|
Post by mercurialfreddie on Dec 20, 2022 21:01:15 GMT
yes but, according with Queenvault... "EMI did not know where the first generation stereo master tapes were stored, so the 1986 and 1988 CD releases of Queen CD's used production masters for their source. The production masters were stored at Abbey Road and easily obtainable. Production masters were tapes created for the cutting of the original vinyl records. The process, as Brian May explained in an issue of the Fan Club Magazine, is as follows; the stereo master tapes of each track were taped together and all recorded onto one long production master tape. That production master tape would be the easiest way to cut to vinyl. The quality, however, would be one generation removed from the stereo master of each individual track. These production masters were used for the very first Queen CD releases, which explains their "hissy" sound." Does that also explain how the start of some of the tracks were 'clipped', particularly on the original CD of ADATR? Did they trace the original first generation master tapes ? I thought they were used for the famous 2011 release of all back-catalogue ?
|
|
|
Post by deathtoming on Dec 28, 2022 5:06:28 GMT
I mentioned earlier in this thread a long time ago how I was interested in hearing about what differences people can hear across the different masters, since they're not always obvious to me.
I was listening to the Elektra '84 News of the World target CD today and noticed some things, so I compared those particular spots across a few other discs. The EMI '86, Hollywood '91, MFSL '93 all had these moments as well, but they were "cleaned up" in the 2011 Ludwig disc so that you can't hear the following:
- Spread Your Wings: at about 0m 19s in, there is a "p-pop" when Freddie sings the words "made up" - Who Needs You: at 0m 2s, while the guitar kicks in on the right, there are light incidental noises on the left before the percussion starts - It's Late: from 0m 39s to 0m 48s, the words "myself," "but," and "inside" have some problems with extra sounds being picked up
Was it technological limitations that made Ludwig the first to remove some of these issues? Or was it a choice to keep these imperfections as it was deemed to be part of the album? For example, even though it's barely audible, I liked hearing the sounds in Who Needs You because it gave it a slightly "live" feel to the recording.
Any other examples of imperfections being removed or previously buried sounds more noticeable in 2011?
|
|
rub3945
Ostler
Posts: 248
Likes: 436
|
Post by rub3945 on Dec 28, 2022 9:28:25 GMT
I mentioned earlier in this thread a long time ago how I was interested in hearing about what differences people can hear across the different masters, since they're not always obvious to me. I was listening to the Elektra '84 News of the World target CD today and noticed some things, so I compared those particular spots across a few other discs. The EMI '86, Hollywood '91, MFSL '93 all had these moments as well, but they were "cleaned up" in the 2011 Ludwig disc so that you can't hear the following: - Spread Your Wings: at about 0m 19s in, there is a "p-pop" when Freddie sings the words "made up" - Who Needs You: at 0m 2s, while the guitar kicks in on the right, there are light incidental noises on the left before the percussion starts - It's Late: from 0m 39s to 0m 48s, the words "myself," "but," and "inside" have some problems with extra sounds being picked up Was it technological limitations that made Ludwig the first to remove some of these issues? Or was it a choice to keep these imperfections as it was deemed to be part of the album? For example, even though it's barely audible, I liked hearing the sounds in Who Needs You because it gave it a slightly "live" feel to the recording. Any other examples of imperfections being removed or previously buried sounds more noticeable in 2011? Good finding! Haven't listened to the 2011 version of NOTW enough to notice all those. Have heard quite a few differences on the 2011 Flash disc so far though. All during the parts with the movie audio. I'm taking the clicks/pops out of an LP transfer right now and am using a couple different discs for reference to make sure I'm not removing anything that was originally on there. The '86 EMI and '91 Hollywood have been the most trustworthy so far (the imperfections stand out more on the Hollywood since it has a slightly cleaner sound) but the 2011 has most of those instances removed. I prefer the authenticity of the original mixes too as it's how the band wanted the music to sound at the time. Maybe they would've taken tiny stuff like that out if they had the modern tools, but I find it that tad more impressive hearing what they were able to achieve in the studio on their own...
