| ernie 04.03.2005 12:24 |
i was at this music store the other day and it was good cuz it had almost all of queen's releases but it also had a bunch of japanese imports of the studio albums. they had different packaging and some japanese written on the back but as far as i could tell they weren't any different from the normal albums...just way more expensive! has anyone ever seen these before and are they worth buying? |
| Negative Creep 04.03.2005 12:29 |
Definitely not.... they are merely badly remastered versions of the 94 remasters - madness. too much compression - particularly on the higher frequencies, the lowest & highest frequencies appear to have been cut & whoever eq'd this set must be fucking deaf aswell |
| ernie 04.03.2005 14:27 |
oh thank goodness...i was this close to buying them :o |
| Fraz 04.03.2005 14:33 |
no but shall stay well clear of em now. |
| inu-liger 04.03.2005 14:41 |
Negative Creep wrote: Definitely not.... they are merely badly remastered versions of the 94 remasters - madness. too much compression - particularly on the higher frequencies, the lowest & highest frequencies appear to have been cut & whoever eq'd this set must be fucking deaf aswellThat would be Justin Shirley-Smith's doing. Either way, the 2001 remaster tracks on Queen: Jewels II sounds fine to me. I have a sample put up, which there is a link to in this section. |
| Benn 04.03.2005 14:46 |
No, to me, the Mini-LP versions of the albums sound BETTER than the '94 remasters. They are less harsh at the higher end and at the bottom, the sound is *richer* as opposed to deeper. I think they are also mastered slightly less *LOUD* than the '94 set. The packaging is also nicer (although the cover of Queen II still looks like a badly pasted cut out on a black background) and they make a nice departure from the standard jewel case in amongst the hundreds of others....... So much so that I flogged all my '94 remasters on e-bay a couple of weeks ago after buying ALL the Mini-LP versions. |
| inu-liger 04.03.2005 14:48 |
Here's the link for my edited sampler of Jewels II: link |
| ernie 04.03.2005 15:13 |
Inu Yasha (a.k.a. Lum's Stormtrooper) wrote: Here's the link for my edited sampler of Jewels II: linkthanks! yeah they do sound fine to me...they sound smoother in a sense and overall i wouldn't mind having them |
| inu-liger 04.03.2005 18:24 |
You can order them from link (CDJapan), or any other site that sells Japanese import CD's (though CDJ is one of the best!) Regarding the remastered CD's: The ones originally recorded on analogue tape (Queen - Hot Space) are regarded as sounding the best out of all the remasters produced from around the world, so these would be the best copies if you're for improved re-mastered sound quality |
| Wilki Amieva 05.03.2005 00:33 |
THE WORKS was also recorded in analog equipment. |
| inu-liger 05.03.2005 13:01 |
Wilki wrote: THE WORKS was also recorded in analog equipment.Yes, and so was Magic, but they were mixed down and mastered digitally. I should post Justin Shirley-Smith's letter regarding this matter again... |
| Negative Creep 05.03.2005 14:34 |
AKOM was definitely recorded digitally, The Works was originally recorded digitally but theres seems to be some confusion over this... I don't think the original vinyl or CDs were actually mastered from the digital masters but from an analogue master. |
| GiantSpider 05.03.2005 15:29 |
Well I have the UK Live Killers 2003 re-issue (A.K.A Japanese 2001). And it seems fine to me. If you want the Imports HMV are selling them for £17. |
| inu-liger 05.03.2005 16:08 |
Here's my letter from Justin Shirley-Smith: "Hi Richard In answer to your questions. The earliest digital tape in the Queen audio archive is dated 20th September 1983. This is an F1 format cassette-tape of rough mixes from The Works sessions which is stereo only. The earliest digital multi-track tape in the Queen audio archive is dated 18th September 1987. This is a DASH format tape which has 24 tracks. This tape contains transfers of various Brian songs from analog tapes done at the time Brian first bought the machines - just prior to The Miracle sessions. Obviously, any type of tape damage (water, fire, heat, breakage etc) could result in loss of information if serious enough, but he most important thing to avoid is proximity to anything magnetic, such as a loud speaker. A magnetic field will erase information from analog or digital tapes because they are both magnetic media. This is the first thing you learn in a recording studio for obvious reasons. Since computer hard disks (+ floppy discs, jazz and zip etc) are also magnetic media, they too are best kept away from magnetic