| 4 x Vision 01.07.2011 10:03 |
I don't see any topics discussing the new batch individually, so sorry if double post? I love this remaster. It sounds absolutely great. They've given these songs new life. IHIGHLIGHTS It's Late - I've never been a lover of this song, but it now sounds like the hard rocker it always should have been now. All Dead, All Dead - As of all the remasters so far, we can at last hear Brian's lead vocals the way they should have always been. They have a bit of volume now, and you can really hear how rich is voice was. Piano in this song is lovely and a lot clearer. Spread Your Wings - I prefer the BBC one. The album cut sounds more or less the same as it always did, although Freddie's voice is sharper sounding to my ear. I think there was an interview around then that Freddie said Brian is ruining his beautiful voice and that he sang til he bled trying to get it right for It's Late... you can hear that now in these songs (no wonder he had nodules). The SYW BBC version is stunning, they're all on top form and the remaster sounds amazing. A very modern feel to it. My Melancholy Blues - The album version sounds like Freddie is in your room singing at a piano. Again though, the BBC v is better IMO. You can really hear the "blues" in Freddie's voice. Brian's subtle guitar work at times really comes through. Simple but very effective. The other songs all sound louder and that's a good thing for this album imo. NEGATIVES Sheer Heart Attack - I wish it got the same treatment as It's Late. Still sounds too weak for it to be the hard rocker it was live. Dissapointed with this track. Feelings, Feelings - Nice the first time I listened, but fails to hook me the way other songs on that album did, so I can see why it was excluded. Freddie sounds awesome, but the song would have been an album filler for me. |
| dysan 01.07.2011 10:27 |
I agree about SHA. One of my all time favorite songs but has always seemed to lack the omph it deserves. |
| Soundfreak 01.07.2011 12:10 |
They have really worked on "It's late". The track is EQed slightly sharper than on previous versions like "Queen Rocks" or the "Hollywood "News of the World". But most noticible they have cleaned the intro. All earlier copies contain lots of deep microphone rumbling noises on words like "love me", "myself"...."inside". All this has been removed now. |
| The Real Wizard 01.07.2011 13:16 |
Soundfreak wrote: But most noticible they have cleaned the intro. All earlier copies contain lots of deep microphone rumbling noises on words like "love me", "myself"...."inside". ====================== Excellent catch. Indeed, It's Late has never sounded better ! |
| Rick 01.07.2011 14:20 |
You know what SHA is lacking? A snare drum. |
| jamster1111 01.07.2011 15:10 |
Rick wrote: You know what SHA is lacking? A snare drum. No, I think the thing it really lacks is cowbell. |
| malicedoom 01.07.2011 15:34 |
You can always use more cowbell. |
| smilebrian 02.07.2011 06:34 |
Has anyone compared the remaster to the MFSL or the Target CD? I have the MFSL which I think sounds pretty good, but I haven't heard the Target. Vinyl murders all of them anyway, so I play that mostly now. It's Late for me is one of Queen's greatest, one of my top three for sure. |
| Rick 02.07.2011 07:20 |
jamster1111 wrote: Rick wrote: You know what SHA is lacking? A snare drum. No, I think the thing it really lacks is cowbell. ==== Hehe, I was being serious. You can hardly hear the snare. Why not the same drum sound as in Fight From The Inside, Get Down Make Love or It's Late? I don't understand. |
| dysan 02.07.2011 07:24 |
We know SHA was around the time of the album of the same name - it is often said to have been 'started' at those sessions, but is the backing track from then, or was it totally newly recorded for NOTW? |
| TyphoonTip 02.07.2011 07:56 |
Soundfreak wrote: But most noticible they have cleaned the intro. All earlier copies contain lots of deep microphone rumbling noises on words like "love me", "myself"...."inside". All this has been removed now. _________________________ Haven't heard it yet. But I have to say, that concerns me. 'Cleaning' is what made the 93-4 remasters a waste of plastic. If it's been "no-noised", I'll be very disappointed. |
| joesilvey 02.07.2011 09:11 |
I think NOTW is the best sounding of the second set of remasters... completely agree that it sounds like the band are playing right in the room with you. absolutely stunning... |
| TyphoonTip 02.07.2011 09:30 |
smilebrian wrote: Has anyone compared the remaster to the MFSL or the Target CD? I have the MFSL which I think sounds pretty good, but I haven't heard the Target. Vinyl murders all of them anyway, so I play that mostly now. It's Late for me is one of Queen's greatest, one of my top three for sure. _______________ I've turned my back on the MFSL of News. As much as there are parts that sound great (which seduced me for a while), it's just too bright over all. Distractingly so. The same mastering approach is used on the Races MFSL, but for some reason it really works on that album. The definitive version of that album for me. |
| The Real Wizard 02.07.2011 13:09 |
TyphoonTip wrote: If it's been "no-noised", I'll be very disappointed. ====================== Oh no, it's nothing like that. It's clean as clean will ever get. Analog clean. |
| smilebrian 03.07.2011 04:46 |
