|
Post by claytonm4500 on Mar 15, 2021 20:09:11 GMT
Hi everyone,
Recently I compared the 2007 Remaster of Out of the Blue to the original 1990 CD, and I gotta say, I feel the original CD sounds much better. I know that lots of newer CDs suffer from the loudness war and lack dynamics, but this is a little different. To me, it sounds like the tapes they used for the source of the 2007 remaster were inferior, almost sounding worn out some and less clear. Whereas the original CDs has crispy drums and more highs. Does everyone else feel this way too, or am I alone?
I would love to know your thoughts.
|
|
|
Post by ShardEnder on Mar 16, 2021 2:59:28 GMT
At some point between the creation of the 21st anniversary Digipak reissue (AKA the '98 stealth remaster) and the version prepared in 1999-2001 yet not released until 2007 due to later waves in the entire catalogue overhaul campaign being massively delayed while newly uncovered rarities could be polished up, the multitracks for Out Of The Blue were either lost or damaged, meaning that the only surviving copy now able to be used was a stereo cutting tape that was in less than ideal condition. They've since been able to patch in a few bits and get this sounding relatively decent, but you really can't go wrong with most of the pre-2001 digital versions. I'd also recommend the original "fat boy" 2CD edition, though I'm looking to replace my old '98 retail disc with one of the copies sold via the FTM hub, as those were randomly signed by various band members - it's just a shame these are virtually impossible to find in any form due to how little the world cared about ELO back then, though my understanding is that the initial print run did sell out. Between the great sound, fantastic packaging and some promising liner notes from Rob Caiger that point to what he'd later be able to offer, it's a winner all-round.
|
|
|
Post by livinthing on Mar 16, 2021 15:04:13 GMT
Am l right in saying the recent vinyl release also uses this poor master? If so, the original vinyl l bought on eBay recently ( although unplayed as l haven't got a record player ) may be the best quality going. But there is the 2015 HD version which may hopefully get a release this year???
|
|
|
Post by claytonm4500 on Mar 16, 2021 17:47:22 GMT
The 1998 CD is no different than the original 1990 one, in terms of source tapes used. They are identical just with some slightly different time cues, mainly in the Concerto.
|
|
|
Post by queenofthehours on Mar 16, 2021 19:39:15 GMT
I noticed a difference between the CDs, I thought it was just me.
I don't know which year it was but the first version of the album I heard was on an old CD from the library, it might have been the 1990 one but I'm not certain. I went and bought the 2007 remaster a while later and felt disappointed somehow. I guess now it must have been because the music didn't "sound right". I know nothing about dynamics and stuff but the difference between CDs felt like the difference between vinyl and CD - you don't know what it is but there is something not right.
|
|
|
Post by tammytastic on Mar 17, 2021 11:55:31 GMT
Slightly off topic but I was stunned listening to my red vinyl of ANWR. I love how pretty is looks but the sound is so flat compared to either my 180g version or the CD box set version.
|
|
|
Post by lasttrain929 on Mar 17, 2021 12:39:41 GMT
After reading your comments I gave then both a listen late last night, and I did notice my original CD was a slightly clearer sound. Not sure which year it was. On the plus side for the remaster you have the bonus of the two extra tracks “ the quick and the daft” & “ latitude 88 north” plus the mini space ship model and new sleeve notes and pics. I usually play the original CDs l bought, thought Jeff got them perfect first time around.....
|
|
|
Post by queenofthehours on Mar 17, 2021 13:18:07 GMT
To me the older CD sounds warmer than the remaster but I might just prefer the old CD because it want the first version of the album I heard.
|
|
|
Post by rich2371 on Mar 17, 2021 17:54:57 GMT
Yes the original cd sounds alot better than any of the latter remastered releases , you can clearly hear drop outs on ie night in the city . Yes the original vinyl is the same a lot better than any of the recent remastered versions . Real shame that the master tape was lost/damaged.
|
|
|
Post by Timeblue on Mar 17, 2021 18:13:47 GMT
Would it make a difference on what equipment that you used? A £20 CD player or turntable isn't going to offer the same acoustic capability as a £300 player with a top end amplifier and speakers....
|
|
|
Post by Southernman on Mar 20, 2021 7:46:57 GMT
Somewhat off topic I know, but does anyone know the quality of the pressings used for the Four Light Years box set?
|
|
|
Post by Horacewimp on Mar 20, 2021 8:35:35 GMT
Somewhat off topic I know, but does anyone know the quality of the pressings used for the Four Light Years box set? I’m sure I’ve read or heard the quality of those pressings was very poor.
|
|
|
Post by livinthing on Mar 27, 2021 19:08:26 GMT
Just bought a 1990s copy on eBay, gonna check it out
|
|
|
Post by livinthing on Jun 26, 2021 15:38:52 GMT
1990s version aside, l also invested in a 2007 pre bscd2 Japanese miniature. As it has the 3 extra tracks l expected it to be the poor sounding remastered audio. It is split into two discs and l listened to the second disc.To my suprise l didn't hear any drop outs through' concerto '. I have yet to listen to the 1st disc. Does anyone know what version was used here by Sony Japan?
|
|
|
Post by ShardEnder on Jun 26, 2021 16:21:41 GMT
All reissues of OOTB since after the 21st anniversary reissue use the same source - a stereo cutting tape that shows signs of wear in places. For the 2015 remaster issued on HDtracks and similar digital outlets, some of this damage was repaired, but it's still a less than ideal situation because of the excessive compression applied to that version (which goes against the whole ethos of such "high resolution" editions).
|
|