fields. In the beginning of automated mixing, the fader move data was recorded on one track per pass alternately, using up two tracks of the multi-track tape. In the Queen Audio archive this only happened on Musicland tapes. Starting from The Works (recorded at The Record Plant LA), one track of the multi-track tape was used to record time-code. This technology comes from the movie industry and is used for synchronising things together, such as music to picture and, in the audio world, facilitated the first 48 track playback by synch'ing one 24 track tape to another 24 track tape. From memory, I think the first 48 track Queen songs are Hard Life and Hammer To Fall. The time code was also used to allow a mix computer to recognise which part of the tape was playing, and therefore which fader moves to perform. The fader mix data was stored separately on computer disks of various kinds. Automated mixing still works in the same way, by chasing time-code. Best Wishes Justin" |
| Benn 07.03.2005 08:07 |
>Well I have the UK Live Killers 2003 re-issue (A.K.A Japanese 2001). And it seems fine to me. If you want the Imports HMV are selling them for £17. Alternatively, go to Queenonline and buy them as "Buy 1 get 1 free" |
| Fenderek 07.03.2005 08:23 |
Benn wrote: So much so that I flogged all my '94 remasters on e-bay a couple of weeks ago after buying ALL the Mini-LP versions.Did the same...! They sound MUCH better- love them |
| isolar2 07.03.2005 09:33 |
ernie wrote: i was at this music store the other day and it was good cuz it had almost all of queen's releases but it also had a bunch of japanese imports of the studio albums. they had different packaging and some japanese written on the back but as far as i could tell they weren't any different from the normal albums...just way more expensive! has anyone ever seen these before and are they worth buying?definately worth buying, but for a normal price. in european countries such as germany and the netherlands these discs go for approx approx. 16 euro/each. not a bad price i guess. the sound is much better, the remastering job was done much better, the sleeves are very attractive and much better then the 1998 sleeve issues. all in all, get them for a normal price if you can, you won't regret it. |
| Benn 07.03.2005 09:34 |
No, here's a thing. The mini-lp series is supposed to replicate the original vinyl issues, right? Why, therefore, did the powers that be decide it would be *right* to have the bonus tracks that are on the original CD issues (ie bonus tracks on AKOM and Miracle)? Also was "Track 13" on the vinyl issue of MIH (I have no idea whether it was or not)? At the very least, the tradcklisting doesn't match the packaging...... Personally, I'd like to have also seen the discs "look" like vinyl as done on The Who's and The Stones singles box sets. Other than that, I think they are amazing sounding - the tones are rich and full, with very little compression evident. There is also significantly less background hiss than on the '94 EMI remasters. Has anyone gone through and translated each of the lyric sheets from Japanese to English? |
| boy of destiny 07.03.2005 12:26 |
I haven't heard the Japanese remasters, but the gold News of the World cd is incredible. I agree with the other posts, the '94 remasters suck. |
| inu-liger 07.03.2005 18:57 |
Benn wrote: Has anyone gone through and translated each of the lyric sheets from Japanese to English?Not that I know of |
| Benn 08.03.2005 06:54 |
Would you be williing to do it? |
| NOTWMEDDLE 08.03.2005 16:00 |
The albums were remastered for the 1998 boxed set The Crown Jewels. Queen II and Jazz benefitted an awful lot from the 1998 remastering as opposed to the original Hollywood CD issues from 1991. Also, Crazy Little Thing's intro was fixed cos if you listen to the intro on the reg Hollywood issue of The Game, it sounds like the tape was cut. Also, the picture labels were properly reproduced for Opera, Races, Jazz and The Game. |
| Adam Baboolal 08.03.2005 20:32 |
The compression may not be evident to some, but as Deacon Fan once showed, there is a definite increase. He posted pics of Don't Stop Me Now's waveform and showed that the dynamics were compressed further than the previous remasters. Some listen and don't mind this, but now that I'm in school for this stuff, I can recognise the problem with this. I like Brian's idea of going back and redoing mixes like the Teo Torriatte (hi-def). Or instead, it's probably better to go back, remix (like the dvd-a stereo mixes are) and then master from those new mixes. I don't mind the 2001 remaster albums up to Hot Space, but the ones that come after that do seem to suffer more. And yeah, I'm not a fan of the lesser mid-range approach Justin took. Peace, Adam. |