|
|
|
Post by deathtoming on Jan 2, 2023 20:42:05 GMT
- It's Late: from 0m 39s to 0m 48s, the words "myself," "but," and "inside" have some problems with extra sounds being picked up Any other examples of imperfections being removed or previously buried sounds more noticeable in 2011? Good finding! Haven't listened to the 2011 version of NOTW enough to notice all those. Have heard quite a few differences on the 2011 Flash disc so far though. All during the parts with the movie audio. I'm taking the clicks/pops out of an LP transfer right now and am using a couple different discs for reference to make sure I'm not removing anything that was originally on there. The '86 EMI and '91 Hollywood have been the most trustworthy so far (the imperfections stand out more on the Hollywood since it has a slightly cleaner sound) but the 2011 has most of those instances removed. I prefer the authenticity of the original mixes too as it's how the band wanted the music to sound at the time. Maybe they would've taken tiny stuff like that out if they had the modern tools, but I find it that tad more impressive hearing what they were able to achieve in the studio on their own... The problems I heard (using headphones) on It's Late were pretty bad, though. It almost sounds like someone was roughly handling the mic with their hands while Freddie was singing into it.
|
|
|
Post by straycatbeatles on Jan 14, 2023 6:30:14 GMT
So for an experiment, I reapplied EQ to Keep Yourself Alive from the first EMI CD to match the 2011 remaster. The results came out pretty well, unfortunately I was not able to get similar results with the other album tracks, but it is nice to have at least an uncompressed master of one of the tracks.
|
|
|
Post by straycatbeatles on Feb 7, 2023 18:24:26 GMT
Got the Elektra Greatest Hits for cheap at a local shop. It is packaged nicer than the EMI, a non-Target but still in good quality. I don't feel the mastering itself is too nice. The EMI is much more satisfying to listen to, and is more balanced in terms of EQ, though Under Pressure is nice, and I added it to the my files of the EMI as an extra track.
|
|
rub3945
Ostler
Posts: 248
Likes: 436
|
Post by rub3945 on Feb 9, 2023 9:01:10 GMT
So for an experiment, I reapplied EQ to Keep Yourself Alive from the first EMI CD to match the 2011 remaster. The results came out pretty well, unfortunately I was not able to get similar results with the other album tracks, but it is nice to have at least an uncompressed master of one of the tracks. Give this one a listen straycatbeatles ! Completely untouched rip of the original UK LP. Will eventually get to cleaning the clicks and pops up and sharing the full thing but either way, there's no way I can go back to any of the existing digital versions after hearing this one... (YouTube definitely hampers the quality a touch, but should sound alright if you play it at 1080p 👍)
|
|
|
Post by dragonkiller on Feb 9, 2023 11:49:54 GMT
So when the "new digital" CD came out back in the 80`s and everybody said digital was the future. It turns out the best sound recordings were the original releases, on vinyl. Conclusion ...If it`s not broken dont`t fix it. Long live vinyl, just have to get myself a new record deck.
|
|
Dimitris
Ploughman
Posts: 476
Likes: 282
|
Post by Dimitris on Feb 9, 2023 14:56:54 GMT
So when the "new digital" CD came out back in the 80`s and everybody said digital was the future. It turns out the best sound recordings were the original releases, on vinyl. Conclusion ...If it`s not broken dont`t fix it. Long live vinyl, just have to get myself a new record deck. I guess it depends on what metric you're using to define quality. Technical terms CD wins. But subjectively, many people prefer the sound of vinyl over CD. Listening the first cds of the 80s in an great sound system , the format really reveals the limitations of the tape. As it was stated back then: The music on this Compact Disc was originally recorded on analog equipment. We have attempted to preserve, as closely as possible, the sound of the original recording. Because of its high resolution, however, the Compact Disc can reveal limitations of the source tape.
|
|
rub3945
Ostler
Posts: 248
Likes: 436
|
Post by rub3945 on Feb 9, 2023 18:26:01 GMT
So when the "new digital" CD came out back in the 80`s and everybody said digital was the future. It turns out the best sound recordings were the original releases, on vinyl. Conclusion ...If it`s not broken dont`t fix it. Long live vinyl, just have to get myself a new record deck. I guess it depends on what metric you're using to define quality. Technical terms CD wins. But subjectively, many people prefer the sound of vinyl over CD. Listening the first cds of the 80s in an great sound system , the format really reveals the limitations of the tape. As it was stated back then: The music on this Compact Disc was originally recorded on analog equipment. We have attempted to preserve, as closely as possible, the sound of the original recording. Because of its high resolution, however, the Compact Disc can reveal limitations of the source tape.
I agree with both of you there. I fully believe digital and vinyl have the ability to sound as good as each other. It's really just dependant on the quality of the source itself and the mastering.
I can't actually comment on how the LPs sound in person and don't plan on owning a turntable anytime soon, but these rips onto digital format are enough to tell me that not all Queen CDs reached their full potential (my opinion anyway).
