So far, these are all the CDs I have with a DR score of 15 or higher (the year is by the CD release date, which may be later than the original release): Fleetwood Mac - Rumours (1983) - DR15 Jethro Tull - Under Wraps (1984) - DR15 Sade - Diamond Life (1984) - DR15 Fine Young Cannibals - Fine Young Cannibals (1985) - DR15 The Police - Every Breath You Take - The Singles (1986) - DR15 10000 Maniacs - In My Tribe (1987) - DR15 Sting - Nothing Like The Sun (1987) - DR15 Andy White - Kiss The Big Stone (1988) - DR15 Big Country - Peace In Our Time (1988) - DR15 Cheap Trick - Lap Of Luxury (1988) - DR15 Dire Straits - Money For Nothing (compilation) (1988) - DR15 Huey Lewis & The News - Small World (1988) - DR15 Kool & The Gang - The Singles Collection (1988) - DR15 Living Colour - Vivid (1988) - DR15 Soul Asylum - Hang Time (1988) - DR15 Lisa Stansfield - Affection (1989) - DR15 Andy White - Himself (1990) - DR15 Salt-N-Pepa - A Blitz Of Salt-N-Pepa Hits (1991) - DR15 Talking Heads - Talking Heads 77 (1988) - DR15 Steve Winwood - Roll With It (1988) - DR16 INXS - INXSive (1988) - DR16 Talking Heads - Speaking In Tongues (1983) - DR17 Is it a coincidence or not that so many of these seem to have been mastered in 1988? A handful of these are confirmed or suspected to have preemphasis, but the majority don't seem to.
It must be a rare example of a modern release without brickwalling, which has been pretty standard since the mid 1990s.
The old West German of Under Wraps is the only one confirmed to have pre-emphasis. None of the others do or have been verified. Once you set the correct EQ the DR's will drop. The dynamics of some of these are the reason for the high DR's. (Well recorded) If Rumours would of been produced by Spector it'd be a 9
I picked up Iconoclassic Records' excellent sounding re-issue (remastered by Vic Anesini) of Peter Green's 1979 LP "In The Skies". Definitely recommended if you're a fan of the album. It has relevant bonus tracks as well. foobar2000 1.6.16 / Dynamic Range Meter 1.1.1 log date: 2023-04-06 09:44:12 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Analyzed: Peter Green / In The Skies (Expanded Edition) -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- DR Peak RMS Duration Track -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- DR13 -0.55 dB -16.76 dB 3:52 01-In The Skies DR15 -2.09 dB -19.75 dB 5:12 02-Slabo Day DR17 -1.88 dB -22.93 dB 7:47 03-A Fool No More DR15 -3.02 dB -19.98 dB 4:31 04-Tribal Dance DR13 -3.37 dB -18.83 dB 3:11 05-Seven Stars DR17 -1.52 dB -22.08 dB 4:16 06-Funky Chunk DR14 -2.54 dB -20.25 dB 4:39 07-Just For You DR14 -2.43 dB -19.29 dB 3:42 08-Proud Pinto DR14 -4.25 dB -23.68 dB 3:14 09-Apostle DR12 -3.58 dB -19.58 dB 3:55 10-Apostle (Single Version) DR15 0.00 dB -17.38 dB 4:42 11-Tribal Dance (Single Version) DR10 -4.47 dB -17.68 dB 4:39 12-Slabo Day (Rehearsal Version) DR8 -4.81 dB -15.52 dB 4:12 13-In The Skies (Rehearsal Version) -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Number of tracks: 13 Official DR value: DR14 Samplerate: 44100 Hz Channels: 2 Bits per sample: 16 Bitrate: 836 kbps Codec: FLAC ================================================================================
So I am popping back into this ancient thread to try and make my point regarding using dynamic range tools as a guide to buying the best version of the music you want. First and most important. You like the music and simply want to buy a version of it. If you have discovered an album you like from years ago maybe there are a dozen or more releases available to choose the best one. This is where I use dynamic range tools to help guide me to make the most informed purchase. Again this is not about liking the music, you do, no matter what version, but you want, to the best of your ability to get the best. To me using DR is a way of comparison of the potential quality difference in a recording. Some times the differences are very distinct with a wide range of DR ratings from low to high. I, am buying the highest rated DR value in the format I want for the music I know I like. I get all of the "I use my ears" comments. Of course you do and so do I, but if you cannot and if you have not heard every version available to you how would you know you have the best that you might enjoy the most. Having a higher DR, does not guarantee you will like it better but I like those odds over the "good luck" odds of just using my ears to determine the best available...