| Benn 09.03.2005 07:50 |
But by changing the mix, you are changing the song by definition. Mixes, in my view, should never be changed, unless they are to the benefit of the ORIGINAL and not to make a new version. And, new mixes should never be passed off as ORIGINAL material. Albums, as they were released, are what the band originally meant for us to hear and that's the material that should be preserved in it's original stste. Sure it's a good idea to re-mix material but never at the expense of the original mix. |
| Adam Baboolal 09.03.2005 10:02 |
Benn, have you heard the DVD-A Stereo PCM mixes? They're EXACT replicas of the original album mixes. Peace, Adam. |
| inu-liger 09.03.2005 10:02 |
Benn wrote: Would you be williing to do it?No, sorry. I don't have the time alone just to romanize the Japanese lyrics. Too much for me to do there. |
| Benn 09.03.2005 11:03 |
Adam, >Have you heard the DVD-A Stereo PCM mixes? They're EXACT replicas of the original album mixes. But they have been re-mixed for 5:1 stereo, so they CAN't POSSIBLY be exact replicas. Just reading Justin's notes on the creation process proves that they have tried to make something "new" out of the original masters with completely different mixing across the individual speakers. The good thing there is that they don't try to pass them off as being exactly the same, but new and (arguably) improved.... |
| Adam Baboolal 09.03.2005 11:24 |
Benn wrote: But they have been re-mixed for 5:1 stereo, so they CAN't POSSIBLY be exact replicas.That doesn't make sense. They're not 5.1, they're recreated from the master tapes BEFORE the 5.1 remixing happens. Maybe replica was the wrong word. What I meant was, they mix from those newly transferred tapes in Pro Tools and then match everything up to what we have heard for years on the cd's. It's no use being anal about having everything sound exactly like how it once did because it's nigh on impossible. And it's not like they're scrapping any previous set of remasters. We can all choose the 94/98/01 remasters. So, they're preserved in that form at least. It doesn't even count the tapes that sit waiting to be remastered from again. Not to mention good vinyl copies. We all hear things differently as no-one has the same set of ears. But what I can tell you is that the remasters sound had been constant, up to the 2001 versions. All that had come before did not sound radically different. But when Justin took them, he did radically change the sound of them. And myself and others agree that the sound of the remasters past Hot Space sound very different. Some like it and sound don't, that's a personal opinion. But the point is that there was no dispute on how these albums sounded before Justin's 2001 attempt. Peace, Adam. |
| inu-liger 09.03.2005 21:55 |
I'm one of those who like the 2001 remasters. When I start making more money, I'm going to pay my friend over in Japan to get me all the 2004 cardboard releases, as it would be much cheaper for me to get it directly from my friend than to order through CDJapan and have to pay those extra shipping costs. I do need replacements for the Jazz and Innuendo albums, so that gives me incentive to get these remasters (though it doesn't stop me from deciding otherwise to get new copies from the Hollywood Records remaster CD's) |
| Scirocco1977 10.03.2005 04:41 |
Okay... this is getting a little confusing. Let's say I'm a regular guy who has this regular obsession with Queen music, and hence has all Queen albums on CD (the digital remasters of the early 90ies). Now, let's say some of my Queen CDs are slowly making trouble being played (being a DJ now and then and therefore the CDs get scratches...) If I was to purchase two or three albums again, which versions should I choose? N.B. I live in Germany but can get hold of the Japanese Remasters (the so-called Mini-LPs) to a decent price. |
| Benn 10.03.2005 07:05 |
Depending on what format you like and what you think you want in your collection. I sold all of the '94 EMI remasters (and the rest of the Queen catalogue) and upgraded to the most recent set that appealed to the collector in me - and that was the mini-lp set; a friend of mine purchased a couple of the original mini-lp issues from the states and they sounded *better* to me than the '94 Remasters. I believe I have the best sounding and looking versions so far. But, as Adam so rightly says, we all hear different things - I spent probably too much time standing next to Pete Townshend's and John Entwistle's amps to be able to hear EVERYTHING, that's for sure!!!!!!! |