Best sounding Queen CDs

What are the best sounding Queen CDs? Are the 2011 remasters any good?

 

Search.Search.Search.Search.Search.

 

I quite like those 2011 ones. I suspect others won't though.

 

as always, the best sounding queen CD's are the ones that sound best to you on your stereo system...and sadly, no one on earth can tell you the answer other than you yourself.

 

Surprised no one mentioned this thread:

Roland's favorite CD versions of Queen albums

 

Believe it or not, the cheap Queen Greatest hits CD sounds REALLY GOOD once it is DolbyA decoded. IT sounds really harsh and compressed when just played, but when processed through a DolbyA decoder, it really opens up. After decoding, it is raw 2trk un EQed, but is nice when a bit of very mild EQ is done to it. Too bad that it doesn't have Bohemian Rhapsody on it. I am sure that there is more undecoded material out there.

When decoding it, essentially gives you the same thing as an old audiophile record.

My CD: Hollywood Records HR61265-2.

Gotta rip it, then process with a DolbyA decoder. Here is mine: Hightail Spaces

John

 

Aside from some questionable bonus remixes; Any opinions on the 20th anniversary Hollywood CDs?

 

Get the 1980's EMI CD original masterings, available in Europe for many years. On average, they are good sounding, dynamic, and easiest to listen to.

 

I agree, if you can find something like that. Nowadays, it seems like they are just playing out digital master tape images for the re-issues (DolbyA or not -- I don't think that they would DARE do that to DolbySR encoded material, however). At least, that is better than the hyper compressed 40th anniversary ABBA Gold (yuck!!!) Cant do very much with so much compression and limiting other than use it as a coaster or what NOT to do to music.

 

These EMI CD issues were imported to the USA for many years, and many shops carried them.

 

Noise reduction applied on those. Dynamics are fine. Kind of lifeless sounding. Originals and gold are better.

 

I think 2011 Remasters are the best queen's CDs. No Noise Reduction applied, Fine EQ. I can sure that 2011 Remasters sounds great especially in Queen's 70's catalog

 

And they're still pretty pricey to purchase.

 

The 2011 remasters are too digitally compressed.

 

Dynamic Range meter rate doesn't show real dynamic to our ears. 2011 Remasters sound not squashed but clean and punchier. 2011 Remasters have profit of clear sound of original master tape and good mastering process.

 

Slightly off topic, but the super touted ABBA studio stuff is so compressed that the crest factor is only about 4 on most of the songs (and peak to rms of about 13-14dB.) The master tapes show about 20-21dB and often crest factor above 10, so those 'fancy releases' are also very squashed. On the other hand, I have some old commercial copies that are very close to the dynamic range of the master copies. (Where did I find the really good copies? I dont' remember but it was well over 10yrs ago.) There is A LOT of variability all over the place -- compression seems like it is deemed 'good' by the distributors nowadays. (Peak to RMS below 14dB is often TOO MUCH compression/limiting, and 13dB or below is mostly just wrong.) Music usually sounds best above 15dB (IMO.) Crest factor should almost never be as low as 4, but maybe at least 6.

For my copy of 'Queen Greatest Hits' from Hollywood records (obviously DA encoded), the original peak to RMS is about 16.3dB, and the crest factor about 7 (not too bad, esp for DA encoded material), while the decoded version has peak to RMS of about 17.3dB, and a crest factor of about 8.5. So, DA decoding doesn't always help the stats all that much (mostly active at the HF anyway), but DOES help a little in some cases. That copy of 'Bicycle', once decoded, pretty much sounds like it should. On the same disk (We will rock you) has a crest factor of about 4 (4.13,3.94) and a peak to RMS of 11.9!!! (Wow!!!) But after DA decoding, it is 15.97dB peak to RMS, and a crest factor of about 6.6. A rather useful improvement (anything is better than peak to RMS of 11.9 and a crest factor of 4!!!)

I think that the only way to compare is to use some kind of well designed dynamic range measurement to get an idea of what is going on. The SOX stuff is easy to use, and sox command line (that is my world), but other tools might be more accurate for the purpose. Even though I am really trained to detect compression, really GOOD compression can sometimes fool me into thinking that it doesn't seem as bad as it really is.

 

If you're interested in their early catalog, I personally think you can't wrong with the 2011 masters.

Okay, you can go slightly wrong. Just don't bother with the two-disc versions. Get the single disc sets, and buy Live at the Rainbow 74 as well.

I can't speak beyond Day at the Races though, because by then I've checked out of the Queen Hotel.

 

Having dumped my 93/94 'digital master series' cds due to the sound: I currently have the 2011 remasters for all the 70s albums, original 80s EMI cd issues for 'The Game' and 'The Works'.

I like the 2011 remasters personally. Despite the published DR values; they sound very good and detailed to my ears. The two original cds I have also sound great too. I went for the originals for those two afformentioned cds simply because they were in £1 section in my Local indie record store (very light scratches to the discs that don't affect playback).

I also have the 2003 cd of 'Live Killers' that has a fairly poor sound (although that is largely down to the original recording being less than stellar). I recommend the 2014 mastered for ITunes release of that album to buy or stream. Have 'Flash Gordon' on vinyl, will get round to buying the final 3 albums at some point, I will either go for the originals or 2011 versions.

 

Tell me more; what's so good about it?

 

Whilst it's hard to describe sound quality in words, I would say it has a nicer and 'smoother' sound than the 2003 cd, not a night and day difference but an improvement none the less. The sound is more in line with the 2011 cds (Live Killers oddly not released as part of that campaign ).

The 2003 cd (and the 2001 Japanese cd that shares the same mastering) sounds closer to the early 90s remasters: a little bright and slightly harsh sound. Despite published info at the time stating this remaster was to improve on the original poor sound of the lp and early cds.
All the above is simply my subjective opinion.

 

Thanks, I will check some samples on iTunes.

 

What’s pricey though? I picked up half a dozen of them, the 2CD versions, just a few weeks ago for less than $10 per album. They are out there if you know where to look (ie. big used CD stores, like Reckless).

 

.

Oh: I forgot to add that I also have the 2011 remasters for 'Hot Space' and 'Greatest hits I and II'.
Though the bass guitar is a little bit overwhelming on 'Another One Bites The Dust' on the remaster compared to the sound of that track from my 'The Game' cd. Yet it's not a major issue to me.

 

Easy: 2011 remasters for Queen and Queen II, original 80s EMI CDs for the rest, except ANATO: DCC. At least for up to The Game.
I don't know about the others, my interest stops there.

 

I have all of the 2011 remasters and have no complaints. I've had the original UK vinyl of them all for many years and am totally familiar with the sound of them. The 2011 remasters didn't compare badly to me.