YES Japanese reissues July

Same 2 samples provided by Jeff but this time it's the Forever Young 18P2 and Rhino Remaster. 30 second WAV files.


Beyond And Before - 18P2-2881 Japan
http://www.badongo.com/audio/16256084


Beyond And Before - Rhino Remaster
http://www.badongo.com/audio/16256091

 

Sweet! But could you throw these up on Yousendit? I want to download them.

Badongo locks up for me just as my download wait time expires.

 

I meant those that they'd DIDN't reissue,like "Yessongs","9012Live","Yesshows" and "Big Generator",which Rhino looked over....I'd only wished they've been complete!

 

Oh, okay.

Well, based on the way Rhino remastered the catalog, I can't really see what it matters, but it looks like these Japanese versions will outdo the Rhinos in terms of shoddy mastering.

 

Sure thing Jeff.

Beyond And Before 18P2-2881 Japan
https://download.yousendit.com/dVlwQndBT01iR0tGa1E9PQ

Beyond And Before - Rhino Remaster
https://www.yousendit.com/download/Y1RyK0dnQ3RCSnFGa1E9PQ

 

How true,how so painfully true,Jeff! If they could get an engineer who'd knew what these masters needed,well,things could improve,and then some! Oh,well!

 

Of all the clips posted, the only one I can stand is the Gastwirt. The others are painfully bright, even the 18P2-2881 Japan.

 

Yeah, I like the Gastwirt but it has some compression and lacks the punch of the original Atlantic and original Japanese CD.

I'll put all of these in a row so and throw up the clip shortly. Shall I adjust them all to peak at -1 so the volume is the same?

 

I have Yessongs and to me it sounds better than anything before. I am sure that some will find it harsh sounding but to me, there is more detail than ever. I do not get hangover listening to any of these new remasters.

I am curious what Jeff thinks since we now have sound samples.

I think sometimes this comes down to your CD player. I have a top of the line Marantz Sacd. I have had much less problems with harshness since I replaced my old player with it.

 

You're right except the Rhino/SHM remasters have less 'body' than the rest while retaining/increasing the overall brightness.

But: the Gastwirt seems to be no-noised or something. I can't really put my finger on it but some harmonics are lacking there, the guitar sounds somewhat muted. It's a bit of a compromise but definitely the least fatiguing version...

There's too little bass on the Rhino (seems a little familiar )so it'd rank it lower than the SHM. So do I have to officially call them an improvement after all?

 

Okay, here's a little clip I made and I set everything at -1 so the volume will be the same.

The original Atlantic and Japan 18P2 are very similar so I just used the Atlantic for this. Then I used the Gastwirt and finally the new SHM. I didn't bother with the Rhino for now as I think it's so bad it's hardly worth it.

So, here it is:

Orig. US Altlantic
Gastwirt remaster
Japan SHM

See which you like best:

https://www.yousendit.com/transfer.php?action=batch_download&batch_id=Y1RyK0dnMm1iR0ozZUE9PQ

 

Oh, and my preference is for the Gastwirt. Despite a bit of compression and maybe a hint of NR, it has by far the best tonality, IMO.

Second is the orig. Atlantic and Japan 18P2.

The SHM comes next and sounds a bit like a transistor radio broadcast.

The Rhino comes last and I'm convinced is from a transistor radio broadcast.

 

This is for "Beyond And Before?"

 

In defense of my earlier posts, I believe sometimes it comes down to your system. I believe my SACD player smooths out a lot of the harshness in some cases. I have a top of the line Marantz SACD. It definitely smoothed out redbook CDs that sounded harsh. Some it does not. To prove it to myself, I played the new Yes remasters on my buddy's system and I agree Jeff, they did sound very harsh. I see the waveforms and they don't lie. I am listening to the Gastwirt CTTE and it just does not have the definition that the SHMs have no matter what level.

 

What this comes down to isn't what kind of player you have but what type of mastering you like. The mastering differences on these are drastic. No player or system is going to change that. And afaic, you shouldn't need to "defend" your posts. Some people obviously like music to be treated this way. These will sell well and many will like them. That's just the way this schit goes.

You seem inclined to like "definition." It's a word you've leaned on to describe what you like about these and (hopefully this is obvious but I'll mention it anyway) you have every right to enjoy that aspect of mastering. However, this isn't what everybody is most concerned about.

With compression and EQ, you get more definition. That's surely part of why it is used. People notice things in a mix that they didn't before and feel justified in buying the same music again. Five years from now the same albums will be resold and you'll notice the cymbals more or a bass line you didn't recall being quite that profound or Jon Anderson coughing in the background...

But for many of us, "clarity" and "detail" aren't the only issues at play.

You can take any CD you own and turn up the treble. This might intially reveal a few things and sound exciting, but listening to entire albums that way might prove a bit fatiguing. If it doesn't, consider yourself "lucky," I guess.

