Zoots
Blue Crack Supplier
This album is no way as loud as Bomb.
I think it's fine.
I think it's fine.
I was actually really surprised at how GOOD the CD mix is, compared with the NLOTH Aus/NZ version I bought a few weeks ago.
Edit: As a comparison point, the guitar solo for Miracle Drug is pretty badly distorted on HTDAAB, as are some of the lyrics on Yahweh. I don't hear anything even close to those examples on NLOTH.
Most people here probably havent heard the quality of U2 on a Cassette if they are complaining about the quality of the new album....however I know where people are coming from....but the question is how many people would be willing to pay more then the 10-12 dollars for a better sounding format? A lot of people even on this forum think 10-12 dollars is too much for a CD which is pretty disturbing.
To get the best sounding stuff I would be willing to pay a premium price but I am sure I am in the minority.
To get the best sounding stuff I would be willing to pay a premium price but I am sure I am in the minority.
Disintegration - The Cure
The thread that was talking about the 96khz torrent version of NLOTH was strangely closed down. Near the end of that thread someone posted some waveforms of the 96khz version vs. the CD version. You could see that the 96khz version did indeed seem different; more dynamic range and less clipping.
I downloaded it last night and had a quick listen. And yes unless I was mistaken I think had much more 'life' to it than the CD version.
Has anyone looked deeper into the 96khz version? It shows promise, not because it is 96khz (that is just a sampling rate; big deal) but because it seems to have more dynamic range.
A lot of people shot it down under the assumption that it was just the CD copy. From what I have seen (waveforms) and heard (my ears) it might not be.
But that was 24 hours ago, and a lot changes in 24 hours!
If they came form the same source, shouldn't the files be the same length? Opening the waveforms, I notice that the lossless CD files are consistently about .115 -.179 seconds shorter than the files from this 96khz torrent.
If the 96khz torrent files didn't come from just a ripped CD, then the big question is, where did they come from?
forgive me for not being positive, but i wanted to say that the sound quality of "no line on the horizon" is fair at best.
i thought perhaps the 256k mp3s were not encoded properly, but after buying this album in digipack format today, i crank up my speakers only to hear horrible dynamic range, massive compression (on steroids) with distortion & clipping in many of the tracks...
what is wrong with the cd mastering here? they've done what i feared...pumped up the volume so much that the damn sound quality is sh&t...why can't these people understand "dynamic range"! why does everything have to be so improperly boosted?
if you dont know what i'm talking about, why not read these articles:
The Death Of Dynamic Range
Loudness war - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Stereophile: "CD Quality": Where Did the Music Go?
it's a real tragedy that we have great producers like danny lanois and brian eno producing great albums with songwriters at the top of their game recording the songs but only to have their masterpieces sent to the cd mastering f#cks to screw it all up in the end!
i went to best buy today to buy an album expecting great cd sound quality only to be repulsed by it....well, there's always vinyl still! maybe i'll just dust off the old turntable and buy the $20 U2 vinyl edition next.
who else agrees with me on the sound quality issue? please weigh in.
I dont get it. I just enjoy the music. All this technical stuff is just too much for me.
Well, what would be more enjoyable...watching movies in theater quality or on your standard tube?
I mean the movie is still good..except at least enjoy it in high quality!