Dire Straits - BROTHERS IN ARMS - XRCD: good or bad?

Can anyone comment on the sound of the Dire Straits - BROTHERS IN ARMS XRCD? How does it sounds? Is it better than regular remaster?

 

Heavily compressed. To be avoided.

The regular remaster is not that compressed and its tonality is better than on the somewhat 'sterile' Original. So the Bob Ludwig Remaster is the one to get in my opinion.

EDIT: I can even prove that!

 

Vader, thank you! I also don't have any serious problems with Ludwig remaster..

 

I have both edition. IMO xrcd "Brother in Arms" sounded better then Bob Ludwig remaster.

 

I also like the XRCD.

 

I'm only answered on your question.I think that Vertigo orange swirl better then xrcd & Ludwig remaster.

 

I like the XRCD too and prefer it over the SACD.

 

The dualdisc is the way to go.

 

I agree with Vader67, the XRCD is not good and was easily beaten by the remaster and the original W. German Vertigo pressing. Even these two I was not entirely satisfied with the definition and found my preferred pressing to be the original Japan for USA Warner Bros.

 

IMHO, AVOID the SACD. I bought it for the multichannel mix, which is interesting and enjoyable, but the thing is *heavily* compressed. Listen to the Man's Too Strong to see what I mean--it does not have the dynamics of the original--moments in the song that hit you like thunderclaps in the original sound, well, a bit boring on the SACD.

I like the previous 90's-era remaster. In fact, I bought the remaster when my original went missing and I ended up enjoying the remaster quite a bit more.

 

The XRCD has been used at many a Sterophile stereo show and has always sounded fine to all attending.

In fact their usually is a room for the XRCD products.

It has always been a great sounding recording anyway.

 

This is why I really don't get this whole audiophile business.

Personal tastes aside, it's a fact that the XRCD is compressed. And then you have a room full of people who hear lightyears of difference between
- power cables
- power outlets
- electricity in the daytime / at night
- atmospheric humidity
- 'sound magnets' positioned in their living-rooms / on their CDs / on their wives
etc.

And then not a single one of them notices the absence of dynamics?

Everyone's entitled to his/her respective opinion and good luck to everyone who cherishes this XRCD but why buy all the ultra-expensive stuff if the recording lacks one of the most important aspects of music?

-> It would be okay for me as a non-audiophile or your average Alaskan hockey mom to prefer the XRCD but how can people who seem to be anal-retentive about every little aspect of receiving music ignore this? <-

Editor's note: This statement is in no way directed at you personally or anything like that, I am just making refence to your statement about this general perception amongst 'stereophiles'.
No offence, guys!

 

No offense taken It's a very good point, Vader67, and one I often think about as I read the cd reviews in Stereophile and The Absolute Sound.

 

I've got the original Vertigo and the Japan for US Warner Bros, and the Japan one beats it hands down. The Vertigo is one of the quietest CDs I own, to the point where it doesn't come across very well on my system. The WB is much closer to a normal 1980s level, which makes it more detailed while still retaining the lovely dynamics that the SACD is missing.

I strongly recommend the Japan for US. Don't bother with any other version.

 

I also forgot to mention that the Japan for US WB that I bought today has the smooth-sided jewel case, which makes me happy. Why they stopped using those things is beyond me, they look so much more professional.

 

Louder sounds better in most cases, it takes time to really appreciate what sounds good in the long run. That is why there are so many terrible sounding systems for megabucks around and/or overpriced bad sounding audiophile" pressings costing a fortune, that do not sound as good as the standard pressing you find in a thrift store in nm condition - The more you are convinced that this C or that amp/speaker combination sounds MUCH better than the average combination you can be sure that in 3 of 4 cases the customer, who buys directly what he likes will not be lucky with what he got in the long run. Now put 10 strangers in one room and the head honcho plays that Cd on a mega buck system, that costs more than your car and asks you doesn't this sound superb ? What do you expect as an answer ?

I was a fan of the CCR JVC 20 Bits , because they sounded so loud and clear, but now i ask myself where was my sense of quality ? The analogue productions and even the regular 40 year anniversary series sounds so much better. Too loud, no headroom, some parts totally distorted, because the recording must have been in the red etc.


Usually the stuff that sounds natural and not overwhelming is the one that will give you many hours of listening pleasure, where you can discover the details , instead a mastering where someone is rubbing them under your nose and over emphasizes the highs, the bass or whatever...

 

They are much stronger and heavier also. Jewel cases are extremely flimsy nowadays. That's why most of them come broken.

 

I have the Japan for U.S., also. I've never compared it to any other versions, but I've always liked it. The funny thing is I've always considered it one of the quieter cds in my collection (much quieter than the other unremastered U.S. Dire Straits discs when I tried to make compilations). If the Vertigo is even quieter it must be barely audible

 

I remember reading somewhere years ago that this XRCD was made in Hong Kong for the Hong Kong market, the master tapes were not used, nor were the engineers who normally work on the made in Japan XRCD's. I don't even know if it's an official XRCD release as it was never on their web site. If someone can correct my information, please do, my recall on this is hazy.

 

This is among the best posts I 've ever read in this forum

 

No kidding!! The Vertigo is almost painfully quiet, EAC reports that Why Worry? has a peak level of only 16%!

 

I thought BIA was a full (DDD)1980's digital recording. So original bit rate should be low. Did they transfer it to analog tape so an SACD can be made? Pretty funny I think.

 

The SACD had the potential to be awesome. It wasn't a remaster, it was a complete remix. So even though the original tracks were only 16/44, the remix was done at 24/192 IIRC. But when you compress everything, what's the point?

 

Mine was 02 as well Simon.