Jethro Tull - Aqualung 40th Anniversary Special Edition (part2)

Hearing? No, That would be their OPINION.
I own practically ever issued version of Aqualung since day one...the remix is not harsh..IMO..after 40 years worth of listening.

 

yes, a very strong word!

 

whatever Peter did it is perfect! I like hearing the clarity finally for a change that was always buried under the mud...

 

Exactly my friend.

 

Mine has arrived from ImportCDs........ Shipped to Sweden and arriving in perfect shape. Not a dent on the package. Should I open and play something or just admire the box on the shelf???? Looking good. Where do I begin? Most curious abot the Bluray since I'm a fan of Hi-Rez multichannel. Maybe I save that experience to X-mas.....


Also nice to see Steven Wilson participate in discussions on the Forum. He is very welcome to brief us about more upcoming projects. For instance more Jethro Tull boxes..... Of course he is obliged to give us info about Porcupine Tree and solo projects.

 

congrats! I'm happy for you! let us know what you think when you finally get to hear it.
Indeed...It's great that we were able to chat with Steven.

 

Glad it made it safely. Hope that you enjoy it as much as I do.

 

I like both the remix and my original CDP32 disc. Both are great. I do wish the remix wasn't so loud on the acoustic songs though. "Wond'ring Aloud" particularly is hard on the ears and bright.

As for turning down the treble, a lot of high-end amps don't have tone controls. I don't have any on my Creek component, so what you're suggesting is not possible for me.

 

Yes, that's something I mentioned. It is a mastering issue.

 

Merci, Maître !

 

Thank you for joining in, Steven Wilson.
The 5.1 is the jewel in the crown for me.

Cheers!

 

Steven Wilson,

Did Peter Mew make any adjustments to the 5.1?

Thanks

 

I have my amp set on "Source Direct" and have all the control by-passed. My CD player is hooked up via "Direct in" connection.

 

So, you are in disagreement with Steve Wilson about this, since he mentioned he preferred his original mix before the treble added by Peter Mew. Seems like Peter Mew was able to remove even more crud with another simple EQ move.

Seems like you have the same taste and/or similar hearing as Peter Mew. It is very safe to recommend more of his work to you, you won't be disappointed. A lot of crud removed on many of his masterings.

It is good to know that some people like his work, since he seemed to have received so much criticism in the past, especially on this forum. It's nice to see that he finally gets the recognition he deserves.

 

Regarding the supposed over-brightness, loudness etc, it's interested to see the psychology at work here. It looks like anything 'wrong' is now being ascribed to Mew's work.

I would ask: How do you know, without having heard the same mix before Mew's mastering?

I'd say Steve Wilson and Peter Mew are the only persons really in a position to make that comparison with any authority. And Mr. Wilson's comments have been most professional and reserved in that regard.

I hope at least we can set the 'smiley face EQ' accusations to rest. According to Mr. Wilson, the bass on the new one is what's on the multis, and he hasn't reported that Mew added more at that end. So that's half the 'smile' gone and the other half is at least partly reflecting the higher treble content in the multis -- so what you're hearing is really a 'frown' in the original mix.

 

First of all, there is no "wrong" here, it is only a matter of preference.

If we consider (which I do) that Mr. Wilson was making a true statement, then we know the following:

The new mix/mastering is brighter and has more bass than any other previous version. It is also slightly less dynamic than the DCC and the UK Chrysalis (especially considering that the higher energy in the upper frequencies will give higher dynamic range readings).

We also know (by Mr. Wilson's statement) that Peter Mew has added some treble and that he preferred his original version. We do not know how much treble Peter Mew actually added, but we have another reference point by Mr. Wilson where he states (something along the lines) that a 2 dB EQ change is only a small or minor adjustment which should hardly be noticeable (in his opinion, or at least this is what I read out of his comment).

We do not know for sure whether Peter Mew also made some adjustments in the low frequencies (but probably not much, otherwise Mr. Wilson would have most likely pointed out the difference). And we don't know whether Peter Mew added some slight compression during mastering.

So Peter Mew is at least partly responsible for the higher energy in the treble range, which some people like and others don't.

It would be nice to know what exactly was done by Peter Mew during the mastering, but by judging his other recent mastering work, he is known for adding quite a bit of treble, a little bass, and some light compression. So it is a reasonable assumption that some of these things which have been noticed by some members in this thread are related to Peter Mew's input, but it is (besides the known issue of some added treble - no value was given) an assumption and not a fact. It seems a pretty plausible explanation though, in my opinion.

By the way, I really think the mix itself is very well done. I just don't like the overall tonality of it.

 

Are you listening to just the redbook?