These rips (once they're all cleaned up) will for the most part become my new go-to versions. And YES I'm trying to figure out how they can be shared externally without breaking the forum rules 🙂
|
|
|
Post by dragonkiller on Feb 10, 2023 12:29:20 GMT
In my own opinion I feel that the vinyl is a richer deeper sound, and the CD can sound similar but not the same. The only downside to vinyl was the dust and scratches. I have a lot of Queen/solo vinyls I never played even when I did have a turntable.
When the CD format first came out my first was The Works CD and Greatest Hits and thought if this is the future of music I`m in. You got more music on the CD(later releases with bonus tracks etc.)and it did sound clearer and easier to clean and store. As I got older though CD`s started to sound different to me(probably hearing issues).
Now a lot of people are saying vinyl is the better sounding format, especially the older versions.
Rant over and either way lets all enjoy the music Freddie and the boys gave us.
|
|
Raf
Dragonfly Trumpeter
Sweet like some kind of cheese
Posts: 198
Likes: 236
|
Post by Raf on Feb 10, 2023 14:33:12 GMT
In my own opinion I feel that the vinyl is a richer deeper sound, and the CD can sound similar but not the same. The only downside to vinyl was the dust and scratches. I have a lot of Queen/solo vinyls I never played even when I did have a turntable. And portability Vinyl is a great way to listen to music in your living room (as I do!), but not a very good choice for your car, for a morning run or to take with you on your holidays (besides all the space it'd take in my luggage, I'd be scared to death something could happen to them on the trip). TBH I'm not much a of a CD fan since it's become so easy to stream digital music, but between them and vinyl... I believe each format shines on different occasions. Except cassettes, they just suck.
|
|
|
Post by macduff77 on Feb 10, 2023 15:57:14 GMT
I enjoy all three mediums (vinyl/CD/digital). I have a turntable and CD setup and when I am sitting down to specifically listen to an album, it's usually vinyl. If I'm sitting working or doing something, most likely it'll be a CD (unless I'm in the mood to listen to one of the MFSL recordings, etc).
When I'm out and about or just want some background tunes, it'll be digital via one of my streaming devices or in my car via my phone.
|
|
JackG
Dragonfly Trumpeter
Discord: tieyourmotherdown
Posts: 191
Likes: 196
|
Post by JackG on Feb 16, 2023 19:49:17 GMT
Has anyone compared the SACD 24/96 releases with the CDs?
|
|
Lord Fickle
Global Moderator
Posts: 20,749
Likes: 7,379
|
Post by Lord Fickle on Feb 16, 2023 19:50:42 GMT
Has anyone compared the SACD 24/96 releases with the CDs? I've heard them, and they didn't sound any different to me.
|
|
|
Post by straycatbeatles on Feb 25, 2023 19:51:33 GMT
I'm only going up to the first five albums, as I haven't done up-to-date notes on all of the albums.
01. Queen - CDP or 2011 This one to me really is a toss up. Both have their upsides, the CDP a more natural sound and dynamics, but the 2011 has better EQ choices and a better tape transfer. Consider this one ongoing...
02. Queen II - 2011 I wish the peaks weren't shaved off, but the 2011 is the best version of the album. The CDP, while dynamic, really does feel lacking without the breath of life the 2011 has. The 2004 has a weird treble boost that turns me away from it, despite it being dynamic as well.
03. Sheer Heart Attack - CDP The CDP is very warm, and is a very good choice, but it also felt like it needed a new upgrade. So I went to the 2004, which is also decent, but the EQ feels off on this one too, it sounds like some of the midrange was compromised. The newer tape transfer definitely does help on a good amount of the tracks, though it would need some EQ work done.
04. A Night At The Opera - DCC (or CDP) The DCC I feel hasn't been beaten, though unfortunately it is very expensive. The CDP, however, is a very good alternative. Though lacking a tiny bit of low end, it sounds very natural and is a good first choice for this album.