From what I've heard of these new SHM Yes CDs so far, they sound way too bright and the drums really miss the dynamics they had due to the compression. That most were just taken from the Rhino CDs doesn't help, because using a source that already has somebody else's EQ moves all over it isn't really a reasonable way to remaster something. Frankly, it could be argued that these are a bit of a ripoff disguised in snazzy packaging. The odd thing is that many who probably have the Rhino discs will compare these and hear some improvement, but that would suggest that the Rhinos are some type of definitive source to begin with. Many here, including myself, would disagree.

 

Jeff- Thanks for not accusing me of having a bad ear or something worse. As I said, I will not give up my old Gastwirts or Diaments. However, I must disagree that equipment can make a difference. I recently made serious upgrades to my system including my turntable and cartridge. My system would be considered top end. I am not trying to brag but the system does make a difference and I am sure most would agree with me on that.

 

That's not what I meant.

Quite obviously, equipment makes a difference.

But as regards the clips people have posted, we're talking about quite drastically different masterings here.

And just fyi: Most audiophiles I know will argue that things like compression and top end boost only sound worse as one upgrades his equipment, not better.

There is no player in existence which can make me appreciate a CD with lots of top end boost and heavy-handed compression over a CD without those qualities. Some players might make the former a bit more tolerable than others, but this isn't dealing with what is typically the biggest issue at hand: Mastering.

 

I agree Jeff. I just listened to CTTE again and also listened to the new Procol Harum remasters on Salvo. The Procols sound less harsh and more analog. IN fact, they blow the new Yes remasters out of the water.

I started a thread on them. I am curious to see if anyone else agrees with me on the sound of the new Procols.

 

Often these new remastering efforts sound reasonable in isolation (and I exclude the Japanese HDCD Fragile and CTTE from this discussion because they sounded terrible no matter what you listened to them with), but in comparison to other versions start to sound not so good. See the Definitive ELP thread for a detailed case in point. I quite like the Rhino "Tales From Topographic Oceans" compared with previous efforts, because the dull tape balances Rhino's house equalisation (as would "Yessongs).

 

John-If you like the Rhino Tales from Topo, I know you will like the new SHMs even more so. They are the most realistic I have heard. To me, the mid range boost is what they needed.

PS- I tried to find the ELP thread. Can you direct me to it?

 

My earlier post wasn't meant to be sarcasm. I rely on my ears first. If I'm having an enjoyable listening experience, I'm not going to say " Oh, hang on a minute, I shouldn't be enjoying this, these level readings tell me otherwise. " If I'm happy with it, great, I can enjoy it, I don't have to analyze it to death. You see it all the time in these forums, as soon as someone posts level readings, opinions are already formed by people who haven't even heard the disc in question. ....... funny thing, as the debate rages over should I get these or not, another title has just gone out of print.

 

You'll have to point me to where anyone told you you shouldn't be enjoying your new Yes CDs...

My point was just that I find it odd some people can't just admit that they like the way compression and/or top end boost sounds. As if some boatload of compression shown in a screencap of a waveform wouldn't actually be heard?

So far, these have proven to have lots of compression and added treble versus the original CDs and the 1994 remasters (generally the preferred versions here). That isn't subjective. Whether one likes the sound of the newer versions is.

 

Maybe we could try some comparisons on another song? Beyond and Before is one of the brightest songs on any Yes album. It sticks out like a sore thumb compared to the rest of the album. Sometimes I wonder if it was recorded in another studio or by another engineer or something.

 

Point taken and fair enough, but as far as the above quote though, I was never not admitting anything, I just said that I like these discs so I guess I must be in this instance admitting a fondness for compression and/or top end boost sounds ....... aaaaah that felt good !
It's just hard to fathom sometimes how unheard discs get slammed, either because of the mastering engineer involved, level readings etc .... I've changed thinking a bit on this and now think who am I to criticise a mastering engineer when it's not my field of expertise ?

 

I hear ya, but I think you missed the fact that I threw up audio samples.

I'm sure some folks saw the screencaps and didn't even bother listening to those, but for many who have even the most basic knowledge of digital audio that's an entirely reasonable decision. You have to understand that those pictures do represent a pretty drastic lack of dynamics on the SHM, so some folks won't even waste their time at that point. They know they don't like that sound and it isn't possible to flatten out so many peaks like that without the punch taking a pretty big hit.

The limiting is pretty heavy on the SHM disc and when some people see that they don't even want to waste any more time on the issue. It's not as if everyone here are complete purists but many get upset at the really heavy-handed stuff. I mean, the Gastwirt sample sounded like (and if I posted a pic, would show that) he used a bit of compression, but several folks chimed in to cite that mastering as their favorite. I'd prefer that didn't have any compression but fer chrissakes, at least it's still reasonable. And for this specific case, I found the Gastwirt to be the best mastering based on the samples that were uploaded.

I realize that this is simply not possible to prove, but to me, the SHM mastering here almost seems designed to fool the average consumer into thinking it's cool to have made a purchase because the mix sounds louder and everything is more up front. More "detail" = "better" to the average guy, I would imagine.

Just my 2c.