Peter Gabriel - Best Digital Masterings?

That's a very good use of peak levels.

 

Your West German Polygram disc has a U.S. DADC matrix number?

 

I agree. Here is the original topic by Tlake..

"For the Peter Gabriel catalog, do you prefer the original cds or the SACDs for the best mastering?"

What does all this geek technical data have to do with this question. Talk about hijacking a thread.

Tlake hasn't posted on this thread after the techno's took over.

 

If we can't identify what the different original CD masterings are, how can we know what we are even talking about to each other? We don't even know how many "original" CDs there are.

 

What you, and several others, fail to realize is that there is no such thing as THE original CDs. In order to establish a baseline, so that meaningful comparisons can be made, we have to determine exactly how many different masterings of the early CDs exist so that when someone expresses a preference everyone is able to see which version(s) they are referring to. An "I prefer the originals" is meaningless if you don't know which original is being referred to and whether it differs from any other country's pressing. Similarly, "I prefer the remasters/SACDs" is only meaningful relevant to the specific original versions with which they have been compared, and it is highly doubtful that many (if any) members have ALL the versions to hand.

If you consider "this geek technical data" to be thread-crapping, simply skip it. Clearly, many others do not share your view and want to get to the bottom of how many pressing options exist.

 

I have the Blue Face "Plays Live" Highlights CD (PGLCD 1), and can post EAC levels tomorrow if anyone's interested in figuring this title out.

 

Yes, a thread where every forum member says Original or Remaster makes for much better reading, and always leads to crystal clear results.

That said, I should mention that my friend (fellow forum member Jason Director) and I both briefly compared the V/C and remaster for II and III, and in both cases gave a slight edge to the V/C. I also compared the remaster and the Atco version of I, and preferred the remaster.

 

For those who haven't heard the Virgin/Charisma's a of Peter Gabriel I and III, here's a couple of clips to compare to your U.S. Atco and Geffen CD's-

PG I:
http://www.mediafire.com/?ilpddndsxdz

PG III
http://www.mediafire.com/?syzexgnlkjo

 

No, as the other WGIII posted here.
Foobar2000 was commenting on curbach's Geffen 2035-2 WG copy.
Sorry for the confusion.

 

Nope, one worse. That's how this obsessive collector stuff works.

Exactly the same as yours on all counts.

 

Ok, so luckily I'm not having too much trouble finding cheap old Gabriel CDs. So, now I have something to compare.

I "shot out" three songs tonight; Solsbury Hill from I, I Don't Remember from III, and Hear that Voice Again from So.

The I discs were; Atco Wea, Virgin Swindon, and the 2002 Remaster. The III discs were; Geffen DADC, Virgin Holland, and the 2002 Remaster. The So discs were; Geffen Sanyo, Virgin Nimbus, and the 2002 Remaster. The songs I picked peak near or at 100% on all these discs, bar III on Geffen.

None of them had noticeably more tape his, narrowed stereo separation, or wobbly tape problems. My guess is they are all from decent enough tape sources.

In every case the remaster had a good balance, all the instruments seemed present and correct without anybody grabbing undue attention. Somehow the remasters seemed to sort of mush things together though. Peter does this double tracking vocal thing a lot, one voice is low and dry, one voice high and sing-songey. Carpet Crawlers is the probably the most famous example. Listen to the effect on Solsbury Hill and it's hard to tell there are two different voices on the remaster. On I Don't Remember when the guitar comes in it just kinda blends on in. On Hear that Voice Again especially we lose all the tension and drama of the song, with the way it starts, stops, and builds.

So, while the remasters aren't that gut-wrenching "modern" sound we lose out on something for sure. I'd never heard them before today. If that's all I was allowed to have I could live with them, but they were my third choice in every case.

On Solsbury Hill the Virgin and Atco discs sound quite different. On the Virgin the acoustic guitar, and little cymbal-type things, sparkle. That's nice, but we lose the drums almost entirely. It's hard to pick out the lower double-tracked voice. On the Atco, we get it all back again. The double-tracking is clearer here then either of the others. The drums do sound a bit muddy. I'm going to go out on a limb and say that they just sound that way on this recording. Switching back and forth quickly the Atco sounds rather blah. But listen for a minute or two and it draws you in and you can hear more of what all the instruments are doing. For that reason I'll go with the Atco as my favorite. Still, none of the three peg the audiophile meters at 10.

