Rush - new 2015 vinyl and hi-res reissues thread.

You know what? I'm going to do whatever I bloody well want to do when it comes to getting a satisfactory copy of an LP. If that means returning it as many times as necessary, then that's what I'm going to do. I'm getting tired of certain people trying to police the industry by attempting to guilt others into keeping defective vinyl, and just living with problems because if they don't it's going to destroy the market. I call Shenanigans!

If you want to keep your vinyl titles that are warped and excessively noisy, feel free to continue to live with those defective pressings, but please don't presume to know the extent of what others are able to tolerate when it comes to their defective copies.

Case in point: My copy of AFTK was both dished, and overly noisy. I chose to return it for a replacement. You know what? My replacement copy arrived today, and it is totally flat. Not only that but it is extremely quiet. I will gladly be keeping this copy, and purchasing the rest of these Rush reissues. If I had listened to the "Live With It" contingent, I would have been completely dissatisfied.

So here's MY request of other vinyl buyers: Please do whatever you want to do when it comes to purchasing and enjoying vinyl.

I have to disagree with this outlook as well. While I don't disagree that a good cleaning CAN remove ticks and noise, it does NOT always solve the problem. Cleaning can actually make things worse if you don't do it correctly. You CAN get quiet vinyl without doing anything but playing it. That second copy of AFTK I mentioned above is almost dead silent without doing anything but carbon-brushing it and cleaning the stylus prior to playing.

My point is that quiet vinyl is not something you exclusively make happen by cleaning. It's already out there, but it may require some diligence in acquiring it.

 

then you are lucky. cause a lot of people have had issues with their vinyls...

 

I totally agree with this. I too am one of those guys who has to have a perfect copy and I too will keep sending it back till I get one iam satisfied with... plus eventually they need to fix this anyway. iam sure they are tired of returns by now... get it right the first time and no more problems.. but a lot of people have had problems with AFTK so far..

 

Just be wary that Amazon can ban your account if they think you're abusing the privilege. It's been done before.

 

I do have to say that I stop short of expecting perfection when it comes to vinyl. I will live with ticks or groove noise if it's minor, or in sections of the music that's not very noticeable, or between tracks. I wasn't saying that vinyl has to always be defect-free. Just want to clarify that.

Yep, I'm aware of that possibility. I try to limit my returns to a very, very small number annually.

 

well, I actually return it once. then purchased a new one. so this will be my third. if its good and flat. I wont have to return it.. again.. if not ,, I will. I already paid for it twice... trust me. I hate to have to return anything if I don't have to...

 

OK DeRosa from Toronto, if that's your real name, I'd like to know what this statement means - many of us know that the original digital master of MP was 16/44.1 because that was the exist SOTA technology then. Are you saying we are getting a new master of MP? A higher than 16/44.1 digital master (albeit not remixed)?

 

So the 2015 AFTK 96 & 192 downloads are really upsampled 44.1/24s?

 

I have just played the intro to A Farewell to Kings from my Mercury UK vinyl. The same noise prior to the guitar coming in is present as has been noted for the latest release. I have had this LP since release and this has never registered with me. Of course in my teenage years the turntables were cheaper and basic but listening habits at 14 are different to those at 52. Mind you I've turned the Technics UK 192/24 download up loud just like way back when and I'm grinning like a fool!

 

I have no idea how they will handle the reissue of Moving Pictures. Maybe it will be remixed from
the analogue source tapes so they can use modern digital higher resolution gear, maybe not.

I was is simply pointing out that Rush used digital processes in their original pressings in the past,
so I didn't assume that all the reissues would be done with full analogue chain of equipment in 2015,
and I've never read a claim that the reissues would be full analogue.

 

Has anyone done this kind of analysis of the previously released titles in the series? I have the supposed 24/96 of S/T, FBN, and CoS, but I don't have the software to look at the spectrographs. I have no complaint at all with the sound of the titles I bought, but there should be some truth in advertising, even if my dog would be the only member of my household that could benefit from 24/96 or 24/192.