From many years on this forum, I've come to the conclusion that those who say 'use your ears' are often those who can't hear the differences in dynamics. There are some who can hear a difference, and prefer the "punch" of a compressed recording over the original dynamics. They will say the new compressed version is the best yet. I can hear the difference in dynamics, and for me even a DR10 recording usually sounds to me that the natural life has been taken out of the music. If a compressed remaster has better tonal balance I can't bring back the lost dynamics. But I can do some tonal changes in my playback of the dynamic recording. So for me the DR measurements are pretty much always an indicator of the best sounding recording for my ears. In fact off the top of my head I can't think of recording where I prefer a slightly compressed remaster. I think the fidelity of a recording needs a very good system to hear. The worse the system, the better a compressed recording will sound. Unfortunately most who post a comment on sound quality can't provide an analysis. So when someone says "this is the best sounding version" it means nothing other than the poster likes it. If they added that the recording has great dynamics and natural EQ, and it sounds like you are there, then I it's highly likely that I'll like this version. But if they could add that the compression gives it punch, and the boost in bass and top end brings new clarity, I'll know that it isn't for me.
If I can’t listen to every version I also assume that the one with the highest DR is the one I will probably like the most. But in some instances higher DR is an indication that the bass was rolled off. I learned this on a Canadian version of Sinead O’Connor’s The Lion And The Cobra. Where the mastering engineer just EQ-ed the bass away.
For me the problem is that many on the forum (not you) use this as justification for dismissing DR figures. How many remasters have an increased DR only because of bass roll off? I doubt it would be even 1%
Doesn't the Canadian just use the 'stock' poor mastering Joost? The Sonopress and Japan actually have a higher DR score, but it's not because of that on why I think it sounds better. I think they had a better source, something is way off on the stock world one besides the distortion on Troy.
True, but an eq change with increased bass can reduce the DR by about 2 points in some cases. And I have seen quite a few cases where a DR10 for a remaster got called "compressed" compared to a DR12 original CD. It can be compression, but in reality, it's not that simple.
But that's my point. In reality it is that simple. For decades there has been a norm that a remaster will be 'better' if there is a little or a lot of extra compression. I've not been reading complaints here over the last few decades of remasters having the bass boosted. For those who can hear dynamics and care, a remaster going from say DR12 to DR10 loses life. It's because we hear this that we complain.
The one CD in my collection that stands out above all others is the gold disc I have of Dave Mason's Alone Together. Dynamic range and then some. Do all Gold Discs sound far and away better than those at Columbia House?
Columbia House was one of the clubs. They used previous/current mastering's at the time. The Gold is a boutique label remaster (MFSL) No, it's case by case.
Bernie Grundman mastered California Project in 1985 with no limiters and no compression. DR17. The record or the CD will unseat your woofers if you're not careful.
Nope. The Canadian disc sounds different, and worse, than my EMI Swindon copy. Which sounds worse than my Japanese disc.
I always thought that Before The Down from the KT Fellowship (Kate Bush live album) was an outlier with earth shattering bass and still an album DR of 13. The bass really booms, but DR level is fine.
I find The Lion And The Cobra quite a weird release when it comes to the different original CD versions - the European, Japanese, British/American and Canadian versions all use different masterings, with the Canadian one being a re-equalised version of the British/American master. Considering that it was originally recorded in the UK, I find it weird that Britain got an inferior master to the rest of Europe and Japan. A lot of old UK mastered EMI CDs were poorly mastered by 1980s standards, and in many of these cases the issues with the British master were fixed on versions released elsewhere in Europe. I've got quite a few EMI CDs from the second half of the 1980s that suffer from an unusually high (for the day) amount of clipping (these include the Dark Side Of The Moon and an earlier Peter Gabriel album). Most of EMI's old back catalogue CDs from the UK sound muddy and mildly distorted in my experience. This is in contrast to 1960s/1970s Warner CD reissues from the 1980s, which are usually very good and sound faithful to the original source material. Many of the earliest EMI/Virgin CDs that were mastered under licence by Nimbus, Polydor or a Japanese manufacturer sound pretty good.
DR11 is fairly high by modern standards (even if on the low side for the 1980s when I'd say DR12-14 was fairly average). I'd have said its mastering is fairly typical for something from maybe 1991, which was around the time that CDs began becoming louder but before aggressive brickwalling became the norm.
Even worse: the UK master was issued in continental Europe too. I’m living in The Netherlands and I got the EMI Swindon disc first. I looked for a different, hopefully better sounding, version for years. Finally found the CP32. After I posted that one on the forum, @c-eling informed me that the Sonopress one used the same mastering. I never saw that disc in the bins here, but it would certainly have been easier to buy online than the Japanese one.
Distribution and ownership of Ensign/Chrysalis changed from BMG/Ariola to EMI around 1991. European Sonopress discs pressed before this transition contain the 'good' mastering while EMI deemed it necessary to introduce the 'worse' mastering. The mastering of I Do Not Want What I Haven't Got was also lightly edited by EMI but less intrusively than the first album.
I've often wondered what was up with EMI when it came to their UK masterings - on average their first party CD masters from the 1980s sound noticeably inferior to much of the competition.