TyphoonTip wrote: I've turned my back on the MFSL of News. As much as there are parts that sound great (which seduced me for a while), it's just too bright over all. Distractingly so. The same mastering approach is used on the Races MFSL, but for some reason it really works on that album. The definitive version of that album for me. ________________ I'm aware that the MFSL of News isn't definitive and at the moment I'm liking it but I don't have a quality copy to compare. I've been holding out for a Target but just can't find any for sensible money, plus vinyl has taken over my life for the time being. I haven't bothered with the MFSL of ADATR as I have the CP32 which I really like, I may look out for one now. I find it impossible to beat the Millennium EMI vinyl which I think sounds superb although I haven't compared to a mint UK first pressing. I'm holding off on spending any more $ on new Queen releases as I've been chronically disappointed in virtually everything released for the last 15 years. I can't bare the thought of spending money on remasters that sound worse than the CP32's, so for now I'm holding... even though some good things have been said about them. |
| Rick 03.07.2011 05:03 |
dysan wrote: We know SHA was around the time of the album of the same name - it is often said to have been 'started' at those sessions, but is the backing track from then, or was it totally newly recorded for NOTW? ====== The drums are from 1977, I'm pretty sure of that. |
| Ghostwithasmile is BACK! 03.07.2011 05:22 |
Well I think they didgreat on News of the World. Very nice sound... I love the albumsong Sheer Heart Attack... but when itcomes to the guitar solo : I think it is quite a annoying sound....reminds me of a dentist drilling..... And with headphones you can't play it to loud.... |
| pittrek 03.07.2011 05:49 |
There is on HUGE problem which I have with these remasters. They are way too loud, I hate loud CDs |
| DaveyLane 03.07.2011 06:51 |
Rick wrote: dysan wrote: We know SHA was around the time of the album of the same name - it is often said to have been 'started' at those sessions, but is the backing track from then, or was it totally newly recorded for NOTW? ====== The drums are from 1977, I'm pretty sure of that. From memory there are no concert toms on the SHA album?? Besides, there's no way, bearing in mind the methodical process of RT pulling drum sounds in 1977 that they would have kept a drum take recorded three years before when they would have had a considerably smaller recording budget.... |
| DaveyLane 03.07.2011 06:53 |
ghostwithasmile wrote: Well I think they didgreat on News of the World. Very nice sound... I love the albumsong Sheer Heart Attack... but when itcomes to the guitar solo : I think it is quite a annoying sound....reminds me of a dentist drilling..... And with headphones you can't play it to loud.... I think that was the intention!!!! |
| TyphoonTip 03.07.2011 07:28 |
OK, so I've listened to it twice. Initial impressions. Good: - Haven't tampered drastically with the EQ on the tracks that clearly didn't need it. (eg, All Dead, All Dead). ...Although, in the end, I prefer other versions and possibly won't buy (many) of this remaster series, I like the fact that (so far) Ludwig has been prepared to accept when (in his opinion) the first press got it right (in terms of the EQ), and leave it more or less alone. (This is not withstanding the fact that there has been an across the board bottom end boost on all the remasters so far) - The EQ changes on tracks that perhaps were either a bit muddy or just needed a little bit more definition, have been done reasonably tastefully. (eg, Spread Your Wings, It's Late etc..). Bad: - Generally a bit too loud. Although, again, not brick-walled, as some hysterical audiophiles are screaming, there are moments when I just wished there wasn't quite so much hard limiting on the more dynamic tracks. Conclusion: - I think a middle ground between the occasional stodgy first press and the over bright MFSL has been reached. However, whether this positive will outweigh the occasional moments of heavy limiting remains to be seen. I'll have to live with it a bit longer. But, I think it might. |
| Your Fairy King 03.07.2011 07:49 |
pittrek wrote: There is on HUGE problem which I have with these remasters. They are way too loud, I hate loud CDs lol - that was my problem with the original remasters, they were recorded too low. I had to crank them all the way up to get any punch of out it. The new remasters are juicy! |
| Lapetsu 03.07.2011 10:44 |
ghostwithasmile wrote: Well I think they didgreat on News of the World. Very nice sound... I love the albumsong Sheer Heart Attack... but when itcomes to the guitar solo : I think it is quite a annoying sound....reminds me of a dentist drilling..... And with headphones you can't play it to loud.... ------------------------------------------ I was at some local dance club other day and they played Sheer Heart Attack song there :) People actually went quite crazy during that song, they played some other punk songs there too. But as soon as that terrible squeaking sound started, the dance floor got quite empty:) can't blame them.. |
| rhyeking 04.07.2011 23:44 |
I haven't heard the 2011 remaster yet, so I can't comment, but from what I'm reading, I'm eager to hear it! As for the album itself, hear are a few thoughts... My understanding was that Roger started "Sheer Heart Attack" in 1974 for the album of the same name, but hadn't finished it. I assumed this meant the writing, or at most a demo of some sort, but that Queen never recorded anything more than that. I also read often that it was Roger's response to punk rock, so I'm curious, if that's true, whether the 1974 beginnings bear any similarity to the 1977 finished version. Punk was just getting geared up in 1974 and was well established by 1977, so the questions are: was the music and/or words influenced by punk in 1974? Or did Roger work the song into a punk style by 1977? "Feeling Feelings," either version, would've made a respectable B-side, but aside from "See What A Fool I've Been," non-album tracks didn't exist for Queen in the '70s, despite having a few candidates: "FF," "Mad The Swine" and "KYA (Long Lost Re-Take)." (Note: "God Save The Queen" was, in 1974, temporarily a non-album track until ANATO came out, but as it wasn't recorded for that [or any] album, only later used because it did suit "Opera," it nearly became a rarity). I freakin' love this album! |