05. A Day At The Races - 2011 (or MFSL) The MFSL (and the CDP) are more dynamic than the 2011 is, however I feel the CDP sounds like a soft cloth has been placed over the speaker, so a lot of the detail is gone, but makes for a more relaxed listen. The MFSL is the opposite, lots of detail, but also misses some warmth the original CD had. The 2011 I feel has the better EQ between the three, even with the compression working against it, so is my current choice. The MFSL is there as a second choice if the compression is a bit much.
|
|
|
Post by ThomasQuinn on Mar 2, 2023 6:13:30 GMT
Look, I've said this before, and I'm probably going to say it again a number of times: from a technical point of view, LPs have only one single thing going for them, which is that they 'store' audio as continuous waves rather than samples. Every subjective advantage in sound *can* be replicated on CD, or any other digital format. All true 'advantages' (and they also come with disadvantages) in analog audio processing come well before an LP is pressed, most importantly analog compressors. The real problem is that mixing and mastering for digital carriers works quite differently from doing so for analog carriers - many of the engineers in the early days of CDs (and that means well into the '90s), trained and practiced on analog formats, just didn't 'get' the difference, tried to apply many analog techniques to digital audio, and at the same time missed some of the necessary new techniques for audio processing, leading to a number of records that sound great on vinyl, and frankly terrible on CD. I'd suggest Al Stewart's album "Year Of The Cat" as a perfect example of this.
Bottom line: it's a matter of engineering. If a given LP *really* sounds better than the same album on CD, rather than you enjoying the experience of playing vinyl more than putting on a CD, that just means the CD is poorly engineered.
|
|
BrƎИsꓘi
Administrator
They called it paradise, I don't know why...You call some place paradise, kiss it goodbye.
Posts: 3,738
Likes: 2,868
|
Post by BrƎИsꓘi on Mar 2, 2023 12:49:30 GMT
exactly this ^. The vinyl preference can only ever be about one of two factors: ♦ crap CD transfer or ♦ some perceived "historic relationship" with the times/events linked to the original vinyl purchase/release period.
|
|
|
Post by mercurialfreddie on Mar 3, 2023 12:47:39 GMT
Look, I've said this before, and I'm probably going to say it again a number of times: from a technical point of view, LPs have only one single thing going for them, which is that they 'store' audio as continuous waves rather than samples. Every subjective advantage in sound *can* be replicated on CD, or any other digital format. All true 'advantages' (and they also come with disadvantages) in analog audio processing come well before an LP is pressed, most importantly analog compressors. The real problem is that mixing and mastering for digital carriers works quite differently from doing so for analog carriers - many of the engineers in the early days of CDs (and that means well into the '90s), trained and practiced on analog formats, just didn't 'get' the difference, tried to apply many analog techniques to digital audio, and at the same time missed some of the necessary new techniques for audio processing, leading to a number of records that sound great on vinyl, and frankly terrible on CD. I'd suggest Al Stewart's album "Year Of The Cat" as a perfect example of this. Bottom line: it's a matter of engineering. If a given LP *really* sounds better than the same album on CD, rather than you enjoying the experience of playing vinyl more than putting on a CD, that just means the CD is poorly engineered. Vinyl is analog and the needle touches the surface of the vinyl and causes friction and wear and tear. Some say though, that the best records are used records that are well mastered and played on good, properly set equipment. If a CD is not mastered loud and nor compressed, with plenty of dynamic range, the CD sound quality will be far superior.
If every album was like the old Mobile Fidelity discs, mastered from (usually) the master tape, pressed on that gloriously quiet and flat JVC vinyl, I might never have seriously given up on vinyl. Well, with new record prices being what they are today, loudness war (even on vinyl mastering), and reports of more pressing flaws than I recall in the old days, I would probably be rethinking. The point is that one must define what "good" sound is before asking if A can be as good as B. I accept a loss of some low-level information on CD, for the benefits of pitch stability, lack of crackles and tracking issues and inner groove issues (with the right cartridge I don't hear outright IGD, but there is a degradation of quality nevertheless). So, CD sound might be considered as good as LP, but each one is or can be better in certain respects. A CD will never match the quality of some of the direct disc recordings, but very few of those are what we would call artistic triumphs. But I'll never hear the pitch wowing on a CD, either. Doesn't that count something for sound quality? There is also a question of high-resolution audio...
|
|
rub3945
Ostler
Posts: 248
Likes: 436
|
Post by rub3945 on Mar 5, 2023 11:13:29 GMT
Couldn't agree more with all those points there. Have heard a handful of CDs from other artists that do a decent job bringing the sound over from analog. But even the best digital remastering efforts can't bring a mediocre tape transfer back to life and sadly in our case, the vast majority of Queen's back catalogue still hasn't been heard at its best on digital. I've recently gone through a few of the different remasters (1993, 2001 and 2011) and from what I gathered, they've not re-transferred the tapes for any of them since the 1993 series. The different remastering jobs have certainly shown potential (2011 Queen II possibly being the best example) but there's only so much they can do with what they've got.
