What's the best version of fleetwood macs rumours album?

[TBone]

"Packing up Shacking up is all you wanna do" ... was apparently a line that Lindsey refused to remove, even tho Stevie insisted.

Listening to Rumours again, I realize, again; Mick Fleetwood is an awesome unique drummer.

(my is used bc apparently these sku# are not universally comparative)

On the main: In comparison to my orig canadian 3010 vs my orig jap 3010-2(32xd-350). The 3010 is hotter but not dynamically constrained, with brighter eq. It makes the 3010-2 sound a little dull tonally (justified by the graphs above). 3010-2, Micks cymbals seem to lack the impact of the brighter 3010, but that can be rectified w/greater volume. The 3010-2's sunnier disposition also gives Micks drums an apparent brighter edge/tonal impact (esp. The Chain) which makes even the exact same songs sound a bit different, never mind the few songs that actually are recorded differently. The biggest sonic difference, tho, is the added reverb, obvious on the orig canuck 3010.

You Make Loving Fun: 3010-2 sounds dryer. The added reverb provides the 3010 a warmer hollow character. It sounds pleasant, but it obscures detail. Example; w/the dryer 3010-2 you can easily hear Christine doing ALL her own backup vocals, on the 3010 many of those same background vocals sound too hallow to define. Also, you appreciate Christine voice much more w/the japanese 3010-2, she sounds beautifully natural here.

Go Your Own Way: 3010-2 jap is so-so crank-able, stays open, no fatigue. Just wow; hope my vinyl pressing sounds at least as good.

Can't stand the song Don't Stop, so that's enough of Rumours (for now). Doesn't matter, the Japanese 32xd-350 which is also designated 3010-2 is sans the reverb in comparison to the Canadian 3010.

Sal, i think your version is essentially the same as my Canadian CD. It's a fine cd, but once you notice the added reverb ...

 

[NorthSky]

• http://forums.stevehoffman.tv/threads/fleetwood-mac-rumours-sacd-hybrid.269733/

Here's the reason why I posted the link above: For various opinions between the DVD-Audio and SACD (both multichannel) versions.
We talked various regular digital 16/44 PCM CD cuts and analog record pressings but less on those two hi-res audio formats.
_______

Extra: What is the best medium/version of Adele's latest album...25?
Anyone here who has that album on CD or LP or hi-res download, and what do you think...recording sound quality wise and does it transform your soul into a wide soundstage? You like the effect?

 

[Sal1950]

Sal, i think your version is essentially the same as my Canadian CD. It's a fine cd, but once you notice the added reverb ...

Thanks for the investigation TBone! I'm pretty sure this is a master that I can live with long term, not something I play on a weekly basis in any case so I'm satisfied (for now).
Speaking of Mick, I just love to watch that guy play. His facial expressions and the look in his eyes are priceless. Last I saw him was in the very early 2000's at the Chicago Theater. They kept the big screens camera on him much more that any other bands drummer I ever seen, what a hoot.

 

[TBone]

I'm pretty sure this is a master that I can live with long term, not something I play on a weekly basis in any case so I'm satisfied (for now).

Well, it was CeeDee's posting on the reverb subject that made me want to investigate further. So far; it seems that the reverb based CD pressings are the most common and readily available, therefore that reverb based characteristic would be familiar to most fans of the album.

I've been listening to the 3010 (w/reverb) CD for such a long period it became the norm for me. In fact, on first listen, it's the dryer pressing that sounds a little dis-concerning initially, it sounds different, not the other way around. I think it's possible many may prefer certain songs w/reverb, based on either familiarity and/or the added atmospheric warmth.

However, on a song by song basis, you may want both. Some songs are composed very differently and others just sound different. Go Your Own Way is one such example, you may prefer (as I did) the non-reverb 32xd-350 version by a country mile. It sounds noticeably dryer than what most people have probably heard, but it has > dynamic contrast and far more instrumental details. Case in point; Mick's unique timing/drumming becomes so very much more appreciable without the added reverb.

