Jethro Tull - Aqualung 40th Anniversary Special Edition (part3)

Uh no it doesn't mean that at all.
It means the AVR is receiving a DTS-HD bitstream.
If he was using the wrong cables, the AVR would be receiving an analog signal being decoding by his player, the AVR could not receive a DTS-HD bitstream and would not signal that is it.
If Ed is using an HDMI cable and his player decodes DTS-HD he could go either way and select it on the player.
So Ed what's your player?

 

True. I know of no AVR technology that can 'tell' from an already decoded, analog input signal, what particular brand of lossless digital it originated as.

 

See my partially unanswered questions in this post:
http://www.stevehoffman.tv/forums/showpost.php?p=7234359&postcount=95

 

I do not know who you directed that question to, but here is our consensus:

http://www.stevehoffman.tv/forums/showthread.php?t=271297&highlight=aqualung

 

Actually, your post says exactly what I said. I missed the part in Ed's original post where he states that a DTS HD MasterAudio indicator light lights up in his receiver. Other than that, you and I are on the same page.

 

My profile was updated just a few months ago.The AVR is less than a year old.(Yamaha rxa-1000) Yes I have a BD player which is about a year old also.I know I am listening to DTS-Hd.Others seem to think I'm not.For whatever reason

 

Sony BD-S360 HDMI V>1.4 to Yamaha Rxa-1000.

 

Bottom line...To me, IMO, This release has midrange suck out and too much upper mids energy (treble). Steve Wilson said that he reduced the treble on most instruments, except the piano. Steve Wilson said he can't prefer the treble that Mew added, but it wasn't that bad. I think SW was talking about the entire mastering.

 

I disagree about "midrange suck-out" which implies a heavyhanded EQ which deliberately attenuates the midrange. I plotted spectra of the songs supposedly suffering from this and there is no evidence of egregious EQ. What is more likely is that someone who is used to hearing the old mix now hears the missing high and low end and comparatively speaking there is less midrange (since the original mix was very midrangey).

I've listened to the new mix several times. My system tends to be unforgiving with trebly ear-bleeders, as it is a bit forward in those frequencies. I just don't hear egregious treble. What I *do* hear are cymbals with natural decays that never showed up on the original mix, and a lot of detail in acoustic strumming etc. which sounds very natural to my ears, at least "natural" within the scope of a well mastered rock recording, as opposed to a far-field recording of Segovia recital in a concert hall.

As the poll referenced above clearly shows the overwhelming majority of listeners are satisfied with the new mix. This discussion is very reminiscent of the Bealtes remaster threads where a vocal minority were dissatisfied with them while a large majority were happy as pie. Or cake, if you prefer.

 

I know that we all have our preferences, but after some of the sonic atrocities we've witnessed with remix/remasters of classic albums in the past, it's difficult to fathom some of the gripes here.

 

Are you talking about the stereo mix? I especially like the 5.1 mix. I can hear many things on the 5.1 that I hardly noticed before. I can completely understand the positive excitement over the 5.1 mix. If this were strickly a stereo mix, I doubt as many people would be on board. BTW, the bass is fine with me on the new mix.

Agreed, mid-range suck out may be too extreme of a statement. But again, IMO, midrange magic is not present on this issue. Please listen to what SH did with the eq on the voices on the AF Crosby Stills and Nash cd.

 

Great point. Aqualung was never considered to be an audiophile classic to begin with yet it seems that Wilson's remix has revealed certain nuances and created what is arguably a better mix.

With regards to Mew's work, it would be great if everyone took a so-called blind taste test when listening to material. For example, they had no fore knowledge of who remixed it, who remastered it etc so on. Perhaps some opinions might be different. Yet it is amazing to note that so many posters here like the new mix and the package as a whole.

 

I am only talking about the 2 channel mix, I do not have surround capability. I haven't heard the CS&N yet, unfortunately, but I know what "sweet midrange" sounds like and how carefully controlled tube euphony can be applied quite effectively (but there is too much of a good thing IMO, having a tube pre & amp myself). I am a big fan of the old DCC sound, by and large. But I like other mastering styles as well. What some people consider harsh or aggressive or forward I call a proper rock 'n roll sound, in certain contexts (example of what I like: Sabbath Black Box. Example of what I don't like: Frampton remix). I don't subscribe to any mastering or mixing philosophy, I like what I like!

I am very grateful for the Aqualung remix. I never thought it would happen. My old DCC has been gathering dust over the past couple of years - I had to hear it so I plunked down a ridiculous amount of cash for it on Ebay. It is what it is. I have no urge to return to it. To me the remix is such an obvious and clear upgrade, listening to the old mix would be like returning to my old Mac Plus in place of my Macbook Pro!

 

Mew's work on Donovan's Sunshine Superman recently was also quite good, though I'll admit to liking a crisp, trebly mastering. His reputation seems to be improving 'round these parts.

 

I finally had a chance to play the Blu-Ray disc and the digital glitches are quite startling, especially on the flat transfer original mix. Even listening at low volumes on headphones and expecting to hear the noise it was far worse than I imagined, and I normally don't even care about stuff like this (ie the soft tic in the AF Morrison Hotel).

I do think they should replace these discs, even if we have to mail them in to get them replaced. I don't want to be waiting for the glitch getting ready to turn down the volume every time I want to play the BD.

The 5.1 LPCM surround mix does sound fantastic.

 

Maybe, but definitely NOT with this new Aqualung remaster.

 

Again, I would refer you to the recent poll. Most fans were happy both with the remix and the EQ moves. I was expecting a lot more people to go for the pro-remix/anti-remaster option. I think some audiophiles just don't like any artificial sweetening at all.

 

Any ideas for making this happen?

Tim

 

You are right about the general consensus, but I feel that the re-mix is beautiful and the remaster a bit bright and compressed. (Is that an option?)

 

His work on the recent Opeth - Heritage was pretty good on cd, great on vinyl (if Mew did indeed master the LP). The CD was a little hot but not the vinyl. I should also add that the Aqualung 40th anniversary vinyl is mastered way better than the CD.

 

In what way? More normal change of volume between heavy and quiet tracks? If so, I might try to seek it out.

 

It was said the Hi-Res stereo mastering keeps a lower volume for the acoustic tracks, contrary to the CD.

 

Thanks for that info; I have not listened to my vinyl yet.

 

Steven Wilson mastered Opeth's Damnation and this one sounds very good for a modern Rock recording.