The Who - It's Hard
-
Mike Hunte
- Senior Troll
- Posts: 293
- Joined: Wed Apr 09, 2003 4:48 pm
- Location: Bed
The Who - It's Hard
What's the best version on CD?
Edited EAC log of my Polydor It's Hard CD (800 106-2, Made In W. Germany, inner ring: 800 106 2 02).
Track 1 Peak level 90.8 %
Track 2 Peak level 73.4 %
Track 3 Peak level 72.7 %
Track 4 Peak level 73.2 %
Track 5 Peak level 72.7 %
Track 6 Peak level 83.5 %
Track 7 Peak level 75.7 %
Track 8 Peak level 67.2 %
Track 9 Peak level 72.3 %
Track 10 Peak level 81.2 %
Track 11 Peak level 74.4 %
Track 12 Peak level 71.3 %
Track 1 Peak level 90.8 %
Track 2 Peak level 73.4 %
Track 3 Peak level 72.7 %
Track 4 Peak level 73.2 %
Track 5 Peak level 72.7 %
Track 6 Peak level 83.5 %
Track 7 Peak level 75.7 %
Track 8 Peak level 67.2 %
Track 9 Peak level 72.3 %
Track 10 Peak level 81.2 %
Track 11 Peak level 74.4 %
Track 12 Peak level 71.3 %
Last edited by Andreas on Mon May 09, 2005 2:36 am, edited 1 time in total.
The Warner Bros. WG target appears to have the same mastering as the Polydor:
Track 1 Peak level 90.8 %
Track 2 Peak level 73.4 %
Track 3 Peak level 72.7 %
Track 4 Peak level 73.2 %
Track 5 Peak level 72.7 %
Track 6 Peak level 83.5 %
Track 7 Peak level 75.7 %
Track 8 Peak level 67.2 %
Track 9 Peak level 72.3 %
Track 10 Peak level 81.2 %
Track 11 Peak level 74.4 %
Track 12 Peak level 71.3 %
Track 1 Peak level 90.8 %
Track 2 Peak level 73.4 %
Track 3 Peak level 72.7 %
Track 4 Peak level 73.2 %
Track 5 Peak level 72.7 %
Track 6 Peak level 83.5 %
Track 7 Peak level 75.7 %
Track 8 Peak level 67.2 %
Track 9 Peak level 72.3 %
Track 10 Peak level 81.2 %
Track 11 Peak level 74.4 %
Track 12 Peak level 71.3 %
"I dig snow and rain and the bright sunshine." - TJ
-
lukpac
- Top Dog and Sellout
- Posts: 4592
- Joined: Wed Apr 02, 2003 11:51 pm
- Location: Madison, WI
- Contact:
Andreas wrote:The gospel says that there was a secret remaster (before the remix).
It does?
I had always assumed (perhaps incorrectly?) that the WB and MCA discs were the same.
"I know because it is impossible for a tape to hold the compression levels of these treble boosted MFSL's like Something/Anything. The metal particulate on the tape would shatter and all you'd hear is distortion if even that." - VD
Andreas, here you go:
MCAD-25986 (matrix MCAD25986 03% made at PDO US)
Track 1
Peak level 70.6 %
Track 2
Peak level 62.8 %
Track 3
Peak level 66.3 %
Track 4
Peak level 70.5 %
Track 5
Peak level 66.5 %
Track 6
Peak level 66.6 %
Track 7
Peak level 66.8 %
Track 8
Peak level 56.4 %
Track 9
Peak level 60.2 %
Track 10
Peak level 73.3 %
Track 11
Peak level 61.5 %
Track 12
Peak level 57.5 %
MCAD-25986 (matrix MCAD25986 03% made at PDO US)
Track 1
Peak level 70.6 %
Track 2
Peak level 62.8 %
Track 3
Peak level 66.3 %
Track 4
Peak level 70.5 %
Track 5
Peak level 66.5 %
Track 6
Peak level 66.6 %
Track 7
Peak level 66.8 %
Track 8
Peak level 56.4 %
Track 9
Peak level 60.2 %
Track 10
Peak level 73.3 %
Track 11
Peak level 61.5 %
Track 12
Peak level 57.5 %
You sent one version (Polydor?) of It's Hard and Face Dances. That's nice, as I don't have those iterations otherwise. Problematically, however, my *other* iterations are all at home, where I'm notably not.
BTW, I still don't think EAC logs are very useful. There're too many weird contingencies that could produce similar looking EAC logs, and yet signal different masterings, and also *different* EAC logs that could represent the *same* mastering.
BTW, I still don't think EAC logs are very useful. There're too many weird contingencies that could produce similar looking EAC logs, and yet signal different masterings, and also *different* EAC logs that could represent the *same* mastering.
-------------
"Fuckin' Koreans" - Reno 911
"Fuckin' Koreans" - Reno 911
But don't you agree that the exact same set of peak levels (unless all numbers are 100%) signifies the same mastering? It is not about "similar looking", it is about the exact same numbers.
And that different numbers signifies that at least something was done different in the mastering?
See the Who Are You comparison. The MCA appears to be exactly (100/93.3) times as loud as the Polydor. This is one example that would be interesting to examine. They could be from the same digital source with a volume increase.
But It's Hard has some qualitative differences. On my Polydor, track 2 is louder than track 4, wheraes on dudelsack's MCA, track 4 is louder.
Lastly, my comparisons of the two Who's Better Who's Best have left me confused if we really can determine anything if the digital data is so different. In those cases, the tracks stayed in-synch and had similar-looking waveforms, but I could not make them cancel out. Of course, the EAC logs were very different, and the Polydor WBWB mono tracks were not pure mono while the MCA ones were.
And that different numbers signifies that at least something was done different in the mastering?
See the Who Are You comparison. The MCA appears to be exactly (100/93.3) times as loud as the Polydor. This is one example that would be interesting to examine. They could be from the same digital source with a volume increase.
But It's Hard has some qualitative differences. On my Polydor, track 2 is louder than track 4, wheraes on dudelsack's MCA, track 4 is louder.
Lastly, my comparisons of the two Who's Better Who's Best have left me confused if we really can determine anything if the digital data is so different. In those cases, the tracks stayed in-synch and had similar-looking waveforms, but I could not make them cancel out. Of course, the EAC logs were very different, and the Polydor WBWB mono tracks were not pure mono while the MCA ones were.
Oh, it can. I'm just thinking of cases where it wouldn't. Say you played a tape straight through twice, capturing each version to digital. I'd think that peaks, etc., would be exactly the same...but the two passes would be two distinct mastering attempts, as they wouldn't stay in sync.
-------------
"Fuckin' Koreans" - Reno 911
"Fuckin' Koreans" - Reno 911