2. digital
  3. 167087-129917

Deja Vu all over again

The Crosby, Stills, Nash and Young remastered album is available on Qobuz for streaming at 192kHz 24bit.  It sounds great.  I have the original vinyl that I bought in the late 70s.  This remastered version has a very crisp clean sound with good soundstage depth and width.  I especially like the song, "Almost Cut my Hair". The song seems almost comical to me at the beginning but the mood changes for me as the song continues into a serious and good discussion.
I believe this digital version has little to no compression since I have my preamp volume set at 50 for my normal listening level.  Compare that to some pop albums on Qobuz at 44kHz 16bit that I play at a volume level of 27-33.
I believe the compression level is proportional to the volume level I use for my normal listening level.  For example, ROON shows the dynamic range of each of my CDs that I have ripped as FLAC files into my Library.  I see dynamic range as low as 8 and as high as 18.  The 18 is for a Telarc CD and is exceptional.  I notice my volume level for normal listening level is correlating to this Dynamic Range value.  Of course the higher dynamic range recordings have some nice loud peaks.

128x128tonywinga

Showing 11 responses by georgehifi

georgehifi's avatar
georgehifi
10,312 posts
 


Here’s what one verified purchaser though of the new 50th Anniversary Deja Vu on vinyl.

Holmes
2.0 out of 5 stars
Lifeless mp3 sound on vinyl.
Reviewed in the United States on May 17, 2021
Verified Purchase
Sound quality (vinyl) compressed and pushed to sound loud. Unlistenable. I have bootlegs that sound better than this cash grab. Returned for refund
And if the vinyl was this dynamically crunched, then it doesn’t hold much for the cd, as they were probably taken off the same new remaster.

Cheers George
georgehifi's avatar
georgehifi
10,312 posts
 
I checked out the Discogs site and didn't see any masterings by Bellman of this recording prior to this 50th anniversary release.
Very strange, Deja Vu was released (vinyl) in March 1970 by Atlantic Records. Yet the 1st CD, didn't as far as I can find come out till 1988 6 years after retail CD started????
Cheers George
georgehifi's avatar
georgehifi
10,312 posts
 

It’s all about compression, either because of the vintage of the release of the album used when streamed or because it get compressed because of the streaming process itself.
Which ever it is, playing the original retail stamped release CD on a transport or "copied to a hard drive", always sounds the better to me in most cases than anything streamed.


Cheers George
georgehifi's avatar
georgehifi
10,312 posts
 


There is a reason people think it is superior to CD.

I think it’s mainly those with nostalgia reasons and massive record collections and big rigs, I could have stayed with it also.
I had Stax CPX electrostatic cartridge and power supply (best ever) on mega $ TT and arm.
http://www.vinylengine.com/turntable_forum/viewtopic.php?f=36&t=23803&sid=314038a158e97a8f87...

But to me CD using good R2R ladder conversion has it all over that vinyl rig, especially in sound stage image and depth focus, and the ability to give imagining outside the speakers, which gives the feeling you get up and and can walk into that image, and that’s bought mainly because of the 120db channel separation.
Cheers George

georgehifi's avatar
georgehifi
10,312 posts
 

According to that database my 1970s pressings of Fleetwood Mac have a dynamic range equivalent to digital. I didn’t realize that. So my 50 year old records are a good reference. Good thing I’ve kept my analog rig up to date.


Yes but pity the stereo channel separation is 70% better on CD than vinyl.
For vinyl just 30db at 1khz and almost mono in the bass and around 20db in the highs. CD 120db all through the range. And then there’s the noise difference🤦‍♂️

Cheers George
georgehifi's avatar
georgehifi
10,312 posts
 


Heart’s Dream Boat Annie (which I have the 1997 7243 8 19826-2) were all a little compressed (streamed/download a little worse), which means so were the masters, and there’s nothing that can be done about then.
https://dr.loudness-war.info/album/list?artist=Heart&album=Dreamboat+Annie

Cheers George
georgehifi's avatar
georgehifi
10,312 posts
 

Here 2 x Fleetwood Mac albums I listened to last night that I have a few re-issues/remastered versions of, and it’s definitely the earliest ones that have the better relaxed feel to them as they have the greater DR and quieter passages between the louder transients ones, which gives more "air" around the music.
(all green is good) red, orange, yellow compressed

https://dr.loudness-war.info/album/list?artist=Fleetwood+Mac&album=Rumours

https://dr.loudness-war.info/album/list?artist=Fleetwood+Mac&album=Fleetwood+Mac

Cheers George
georgehifi's avatar
georgehifi
10,312 posts
 
Neil Young or someone similar,  I believe is also one of the founders/investors of the "Dynamic Range Data Base"  https://dr.loudness-war.info/ being very opposed to "compression"

Cheers George
georgehifi's avatar
georgehifi
10,312 posts
 
 "remastered" "later re-issues"
Nearly always means they've been compressed.

Cheers George 
georgehifi's avatar
georgehifi
10,312 posts
 
Remasters are often crunched, but sometimes they get it right.
Yes they usually are, very rarely they leave it alone, nearly always the later ones/re-issues are "dynamically crunched", great term btw, better than just saying compressed, it’s got more meaning behind it.

Cheers George
georgehifi's avatar
georgehifi
10,312 posts
 
The Crosby, Stills, Nash and Young remastered album is available on Qobuz for streaming at 192kHz 24bit. It sounds great.

Pity it’s said it’s compressed, compared to the original masters.
The first 16/44 issues are the best of the digital releases, if you prefer your music naturally dynamic and uncompressed.

Stereophiles music reviewer Tom Fine on CSNY "Deja Vu"
The first CD is the original album, sourced from the original tapes. Chris Bellman at Bernie Grundman Mastering used a light hand at the mastering console and kept the original dynamics and tonal qualities. It’s superior to the two prior issues on 5" shiny plastic: It’s not so much that they were stereotypically bad CDs (although the 1994 reissue, made at the dawn of the awful Loudness Wars, is somewhat dynamics-crunched); it’s that this version is a really good demonstration of how good a CD can sound. Spin it on a top-grade player or through a good DAC and behold the state of the studio-recording art in late 1969.

We were listening last night to Jeff Beck's "Flash" and the 90’s CD was so much better than the streamed 2000’s release from my friends streamer, and this was why.

Jeff Beck Flash 1992 DR 14, 12, 15
Jeff Beck Flash 2006 DR 10, 07, 12


Cheers George
More to discover