Kinda reminds me of Abbey Road http://www.audiosciencereview.com/forum/index.php?threads/abbey-road-spy-vs-spy.217/#post-6221 in which Ringo's drums/style are all but lost on most pressings, but the exact opposite is true with the Toshiba CP35-3016.

I'm a completest type audiophile/collector, I prefer to have a collection of pressings rather than continually roll equipment. Audiophiles are always willing to pay big bucks to improve their system, always searching for that next big upgrade. Yet the improved sonic characteristics I refer can be heard on nearly any device. In other words, in this case; major sonic differences, head-over-heals more acoustically noticeable than the vast majority of audiophile pursuit$ can be attained for as little as the cost of a used CD.

Apparently, innovation can't always differentiate the forest from the trees.

 

[Sal1950]

Audiophiles are always willing to pay big bucks to improve their system, always searching for that next big upgrade. Yet the improved sonic characteristics I refer can be heard on nearly any device. In other words, in this case; major sonic differences, head-over-heals more acoustically noticeable than the vast majority of audiophile pursuit$ can be attained for as little as the cost of a used CD.

Be careful there TBone, you're revealing to much of the absolute sound, (truth).
Problem for we who focus more on the source is that there's so much music and so little time. A cliche I know but very true none the less. Even as a retiree I never seem to have enough leisure time to spend indulging my audio/video desires. My bucket list is long, full of content that I just never get around to listening/watching.

 

[TBone]

as per my #50 post w/freq graphs ...

The visual difference between these two CDs is considerably more than I see when comparing the CD to LP. That confused me, because I've never witnessed two CD differ much at all, esp in the low frequencies, apart from scale. Another look ...

In retrospect, considering the extra reverb and different song versions, the difference makes sense.

 

[TBone]

re: Nautilus LP ... https://www.discogs.com/Fleetwood-Mac-Rumours/release/1165981

notice it was dated 1980, very early example of digital mastering to LP.

came across this very early (over a decade ago) rip of Dreams (LP BSK 3010).
Peak Value: 0.00 dB --- 0.00 dB
Avg RMS: -16.88 dB --- -15.25 dB
DR channel: 14.96 dB --- 13.23 dB

the clipping, my bad; silly excuse being that recorders slow meters. The clipping may not look too excessive, however its 13.23dB dr.value should measure closer to 15dB ...

Dreams (BSK 3010 lp) re-ripped. dr:= 15.18 / 15.29 dB ...

left ch eq; comparing 2 CDs & LP: JPN=RED CND=BLUE. LP=GREEN...

The Canadian CD is obviously tilted brighter; so-much-so, an extra -3dB was added to help scale the graph.

(Edit: LP dated 1977)

 

[NorthSky]

Question: What's the percentage of music recording engineers on this planet adhering to an audiophile standard?

Number 2: Is there such a standard?

Number 3: Which of the two has a higher standard; music recordings or movie soundtracks?

 

[TBone]

What audiophile standard do you refer?

 

[NorthSky]

What audiophile standard do you refer?

No DRC, no Constant Volume, no Echo effect, no Tremolo, no Sustain, no Flanging, no Wa-Wa, no Delay, no Distortion, ...brief...just pure natural music in all its splendid glory with everything that was in the recording as is, including the micro and macro elements plus the atmosphere of the venue plus the sweat of the musicians and the soul of the moment in time and in space. ...That, is an audiophile standard recording.

...Similar to Reference Recordings music record label, Channel Classics record label, , ECM Jazz record label, Three Blind Mice, Opus 3, Sheffield, Proprius, Analekta, Chesky, AudioQuest, Analogue Productions Originals, Silence, Clarity Recordings, Concord Jazz, Nautilus, Blue Note, Premonition, Impulse, MapleShade, ...just to name few of the best music record labels.

 

[RayDunzl]

No wah-wah?

 

[fas42]

No DRC, no Constant Volume, no Echo effect, no Tremolo, no Sustain, no Flanging, no Wa-Wa, no Delay, no Distortion, ...brief...just pure natural music in all its splendid glory with everything that was in the recording as is, including the micro and macro elements plus the atmosphere of the venue plus the sweat of the musicians and the soul of the moment in time and in space. ...That, is an audiophile standard recording.

