40th Anniversary Supertramp - Crime of the Century!

I don't understand it either. Is the term "brickwalling" now used for every record the listener deems sonicly inferior? It's obviously not brickwalled, at all, just like you say.

 

You are making fun of all the people here, don't you ?

 

I understand the concept of freedom of speech...but what is it that makes some people post complete b*ll**** and outright lies in a forum like this?

So once again...this is rumour control, here are the FACTS: The 40th anniversary edition of "Crime Of The Century" sounds great and it has a great dynamic range. If anything the dynamic range is a bit too HIGH for some listening conditions. The quiet parts are extremely quiet so anybody with sensitive neighbours might have trouble listening to the CD at night ;-)

 

crappy posting!!!

 

If this CD is brickwalled, then I'm the owner of the only great sounding copy in the world. That rarest Supertramp item of them all...

 

This is my first post, so I hope I'm following the forum protocol.

I first bought Crime on vinyl shortly after hearing Dreamer on the radio - even as a 12 year old I knew this was a special album. At 16 I bought my first "proper" turntable and Crime featured regularly on my ever growing play list. It hit all the right buttons, emotionally, musically and sonically.

I then got into hi-fi and bought the Mo-Fi half speed master and thought it was better. Upgraded turntable and realised it wasn't better. Spent next 20 years trying to buy a good (no pre-echo!) UK 1st pressing, because they sound fantastic, in my opinion.

Move forward to 40th. anniversary; this thread is about the 40th. anniversary!

The live album is very good. The music is obviously fantastic and the recording / mastering, very good. It isn't Queen or Pink Floyd live with the studio trickery added. The drum parts are simplified and you don't get much lead guitar, (the majority of bands i've seen live can't / don't replicate the original parts), but, you do get to hear how great songs are constructed and played by very competent musicians with honest vocals and harmonies.

Crime itself? I certainly do not think this is brick-walled. Both the CD and obviously a streamed flac are very enjoyable to listen to. I find I'm drawn into the album, can listen to it at any volume and would find it very easy to hit repeat - just like the 1st. UK vinyl, but without lifting the arm from the run out grooves.

Whatever your poison, I hope you enjoy and get as much pleasure from Crime as I have.

 

I have posed this question on other "Crime" threads: has anyone compared this 40th anniversary with the Blu Ray audio?

 

Nice post, I, too, get a lot of pleasure from listening to COTC...welcome to the forum

 

Thank you! I've been reading (and getting inspiration for music purchases) from a distance for a little while now. Even though I've been into music and good sound for a number of years, COTC was one of those CDs that I fell into the trap of "the re-master must sound better". I still can't get my head around just how poor some re-mastered CDs are...

This is why I was eagerly anticipating the 40th anniversary edition on CD. Is it as good as the original vinyl? I guess that for me, a former vinyl junkie, this is now irrelevant as I no longer play my beloved LPs. COTC was also an album that would have been great fun in 5.1. There again why would the music loving public buy SACD or DVD-A when then could have 128kbps with errors?

Back to the 40th. Having bought (and sold the next day) COTC, Remastered, and then bought an A&M+, thanks to this forum, and reading about Ken Scott (thanks to this forum!)... I like the 40th. In my opinion it is tonally more akin to the original (UK) LP, gives the emotion that I want from music and compared to the majority of music released in the last 20 years, is still very dynamic (too dynamic for some!!). I've yet to play it to anyone who hasn't enjoyed it. Now, why don't they make them like they used to?......

