Rush - Clockwork Angels

[squarebab]

Downloaded this today.

 

[squarebab]

from HDtracks.

[jwr]

Downloaded this today.

 

[ATTACH=CONFIG]871[/ATTACH][ATTACH=CONFIG]872[/ATTACH]

 

For those of us who don't have experience with these sorts of graphs, what do these show?

 

TIA,

 

jwr

[mjm6]

I read this as a legit 96K source. No brickwalling here, and the information appears to push up into the higher frequencies in the peaks reasonably.

 

However, the first graph appears to show that the 'loudness wars' are still raging in some mastering studios? Since this is a new album, we won't probably every hear a better version of this album, unless they have a master somewhere that hasn't been dialed to 11.

 

It appears that they have an ultrasonic noise problem in some of their equipment, as that segment near the end seems to have an awful lot of information that far up in the range. I'm sure that's a result of splicing and mixing in different tracks or (more likely) recording sessions.

 

How's the music on this? As a fan of Rush, I am interested in what is sounds like, but if they have dialed it up, I suspect that getting it in high res isn't worth the extra coin.

 

 

---Michael

[jwr]

I read this as a legit 96K source. No brickwalling here, and the information appears to push up into the higher frequencies in the peaks reasonably.

 

However, the first graph appears to show that the 'loudness wars' are still raging in some mastering studios? Since this is a new album, we won't probably every hear a better version of this album, unless they have a master somewhere that hasn't been dialed to 11.

 

It appears that they have an ultrasonic noise problem in some of their equipment, as that segment near the end seems to have an awful lot of information that far up in the range. I'm sure that's a result of splicing and mixing in different tracks or (more likely) recording sessions.

 

How's the music on this? As a fan of Rush, I am interested in what is sounds like, but if they have dialed it up, I suspect that getting it in high res isn't worth the extra coin.

 

 

---Michael

 

Thanks, Michael. I've been listening to Rush for about 36 years, so you could say I'm a fan!

 

I haven't heard this record, though (other than the couple of songs they previewed on the last tour). I was weighing whether to get this on vinyl or hi-res. Vinyl it is!

 

jwr

[Julf]

It appears that they have an ultrasonic noise problem in some of their equipment, as that segment near the end seems to have an awful lot of information that far up in the range. I'm sure that's a result of splicing and mixing in different tracks or (more likely) recording sessions.

 

Actually, to me that looks like a very symmetric reflection/folding - like some funky resampling without proper filtering. Could it be a DSD resampled to PCM? Would love to see a spectrum plot of that part.

[Harry K]

I have the 16/44. The peak WAV analysis looks the same. It's a wall of sound with poor separation and limited dynamic range. Same old. Disappointing but not unexpected. It will sound OK in the car but on the lounge system it's pretty crap.

[Julf]

I have the 16/44. The peak WAV analysis looks the same. It's a wall of sound with poor separation and limited dynamic range. Same old. Disappointing but not unexpected. It will sound OK in the car but on the lounge system it's pretty crap.

 

But in this case the hi-res version might be even more crap if it has HF/folding artefact problems in addition to being compressed to death.

[Harry K]

But in this case the hi-res version might be even more crap if it has HF/folding artefact problems in addition to being compressed to death.

 

Indeed. Worth avoiding. Such a shame. Musically I think it's rather fine. I just can't hear it properly. The tour will be good though and the sound track of the concert footage should give more insight into who played what and how.

[noogle1]

I checked out Clockwork Angels in SeeDeclip. Turns out to be very heavily clipped - e.g. 4777 clips in the last track. Sounds much better after de-clipping, but still seems a bit compressed.

[vinylphile]

I was EXTREMELY disappointed with the quality of the 24/96 HDTracks download. Why bother having this kind of over compressed mess available as a high res download? Why can't they make an uncompressed master for use on a home stereo. Honestly, it sounds better down sampled to MP3 and played on my iPod through my mediocre car stereo.

 

I also purchased the vinyl - although it sounds a bit compressed as well it is far, FAR better than the high res digital download.

 

As for the music, it's growing on me. Better than their last few nondescript albums IMO and on of their best in a while...

[Kimo]

The vinyl isn't nearly as compressed, but it still doesn't sound that hot. I thought sides 1 and 2 seemed to sound a lot better. Pressing was clean and flat for both discs, but there is more snap and drive on the first one.

 

Maybe, best to save one's money and stick to the cd.