Forums dot lukpac.org

Thanks Luke. Noted and logged.

Does anyone ever take the time to think about why we measure these things in Hz? Which is a fancy way of saying cycles per second ? Because sound is a vibration. The faster it vibrates, the higher the tone. There is no information that is "skipped" by some "snapshot" process. Sound is not some sort...

Check this thread:

http://www.stevehoffman.tv/forums/showt ... adid=22998

I find it amusing that even though with all the discussion of digital over there, few (except for Gardo) don't even have a clue about sampling.

There are lots of early CDs that sounded like crap, but items such as Dire Straits' 'Love Over Gold' from the original 1982 batch that launched the CD era show that there were no *technical* limitations at launch. I remember purchasing Love Over Gold early in 1983 and my copy sounds better every tim...

Beatlesfan03 wrote:No. The FAME CDs are different masterings than the 93 series which were remastered by Peter Mew.

Yes, I know that. However, AFAIK the regular UK Macca II was also released in 1993. So is the regular US and UK the same? And was this a remaster that escaped Mr. Mew's no-noise.

But did you mark on it with a green pen first? Ryan 'Fraid it's not that easy, Ryan. The color of the pen is dependent on the seasons and the astrological sign of the person handling the CD. So if it is winter and you are a Virgo with a bad moon rising you would use a black pen for the greatest eff...

This is one Macca CD that I do not have. Is the U.S. release the same as the '93 UK EMI remaster and who mastered this?

Thanks,
Thom

Ryan, Mr. Lovely just posted this: Last night, I conducted further listening 'tests' - the following is the result of deeper listening: 1) The Mono tracks are the real stars of this disc and I believe this can be attributed to use of the 'right' tapes and Vic Anesini's EQ choices. Many of tracks are...

Thanks for graphs Ryan. I started another thread over on that other forum called "Elvis 2nd To None Is Just That!" where I quickly summed up my impressions. That thread was, of course, completely hijacked by good ol' Bob. And I must admit when I read his prose I wondered if we had listened to same C...

I think so -- I'm not enough of a whiz with WAV files to know for sure, but from what I'm seeing, yeah, they shouldn't be wildly different. The BMG isn't a big solid block o' green, I can tell you that much... Ryan Thanks again Ryan. BTW, I read your comments to Bob on the SH forum and I agree with...

I did that comparison last night after reading Bob's post, and will post the graphs here when I'm back home tonight. But in short, the BMG is louder than the DCC but with no significant (IMHO) difference in dynamics. Perhaps a few of the more extreme peaks are compressed, but the two waveforms look...

Compared "Little Sister" on this and 24K Hits (which is easy, 'cause it's track 16 on both). I actually like the new disc better. The Hoffman is very good, and a bit more warm and gooshy, but the clarity, especially the vocal, on 2nd to None bests the DCC. No contest. A layer of muck has been strip...

I just compared the beginning of I'm One - MCA and Japanese Polydor (your CD-R). An inversion test shows them to be identical. I haven't done a bit comparison in EAC, but there's certainly no "extra bass" or anything. Funny how the Polydor copies of both the remix and original mix are identical to ...

Here is an interesting thread over on the AA forum concerning this hotly debated topic:

http://www.audioasylum.com/forums/dvda/messages/7851.html

So, in conclusion, don't waste your money on UD copies, and think twice whenever someone tells you they won't edit something on a DAW because it will "harden the sound." In a review of the vinyl version of Beth Gibbons' (Portishead vocalist) Out Of Season disc, M. Fremer writes: "The recording is c...