| ITSM 05.07.2011 03:50 |
I get the impression that a lot of you guys like "It's Late". I watched the movie about Kurt Cobain - "About a Son", and "It's Late" is in that movie, because Kurt Cobain listed to Queen a lot, and was an inspiration to him. It's a great movie by the way! Just thought you should know : ) link |
| dysan 05.07.2011 04:57 |
I don' think these CDs are way too loud - that's a necessary part of modern mastering. Standardising the levels. |
| The Real Wizard 05.07.2011 15:26 |
dysan wrote: I don' think these CDs are way too loud - that's a necessary part of modern mastering. Standardising the levels. ========== But it's not levels they're fixing - it's compression being added. They're squashing the peak to average ratio, meaning the difference between the quietest and loudest parts is being decreased. This aspect of the mixing process is just the next instalment in the loudness war. Just compare the Calling All Girls bonus track on Hot Space to the picture gallery on the Live At The Bowl DVD - the latter sounds much better because they left it alone. |
| TyphoonTip 05.07.2011 19:55 |
Sir GH wrote: dysan wrote: I don' think these CDs are way too loud - that's a necessary part of modern mastering. Standardising the levels. ========== But it's not levels they're fixing - it's compression being added. They're squashing the peak to average ratio, meaning the difference between the quietest and loudest parts is being decreased. This aspect of the mixing process is just the next instalment in the loudness war. Just compare the Calling All Girls bonus track on Hot Space to the picture gallery on the Live At The Bowl DVD - the latter sounds much better because they left it alone. ______________________ Actually, to be fair, the compression on most of the 2011 remasters is reasonably conservative by today's standards. The problem is the hard limiting. Although the end result is similar, and could be certainly be argued to be a form of compression, it is actually a fundamentally different effect. So yes, similar, but noticeably different. Personally I think it was a compromise they reached in wanting to have the albums sound loud, while also retaining as much of the original dynamics as that approach would allow. It's sad that they felt the need to distort their music to fit the fashion of the time. From Ludwig's recent history, we can be reasonably sure the push didn't come from him. |
| JamesCore88 06.07.2011 04:41 |
I have a feeling that unofficial Feelings Feelings (the "clean" version or/and Number 9 version) is better than bonus Take 10. Especially Freddie's vocal isn't that true and powerful on Take 10. What do you think about it? |
| rhyeking 06.07.2011 10:44 |
I like them both and since the leaked version was of decent quality, I'm actually happy to have two different recordings of a previously unreleased outtake. If they'd released the previously leaked version, it would have been nice, but nothing new for we fans who already had it. This way, we have two looks at a session track that might otherwise have never seen the light of day. |
| atom murray 26.11.2012 11:21 |
|
| atom murray 26.11.2012 11:28 |
News of the World is one of my favourites and it would have been nice to have some more out takes but Queen were busy boys touring so what you hear is what you get. The bonus material on all the remasters is unremarkable and after one or two listens you will tend to forget them. A 2 or 3 CD box at budget price would have done nicely for the Bs and outtakes, no live versions from the official live releases (pure nonsense) instead of ruining the 2011s with childish sleeve notes and extra track listing on the rear artwork. I'm glad I bought the single CDs because they are definitive and that's the way they were meant to be! Queen are my favourite band and I like to remember and listen to them they way they were! Just like Elvis, the way it was!!! Rock on all you lot of tarts! |
| The King Of Rhye 23.10.2013 08:27 |
searched for a thread on this cus I just now am listening to the 2011 remastered version for the first time..... My personal opinion is that the remastering is pretty darn good! I saw a few complaints about the loudness/compression thing.....yeah, I can hear that a little bit, but that seems to be the way everything is going nowadays....look up 'loudness war' on wikipedia some time...and at least it's not as bad as on Metallica's Death Magnetic or Black Sabbath's 13! Thank Rick Rubin for almost ruining 2 great albums.... I don't have an older version of NOTW on hand to directly compare, but the main differences I hear are that it's a tad clearer, and the bass guitar seems louder...or am I just crazy?? |
| dysan 23.10.2013 10:06 |
I can't believe all this was over 2 years ago :o( |
| Ghostwithasmile is BACK! 25.10.2013 07:05 |
Rick wrote: You know what SHA is lacking? A snare drum.The original version does have a snare drum , and it is quite prominent ! Wondr why they cut it out to the orginal version. Could have been a thing with the punk movement. |