Have heard vinyl rips of all the albums now (early UK pressings) and genuinely the only ones I'm still undecided on are Queen II, Innuendo and MIH. All the rest are superior to their digital counterparts without question. QPL seem pretty settled on their 2011 remasters, so looks like the only way to bring that peak sound over to digital at this point is if we do it ourselves. Still plan on sharing these rips (would love to do a video comparing the different sources for each too) but cleaning up the clicks and pops to a level I'm happy with is a super time consuming task. Only finished one or two albums so far around work hours etc. Won't be anytime soon but it'll be worth the wait I promise!
|
|
Dandy222
Tatterdemalion
Posts: 6
Likes: 0
|
Post by Dandy222 on Mar 19, 2023 23:29:37 GMT
Hey People Queen: A Night at the Opera: The Prophet Song. Did anyone notice a drop in volume just as Brian May is about to rip on his (wah wah) lead solo after the Opera section. This frustrates me bigtime, at the peak of the song, the overall volume just drops noticeably? In my opinion Bob Ludwig (re-masterman) has spoilt the song. Thankfully the older releases keep the volume. This flaw started from 2005 onwards. Ironicly Brian May said the 2005 release cannot be bettered? Martin
|
|
Lord Fickle
Global Moderator
Posts: 20,749
Likes: 7,379
|
Post by Lord Fickle on Mar 20, 2023 0:07:29 GMT
Hey People Queen: A Night at the Opera: The Prophet Song. Did anyone notice a drop in volume just as Brian May is about to rip on his (wah wah) lead solo after the Opera section. This frustrates me bigtime, at the peak of the song, the overall volume just drops noticeably? In my opinion Bob Ludwig (re-masterman) has spoilt the song. Thankfully the older releases keep the volume. This flaw started from 2005 onwards. Ironicly Brian May said the 2005 release cannot be bettered? Martin One of the biggest revelations to me on the DVD-A of ANATO was the extraordinary power of The Prophet's Song, when compared to the regular CD version, which always sounded a little bit muted to me.
|
|
Dandy222
Tatterdemalion
Posts: 6
Likes: 0
|
Post by Dandy222 on Mar 20, 2023 0:19:14 GMT
I have the NATO Hollywood version on vinyl,to my disappointment NO CHANGE??
So now I'm on a mission to get the oldest release of both NATO and ADATR.
|
|
Dandy222
Tatterdemalion
Posts: 6
Likes: 0
|
Post by Dandy222 on Mar 20, 2023 0:25:54 GMT
Lord and Tatter
So are u guys aware of what saying??
Do U agree or disagree??
Im Really curious on what U guys think??
|
|
Dandy222
Tatterdemalion
Posts: 6
Likes: 0
|
Post by Dandy222 on Mar 20, 2023 23:12:57 GMT
Someone please talk to me lol
|
|
Lord Fickle
Global Moderator
Posts: 20,749
Likes: 7,379
|
Post by Lord Fickle on Mar 21, 2023 0:02:54 GMT
I thought I'd already made my point. Maybe no one else has noticed a volume dip? I can't remember the last time I played the 2011 remasters, but I don't recall anything particular standing out in The Prophet's Song, other than the fact that the DVD-A still sounds better.
|
|
|
Post by straycatbeatles on Mar 21, 2023 15:09:32 GMT
Hey People Queen: A Night at the Opera: The Prophet Song. Did anyone notice a drop in volume just as Brian May is about to rip on his (wah wah) lead solo after the Opera section. This frustrates me bigtime, at the peak of the song, the overall volume just drops noticeably? In my opinion Bob Ludwig (re-masterman) has spoilt the song. Thankfully the older releases keep the volume. This flaw started from 2005 onwards. Ironicly Brian May said the 2005 release cannot be bettered? Martin A specific timestamp would help wonders, I can compare the rip of the 2011 I have to the DCC and original CD.
|
|
JackG
Dragonfly Trumpeter
Discord: tieyourmotherdown
Posts: 191
Likes: 196
|
Post by JackG on Aug 30, 2023 10:27:43 GMT
I recently replaced my 2011 rips with rips from 1986. It's an upgrade.
|
|
|
Post by velvejones on Mar 24, 2024 23:08:02 GMT
The deluxe remasters have sounded great to my ears, What I really want are Dolby Atmos mixes for the entire catalog.
|
|