The DVD hi-rez 2.0 has the volume difference on tracks more in align with previous masterings.

Specifically, these are ~3dB's lower:
03 - Cheap Day Return
05 - Wond'ring Aloud
09 - Slipstream


Below you can see the volume breakdown for the 2 remixes:

Code:

foobar2000 1.1.10 / Dynamic Range Meter 1.1.1
log date: 2011-12-12 00:50:06
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Analyzed: Jethro Tull / Aqualung  (redbook)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
DR         Peak         RMS     Duration Track
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
DR12       0.00 dB   -14.75 dB      6:35 01-Aqualung
DR11       0.00 dB   -12.76 dB      4:09 02-Cross-Eyed Mary
DR15      -1.56 dB   -21.10 dB      1:22 03-Cheap Day Return
DR14       0.00 dB   -17.28 dB      3:53 04-Mother Goose
DR15      -0.06 dB   -18.79 dB      1:53 05-Wond'ring Aloud
DR12      -0.01 dB   -13.85 dB      3:14 06-Up to Me
DR13       0.00 dB   -16.44 dB      7:11 07-My God
DR11       0.00 dB   -12.85 dB      3:18 08-Hymn 43
DR15      -0.08 dB   -20.19 dB      1:13 09-Slipstream
DR13       0.00 dB   -16.10 dB      4:41 10-Locomotive Breath
DR12      -0.01 dB   -16.38 dB      6:01 11-Wind-Up
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Number of tracks:  11
Official DR value: DR13
Samplerate:        44100 Hz
Channels:          2
Bits per sample:   16
Bitrate:           742 kbps
Codec:             FLAC
================================================================================

Code:

foobar2000 1.1.10 / Dynamic Range Meter 1.1.1
log date: 2011-12-13 23:24:31
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Analyzed: Jethro Tull / Aqualung (DVD 2.0 Hi-rez)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
DR         Peak         RMS     Duration Track
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
DR12      -0.07 dB   -14.75 dB      6:35 01-Aqualung
DR11      -0.07 dB   -12.76 dB      4:10 02-Cross-Eyed Mary
DR15      -4.57 dB   -24.10 dB      1:22 03-Cheap Day Return
DR14      -0.07 dB   -17.28 dB      3:53 04-Mother Goose
DR15      -3.09 dB   -21.79 dB      1:53 05-Wond'ring Aloud
DR12      -0.07 dB   -13.85 dB      3:14 06-Up to Me
DR12      -0.08 dB   -16.44 dB      7:11 07-My God
DR11      -0.07 dB   -12.84 dB      3:18 08-Hymn 43
DR15      -3.10 dB   -23.19 dB      1:13 09-Slipstream
DR13      -0.08 dB   -16.09 dB      4:41 10-Locomotive Breath
DR12      -0.08 dB   -16.37 dB      6:03 11-Wind-Up
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Number of tracks:  11
Official DR value: DR13
Samplerate:        96000 Hz
Channels:          2
Bits per sample:   24
Bitrate:           2663 kbps
Codec:             FLAC
================================================================================

 

So rip the disc, adjust to taste and burn a new one.

 

Yeah, but burn-your-own shouldn't be the point...

 

Thank you for that interesting information!

Looks to me that the three tracks with lower volume were simply level shifted by 3 dB between the Blu-ray/High res and the CD version. Since the values otherwise are about the same (the small differences could be related to the downsampling), I would assume that the basic mastering (as far as EQ and loudness/minor compression) are probably the same between the CD and the High res, i.e. the mastering moves were applied to the high res file before downsampling for CD (with the exception of the 3 dB level shift on the 3 tracks).

 

There’s very little about the previous releases that sounds “natural” and many listeners have commented on the poor sound including the artist himself. I recommend that you read the notes in the booklet about the recording of the album and also read Steven’s comments here about the sound of the multi’s vs the master.

As far as which versions I have - I have/have had many versions over the years including the quad 8-Track, 2.0 8-Track, vinyl, early CD’s and the DCC. And sorry, but no, I never bought the cassette. None of them ever sounded good or natural. Fortunately, the music rises above the sound quality and now we can enjoy both the music and the sound quality with the remix.

 

I didn't think they were "accusations," but however it got there, that is how the frequencies of the remix compare to the DCC and the CDP32. Whether that has as much to do with the new mix or is more just a new balance of instruments and their respective tonality, I guess we don't know.

I listened to the remix again last night, and I still really enjoy it. But I admit that the top end is a bit much and I can certainly hear what those who prefer the original mix are hearing.

 

This remix is a great one and if a few dB’s is all that’s keeping some people from enjoying it, they should at least give it a try.