0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic. Read 17012 times.
Is there any difference between the Bluray and DVDA versions? or do both have the same resolution?
MPs' is one of my favorite Rush albums. Fwiw, this past year, I was on a quest to get the complete Rush catalog for my music library. Hanging out at the SH forum, I read the best sounding digitial versions of most of their albums (pre-1990's +/-) were reportedly the original / earlier CDs from either Anthem Records Canadian or original West Germany Mercury "Atomic" CD's (A number of them share the exact mastering). I already had most of the titles on the early and mid-90's "remasters" series. As mentioned here as well, most of the CDs sound quality leaves a lot to be desired. Flat, cold, compressed, sterile sq. While still not ideal, the Anthem and W.German Atomics are significantly better sounding than any of the versions or "remasters" I had. Less compression & probably earlier generation of source tapes are the typical reasons given. Short of a high quality needle drop from a nice early vinyl pressing, these are reportedly as good as they get... until now?Werd - I'm curious, which redbook CD pressing version were you using for comparison? I've really got my fingers crossed this 24/96 release is a significant sonic improvement. I'm still just a little leary with about a 50/50 split of opinions and the high price tag.Also - for the Rush fans, I thought I recently read the band will be touring this summer and playing MP all the way through? Did anyone else see that???ThxKenreau
HiIts an Anthem recording. Its funny the cd case claims its ADD mastering while the cd claims its AAd mastering .
I saw Rush play in Boston at TD Garden this past Fall. They did indeed play all of Moving Pictures (this was the second time I heard them play a complete album - the first time was 2112). There were some technical difficulties at the end of the show when Alex's guitar stopped working and he got very creative: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5_mbYzM8axoMy initial listen to the hi-rez version of Moving Pictures (I ripped it from the DVD-A) wasn't as positive as many people here. In fact, I thought it sounded worse than the remastered cd version that was part of the package. I'll have to listen again in a few weeks after I get my amps and preamp back from the manufacturer.George
My initial listen to the hi-rez version of Moving Pictures (I ripped it from the DVD-A) wasn't as positive as many people here. In fact, I thought it sounded worse than the remastered cd version that was part of the package. I'll have to listen again in a few weeks after I get my amps and preamp back from the manufacturer.George
What is interesting about the observations so far is that the folks downloading the files from HD Tracks like them and the ones ripping them from the DVD-A do not. I used EAC to rip the MFSL CD just for reference.
HelloUsing EAC i took the bonus cd from my DVDA i just bought and ripped into wav. This is the same recording as my orig. I will report if it comes up different after extended listening but i doubt it. The difference between the Hi rez and redbook are noteworthy. The hi rez is cleaned up and just sounds more powerful. THis 2496 recording is primo cranked up. Its fabulous, the cymbals on the redbook are phasey and just seem to do nothing. The hi rez are placed and full bodied with purpose, its just way better. Like i said this recording is reference for hi rez marketing. Back to back they show how hi rez can get your gear sounding better.
Werd,What are you using for playback hardware? Does your redbook player upsample or play native nos? Kenreau
There is NO DOUBT that this is the best release of this classic recording. I am a sucker for remasters, etc. I have them all; vinyl and cd. No contest, this is the best hands down. Just listen to YYZ ONCE for that breaking glass.Less congestion, more fluid, better dimensionality. Great stuff.