 

I remember reading on the Rush site, when these were first announced, that these were going to be all analog. I'm usually very skeptical about those claims, so I remember being surprised by it and how certain the language was that these would be all analog. I checked the site out and it no longer mentions anything about analog, however it is mentioned on the sites of many retailers. Looks like they recently pulled that language from the Rush site, but the retailers are still working off of the original promo language.

The hi-res files I've heard sound great FWIW. Best I've ever heard Rush sound.

 

Did a quick comparison between my original US Mercury pressing and the new re-issue. On the song AFTK I noticed two differences:

1) The noise on the intro prior to the guitar coming in is NOT on the original vinyl.

2) After the acoustic intro, but before Geddy's vocals, there is a section about 5 seconds long that has audible tape degradation not present on the original vinyl.

In the scheme of things, both of these findings are very minor, but noticeable nonetheless. I just wanted to see if anyone else has noticed, or if they've noticed anything else.

 

Please provide some examples of these retailers "working off the original promo language" that states the remastering chain will be "all analog".
I've looked and not found any. The Musicdirect.com and other descriptions I read typically say this:

"During the '12 Months of Rush' campaign all 14 of the band's Mercury albums will be remastered on 200-gram heavy-weight vinyl at legendary Abbey Road, all from original analogue masters. All LPs will also include a digital download code for a 320kbps MP4 vinyl ripped Digital Audio album download."

It says "all" the albums will be remastered from the original analogue tapes, not that the remastering process will be "all analogue".

AcousticSounds has a similar explanation:

"Rush's 2112 has been newly-remastered at legendary Abbey Road Studios using the Direct to Metal Mastering (DMM) audiophile copper plating process, all from original analogue masters. Then pressed to 200-gram dead quiet vinyl at Quality Record Pressings!"

It doesn't say that the process was "all analogue" it says all the remastering steps came from the original analogue masters.

 

It says:

"During the '12 Months of Rush' campaign all 14 of the band's Mercury albums will be remastered on 200-gram heavy-weight vinyl at legendary Abbey Road, all from original analogue masters."

Not:

"During the '12 Months of Rush' campaign all 14 of the band's Mercury albums will be remastered on 200-gram heavy-weight vinyl at legendary Abbey Road, all from 24/192 copies of the original analogue masters."

It is misleading IMO. I have not heard the vinyl yet, but the 24/192 files sound superb, so I'm sure the vinyl will too.

 

Ah, but it A Farewell to Kings seems to be limited to the bandwidth of 44.1k, that does not seem consistent with working "from original analogue masters". If they had started with the original analogue masters on this project, then I'd expect them to digitize them at 96k or higher, especially if the target format is a 192k download. No, if there was 44.1k as an intermediate step, the digitization was done a long ago (some of the Sectors albums were stated to have been done from 192k tapes that were copied from the analog something like 7 years before). Or it was a huge mistake made during this remastering that didn't get caught.

 

I noticed this as well. I have yet to go back and listen, but I think(operative word) it is on the Sectors mastering as well.

 

Please report back when you have a chance. I was wondering if it is also present on the Sectors version. Thanks!

 

My copy of AFTK 2015 vinyl also has slight and very minor bowl effect....again minor....so it is not perfectly flat. But the sonics is sublime and no click or pops to speak of, even during quieter passages. Very pleased.

 

This is a double edged sword. On the one hand guys like you keep pressing plants accountable, and the other hand guys like you drive up the price of vinyl. If there is a short little noise in a few places, I can live with it. Major skips of pops must go back.

 

Excellent. Sounds like a keeper to me.

 

I haven't.

Again, it's vinyl, people. There are going to be some minor physical defects. Minor warpage, bowing, etc., is to be expected. If it doesn't affect the sound, I don't worry about it. If it causes skips or renders the LP unplayable, of course I will return it. Otherwise, I realize that vinyl isn't like CD or digital download. Yes, perfectly flat vinyl looks nicer, but just as often than not, my LP will have very minor warpage, or will be pressed off center to a minor degree. If I can't hear it, I don't care.

 

I emailed Chad Kassem about this video to make sure he has seen it.

 

This.

 

THANK YOU! I wish the folks that sold the music provided these so we could hear for ourselves on our own gear. Other than all the adware I had to battle...this is a nice treat