cranking this one, you're going to kill your speakers.

 

The best Signals CD is the AMCY-291, which is the same as the SHM-CD... But the US vinyl makes even that CD sound like crap.

[tas7]

Oddly enough I had both Signals and Duke by Genesis in the car stereo. Both albums are very keyboard orientated and both suffer the same 'denseness' of sound. Think that when keyboards are prominent the guitars get panned out left and right to make room and suffer in volume. The best versions of the Signals songs are on a compilation I got because it was cheap called Rush - Gold.

[ytserush]

Ha, the '97 remaster is the worst of the worst. Not only is it the worst Signals, it's one of the worst CD's I've ever heard in general...A real ear bleeder which led to an array of ear difficulties for me, because I played it so much, before I knew better. (IE: Over EQ'd and compressed to the max). If you guys are cranking this one, you're going to kill your speakers.

 

The best Signals CD is the AMCY-291, which is the same as the SHM-CD... But the US vinyl makes even that CD sound like crap.

 

Strange. I've always liked the US vinyl.

 

I agree with your thoughts on the '97 remaster though. Yuck!