That's a bit heavy duty, Bob! Some of my favourite recordings are saturated with all this sort of Good Stuff - the 'effects' are part of the music ... big time! The complexity of recordings is part of the pleasure - I'm not into Vegan music, per se, .

A good system will allow one to hear the purity of one instrument, or voice balancing against the deliberate roughness of another - if it all gets mulched up, then there are problems to be sorted, ... .

 

[NorthSky]

I'm talking real music here, like classical. Sure, I like Pink Floyd. I just wanted to emphasize the good stuff, and stay away from compression and distortion and flagellation.

♪ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wah-wah_(music)

The Wah-wah effect on a guitar

 

[ceedee]

Mark Waldrep and Barry Diament are ones who come to mind.

Haven't heard Mark's recordings but I've heard him speak about them. I have heard Barry's and I think they sound terrible. One poor guy had a rock-pop album to record and somehow got hooked up with Barry. Take a listen:
http://www.soundkeeperrecordings.com/confluence.htm

Hearing that made me realize that there's a reason we use multi tracks and compression for recording rock. Barry is also an audiophool judging by his offering of "slow-burned" CD-Rs and DVD-Rs. He also charges more for a burned CD than a pressed CD, for some reason.

 

[TBone]

Heard some of Mark's recordings, not Soundkeepers. That said, past Soundkeeper, I wished I'd every one of Barry's mastered CDs.

 

[TBone]

Specialist audiophile re-mastering brands, such as MFSL, may be considered more audiophile, but they have their ups & downs. Generally prefer the well-mastered originals; such as AM+ (Audio Master Plus Series CDs) collection, to the remasters.

 

[TBone]

While researching Fleetwood Mac live sets (I've the very compressed The Dance on CD (DVD measures much better)) and noticed they have this uncompressed (~dr15) set available ... https://www.discogs.com/Fleetwood-Mac-Fleetwood-Mac-Live/master/38758

Heard it?

 

[ceedee]

I have heard it, but can't remember anything notable about the sound quality. I'm not really a "DR" guy. Sure, I don't like extreme compression (such as the Rumours deluxe remaster and DVD-A), but I don't mind some compression and limiting. I always thought The Dance sounded OK. There are a few performances on there I really like: "I'm So Afraid", "Go Insane", and "Big Love" are all great IMO. Love Lindsey's guitar playing.

 

[NorthSky]

While researching Fleetwood Mac live sets (I've the very compressed The Dance on CD (DVD measures much better)) and noticed they have this uncompressed (~dr15) set available ... https://www.discogs.com/Fleetwood-Mac-Fleetwood-Mac-Live/master/38758

Heard it?

No, but I have 'The Dance' on DVD; not bad multichannel audio.
It's compressed Dolby Digital 5.1 surround (AC3 @ the time...it was called) - 448 kbps most likely, and on side two...linear PCM stereo.
More fun in surround, but better quality in stereo (16/44).

♫ Bonus: https://qello.com/concert/The-Dance-3580#

 

[LightninBoy]

No DRC, no Constant Volume, no Echo effect, no Tremolo, no Sustain, no Flanging, no Wa-Wa, no Delay, no Distortion, ...brief...just pure natural music in all its splendid glory with everything that was in the recording as is, including the micro and macro elements plus the atmosphere of the venue plus the sweat of the musicians and the soul of the moment in time and in space. ...That, is an audiophile standard recording.

That's a bit extreme. For electric instruments (like keyboards, bass, and guitars), Delay, tremelo, flange, distortion, wah, etc are typically part of the performance. In other words, these are tone shaping tools used by each musician for artistic intent and employed during the live performance of the song.

I've typically understood "audiophile recordings" as being all about capturing the live performance of the musicians as it sounds in a venue. If that live performance includes a guitar player using a wah pedal through a distorted amp - so be it.

That said, I think you'd appreciate the album "Dirt Floor" by Chris Whitley. That's about as raw as it gets and it sounds great.