On I Don't Remember again the Geffen and Virgins are quite different. The Virgin has the best balance between the instruments. When the guitar comes in it really KICKS IN, unlike the remaster. Tony's Stick is nice and deep. Everything overall is nice and punchy. On the Geffen Tony stands out a lot more. While I love his playing, and I hate it when the rhythm section gets buried, it's too much here. The Stick sort of gallumps along without any definition. So, Virgin is my pick here.

On Hear that Voice Again I could not distinguish between the Virgin and the Geffen. (They are not digitally identical though.) The overall balance isn't much different from the remaster, maybe the bass and drums a tiny bit further back. The drama and drive of the whole thing is worlds better however. You can hear so many more details as the tune builds.

So, there you have it. On an ultimate scale; remasters == OK & consistent. Early discs vary more, but are more musically pleasing.

Standard disclaimer; These are my opinions only, jotted down as I listened. Other folks, or even myself on a different evening, may well have different tastes.

 

Thanks for that detailed and insightful report. I have the V/C's of 1 - 3 and So, and the WG Target of Security, and I'm happy with all of them, especially the Target, which sounds awesome. Oh the fatboy V/C of Plays Live is excellent too.

 

I'm still on the lookout for early Virgins of II and IV, that's why I didn't shoot them out yet.

 

What you guys think is the best mastering for Passion?

Is there a big difference between the early CDs and the remasters?

Someone expressed his preference for the SACD earlier.

 

Well, I'm just back from Amoeba with a copy that has a matrix code of -∞. You can't get any closer to the master than that!! So there!



Re: disc structure of '4' matrix copy to '5' matrix copy:

Wow! I wonder who fiddled with things and why. It will also be interesting to see how things break down - is there a 50:50 split in same EAC levels for other matrix codes/disc manufacturers? Are there more Geffen variants?

I guess we can assume that they are derived from the same digital master, at least.

 

Which is smaller, four or negative infinity?

Yeah, I think we're probably splitting hairs on this one.

 

While searching for cheap old Gabriel CD's today, I think I found another mastering for So (PG5): TOCP-66083 (made in Japan by Toshiba-EMI).

The liner notes state "(P)&(C) 2002" and "Remastered by Tony Cousins at Metropolis, London" so I assumed that this disc would be the same as the remaster. However, because the disc sounded a little different I picked it up and sure enough:

TOCP-66083:
100.0 % - 100.0 % - 100.0 % - 100.0 % - 99.1 % - 100.0 % - 100.0 % - 100.0 % -100.0 %
Total running time: 46:12

Remaster (PGCDR5 7243 811746 2 3):
99.4 % - 99.4 % - 100.0 % - 99.4 % - 99.1 % - 99.4 % - 99.3 % - 99.3 % - 99.4 %
Total running time: 46:28

Looks like another option in the mix for So.

I will need to find time to do some more listening before I can actually state a preference for the TOCP or the remaster...

 

Got most of Peter's stuff on vinyl, however I do have the V/C's for IV and So and the SACD for So. All sound excellent, the SACD particularly good with a very expansive and wide open soundstage on my system. The production for IV is superb too. The depths the African drums plunder on the opening track are truly awesome; no need for a sub here...!

 

PG is one of the few artists where I think all of the original cds sound pretty good and the remasters aren't too shabby either. I really don't notice a difference between the CD remasters and the single and dual layer (import) SACDs, but I'm pleased with how they sound overall. Sadly, short of Up none of them are surround.

 

These comments are good Foobar but you don't have your equipment profile filled out. What is your playback system?

 

Does the SACD layer of "Up" sound .... slightly dirty to anyone else, or is there something wrong with my disc/player? The vocals, primarily, sound grainy, or slightly distorted. Hoping this isn't my system or speakers although everything else sounds fine....

 

Just got myself one of these... lovely disc, like a piece of CD history in my hands!