 

Do you believe I should post what I have heard Claus (and the other people whom have presented a personal attack toward me) or not? Should I just follow the herd blindly because it is complimentary to the herd? I described as accurately and carefully as I could, what I heard after a very long listening session of the Blu-ray and the 40th anniversary CD, and I listened all the way through. This new Blu-ray should have dynamic range at least equal or greater than the most dynamic digital edition to date, the Mobile Fidelity CD. The standard Mobile Fidelity record and the UHQR of this title both have dynamics that far exceed what is presented here on the Blu-ray. I would likle for all of you to have a digital edition that is as good as these LPs. With 24 bit/192 kHz resolution we have incredible dynamic range potential, and yet to my dismay, it's not used here. Instead, what they have given us is compressed. Why? Why do you wish to try to discredit someone who advocates a very high standard in sound quality for those items that we buy in the audiophile community? Isn't the reason we all spend time here on the Steve Hoffman Forums to keep the standards of sound reproduction at a high level? Do you want to spend your hard-earned money on compressed high resolution audio, or do you want something that sounds as it was intended to sound (ie, like the master tape?) I'm beginning to understand tangibly why the great Barry Diamont was chased off this forum. Claus, that was uncalled for. Wow!

 

It's clear to me that the EQ on this remaster is responsible for the reduced dynamics relative to the MFSL CD. There is no compression at work here.

 

Why not sell your items in the classified section and continue listening to your MFSL?

 

Sorry, but this is incorrect. Brickwalled is not a matter of opinion. Either it is or it isn't. mrob0000 doesn't have to like the mastering, but he should not be asserting that it is brickwalled when there is plenty of evidence to the contrary. For all the criticism and joking, data and waveforms are useful.

 

Fair enough. I should have chose my words more carefully

 

Post what you hear, but don't assert something that is obviously incorrect. You stated that the new mastering is brickwalled, but people here have shown that it clearly is not.

As for Barry Diament, he had enough arguing with people who attacked him but didn't know what they were talking about. With all due respect, Barry was on the right side of those arguments, but you are on the wrong side of this one. Your situation and Barry's are not the same.

 

To me the new vinyl release sounds incredible. I can't hear any problems with it. Keep these kind of releases coming.

 

Comperssion, brick-walling, level matching, use of that little tool that is used in the digital realm by some sound engineers to make the softer sounds louder and the louder sounds softer, whatever you want to call it, can suck the life out of a great recording. In this case, with the 40th anniversary Supertramp – Crime of the Century, that is exactly what happened.

 

I must have gotten a different version than you did. Perhaps there are multiple versions out there.

My copy had none of those issues and sounds like I'm sitting in the control room listening to a playback of the master tape.

 

@mrob0000 is trippin'! You sure you didn't get a fake? lol

 

I bought the CD a week ago and its sound quality matches the descriptions made in this thread by members of this forum. Now, pardon my honesty, your review sounds an auditory illusion (or hallucination!).

 

This must be a case of trolling. It's difficult to take serious.

 

So how do you explain the DR numbers and waveforms that people have posted?

 

I thought you were jumping the gun there, but maybe you're right. "Sorry I was wrong regarding brickwalling" would be a much more appropriate response from mrob0000, rather than repeating a disproven theory. We're happy that he doesn't like the sound, but that's not due to compression.

 

As has been said before, the MFSL CD is not based on the "regular" album master but from a pre-production master. I'd say the compression that is on this 2014 remaster is exactly the same as on the original CD. What's different is the equalizing, which not everyone likes.

The 'eclipsed' magazine (which I like very much) has criticized the remaster in very weird words. I would have to translate it but if I understood it correctly, they didn't like the treble reduction. But one thing's for sure, this CD is much less compressed than the 2002 remaster. Did you get the 2002 remaster by accident? No, that can't be possible since you also listened to the BD.

Whether you like it or not, "brickwalling" is a term that clearly means something. It's usually referring to a brickwall limiter, and coming with DR's or 9 or lower. None of that is present here. It is one of the most dynamic and tonally-balanced CDs released by a non-audiophile label in the digital era, at least from my (limited) experience. If I had to sort all my CDs by "brickwalled" and "not brickwalled", there's no doubt that this remaster will go in the "not brickwalled" category. Could you give us an example of a different album that doesn't sound brickwalled to you?