- Joined
- Mar 23, 2010
- Messages
- 388
BecauseWhy not?
BecauseWhy not?
LOLBecause
Good points, and I would say that about all five of his Yes album mixes.This is why Steven Wilson matters. He took an iconic record where most of us spent hours inside the Roger Dean world with the band, and brought it cleanly, clearly and enjoyably into beautiful surround.
I noticed differences from the album mix and I just didn't care because they were good and new and everything I wanted to hear was there and with plenty of breathing room. If you love CTTE, just go ahead and buy it and love this.
I can't think of a 5.1 mix where I believe Steven really dropped the ball on. He didn't perform on most of them but the quality of the multich sound he brings to us is limited only by the quality of the original recording.Good points, and I would say that about all five of his Yes album mixes.
some of the dynamic “slam” of certain hits during the title track just seemed watered down...
Just wanted to chime in here on this nicely aged thread and say how thankful I am for this forum. Yesterday I fired up CTTE and was ready for a full mind-meltdown but found myself (once again) critiquing my system and my setup because something just seemed off.
I was wondering if I had inadvertently hit a compression setting or something, because some of the dynamic “slam” of certain hits during the title track just seemed watered down... but then I went through a lot of thinking that this thread confirmed for me... would it feel better loud? Yes. Was some of this probably due to limitations in the source recording? Yes. Was it still enjoyable and a masterpiece, and this was just another way to enjoy it with its own subjective differences from what I know like the back of my hand? Yes. Could I put in another disc that I know is a mind-blower with no adjustment and still get “the feeling”? Yes.
That calmed me down considerably and let me go back and listen again to confirm that yeah, this is indeed darn enjoyable and hard to fault - I’ve just got decades of expectations and preprogramming to move past. But again, seeing others here navigating the same narratives was SO helpful and confirming. Thank you all!
If true then the average of the 6 channels should result in a lower combined measured DR but Steve's measure higher, while some listeners are claiming missing dynamics, slam, drive, etc??? I can supply DR numbers for just about any of the "The Yes Album" masters. None are higher than the 13 I posted and a few are much lower?Leaving aside the issue with interpreting a DR meter reading on a 6 channel source where two channels tend to be very much lower in level than the other four,
So what is it they are missing then? A simple subjective (I heard X Y Z) is not evidence of anything but a individual listeners impression and highly unsupportable? I don't anything wrong with it.dynamic range is not necessarily what people are missing here.
If true then the average of the 6 channels should result in a lower combined measured DR but Steve's measure higher, while some listeners are claiming missing dynamics, slam, drive, etc??? I can supply DR numbers for just about any of the "The Yes Album" masters. None are higher than the 13 I posted and a few are much lower?
I won't debate the math here, it's not my area of expertise. LOLAnyway, the problems of using a DR meter naively with 6 channel mixes has been covered elsewhere on QQ.