CantStopThinkingBig Posted May 6, 2012 Share Posted May 6, 2012 Maybe this is just my imagination, but listening to HF on my iPod I always notice it sounds significantly quieter than all my other Rush songs. Maybe they're purposely mixing CA at a lower volume to preserve the dynamic range? I heard Porcupine Tree does the same thing with their albums. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GangsterOnBoats Posted May 6, 2012 Share Posted May 6, 2012 Well, it doesn't seem that way to me! When I listen to it on my itunes, Hemispheres comes right after (alphabetically organized) and it makes my favorite album by Rush sound like the production of RTB! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CantStopThinkingBig Posted May 6, 2012 Author Share Posted May 6, 2012 QUOTE (GangsterOnBoats @ May 6 2012, 01:17 PM) Well, it doesn't seem that way to me! When I listen to it on my itunes, Hemispheres comes right after (alphabetically organized) and it makes my favorite album by Rush sound like the production of RTB! hmm... is that the remastered version of Hemispheres?? I actually have the 2011 remasters all burned and synched to my iPod now Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Babycat Posted May 8, 2012 Share Posted May 8, 2012 I don't think it's quieter. If anything, it might be a tad louder. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LeaveMyThingAlone Posted May 8, 2012 Share Posted May 8, 2012 I was really hoping Rush would go back to basics like Foo Fighters did with Wasting Light. That album was recorded analog style and sounds freakin' awesome. Headlong Flight sounds "ok", but nothing like the glory years of the 70's and 80's when everything sounded so crisp and fresh, because it was stripped down and recorded analog.  It seems like Rush really likes to tinker with different technologies and try different things and it's hard to find fault with that, but I thought this would have been the perfect album to go back to analog. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snowdog2112 Posted May 8, 2012 Share Posted May 8, 2012 QUOTE (LeaveMyThingAlone @ May 8 2012, 01:20 PM) I was really hoping Rush would go back to basics like Foo Fighters did with Wasting Light. That album was recorded analog style and sounds freakin' awesome. Headlong Flight sounds "ok", but nothing like the glory years of the 70's and 80's when everything sounded so crisp and fresh, because it was stripped down and recorded analog. It seems like Rush really likes to tinker with different technologies and try different things and it's hard to find fault with that, but I thought this would have been the perfect album to go back to analog. I know what you're saying but everything Rush recorded in the 80s was digital. Moving Pictures was one of the first digitally recorded albums and I don't hear anybody complaining about how it sounds. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LeaveMyThingAlone Posted May 8, 2012 Share Posted May 8, 2012 QUOTE (snowdog2112 @ May 8 2012, 02:26 PM) QUOTE (LeaveMyThingAlone @ May 8 2012, 01:20 PM) I was really hoping Rush would go back to basics like Foo Fighters did with Wasting Light. That album was recorded analog style and sounds freakin' awesome. Headlong Flight sounds "ok", but nothing like the glory years of the 70's and 80's when everything sounded so crisp and fresh, because it was stripped down and recorded analog. It seems like Rush really likes to tinker with different technologies and try different things and it's hard to find fault with that, but I thought this would have been the perfect album to go back to analog. I know what you're saying but everything Rush recorded in the 80s was digital. Moving Pictures was one of the first digitally recorded albums and I don't hear anybody complaining about how it sounds. I though it was recorded A to D to D? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LeaveMyThingAlone Posted May 8, 2012 Share Posted May 8, 2012 (edited) Here's the different methods: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SPARS_code I thought Hold Your Fire was the first DDD style recording and the rest in the 80's were either AAD or ADD Edited May 8, 2012 by LeaveMyThingAlone Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snowdog2112 Posted May 8, 2012 Share Posted May 8, 2012 (edited) QUOTE (LeaveMyThingAlone @ May 8 2012, 01:34 PM) QUOTE (snowdog2112 @ May 8 2012, 02:26 PM) QUOTE (LeaveMyThingAlone @ May 8 2012, 01:20 PM) I was really hoping Rush would go back to basics like Foo Fighters did with Wasting Light. That album was recorded analog style and sounds freakin' awesome. Headlong Flight sounds "ok", but nothing like the glory years of the 70's and 80's when everything sounded so crisp and fresh, because it was stripped down and recorded analog. It seems like Rush really likes to tinker with different technologies and try different things and it's hard to find fault with that, but I thought this would have been the perfect album to go back to analog. I know what you're saying but everything Rush recorded in the 80s was digital. Moving Pictures was one of the first digitally recorded albums and I don't hear anybody complaining about how it sounds. I though it was recorded A to D to D? I've always read it that way but I'm no engineer. However, Terry Brown discussed it in detail in a recent video interview (I'm not talking about the 2112/MP doc), let me go watch that again and get the specifics right and I'll get back to you.   Ok, he said it was mixed digitally, not recorded. So yeah, it is different.   Edited May 8, 2012 by snowdog2112 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GangsterOnBoats Posted May 8, 2012 Share Posted May 8, 2012 QUOTE (LeaveMyThingAlone @ May 8 2012, 02:20 PM) I was really hoping Rush would go back to basics like Foo Fighters did with Wasting Light. That album was recorded analog style and sounds freakin' awesome. Headlong Flight sounds "ok", but nothing like the glory years of the 70's and 80's when everything sounded so crisp and fresh, because it was stripped down and recorded analog. It seems like Rush really likes to tinker with different technologies and try different things and it's hard to find fault with that, but I thought this would have been the perfect album to go back to analog. Well consider this: the foo fighters play in 4/4 99% of the time with drop D power chords (requiring one finger) and three guitarists taking the same line over and over. Now, on the other hand, Rush plays more complex music (although not as complex as back in the day) which would make imperfections more obvious. They have one guitarist and about ten thousand time signatures. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
syrinxstarman Posted May 9, 2012 Share Posted May 9, 2012 QUOTE (CantStopThinkingBig @ May 6 2012, 12:31 PM) Maybe this is just my imagination, but listening to HF on my iPod I always notice it sounds significantly quieter than all my other Rush songs. Maybe they're purposely mixing CA at a lower volume to preserve the dynamic range? I heard Porcupine Tree does the same thing with their albums. I have noticed this as well and was wondering what was going on. Headlong Flight definitely seems to have an inherent lower volume. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
USB Connector Posted May 9, 2012 Share Posted May 9, 2012 (edited) Yep. Normally I have my MP3 player at half volume for all the songs I have. I need to crank it to 75% to enjoy HF because I can barely hear it at 50%. Edited May 9, 2012 by USB Connector Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now