Just to be sure I double checked mine. My peaks are correct for my disc, definitely different then yours. My full matrix is; DIDX-001873 4 * ** ***** Notice that mine has a "4" after the six-digit DADC number, yours has a "5". 4 of the tracks are 0.2% louder, 2 are the same - the other 4 some are louder, some quieter, with no pattern. There could have been some other tweaking besides a volume adjustment done that accounts for the difference. EQ perhaps? Or it may sound the same in the end. Does yours go all Am radio when you fold down to mono?
The data rulz us all. All hail the data! Code: Peter Gabriel I Virgin Nimbus Charisma JA VJD Atco WEA Track 1 91.2% 93.0% Track 2 97.7% 100.0% Track 3 97.7% 99.5% Track 4 87.1% 77.1% Track 5 93.3% 95.8% Track 6 97.7% 88.6% Track 7 97.6% 73.6% Track 8 89.7% 80.3% Track 9 97.7% 77.2% Code: Peter Gabriel II Virgin Nimbus Virgin MPO Atlantic WEA Track 1 97.7% 89.2% Track 2 97.7% 99.6% Track 3 58.7% 46.7% Track 4 97.7% 98.0% Track 5 97.7% 95.3% Track 6 92.0% 74.3% Track 7 97.7% 99.5% Track 8 96.5% 75.2% Track 9 97.7% 62.5% Track 10 97.7% 99.7% Track 11 97.7% 77.0% Code: Peter Gabriel III Virgin Nimbus Virgin Holl. Black Triangle Geffen DADC 4 Geffen DADC 5 Track 1 95.5% 78.9% 79.1% Track 2 95.5% 75.7% 76.1% Track 3 37.1% 28.1% 28.3% Track 4 95.5% 76.4% 76.3% Track 5 95.5% 58.8% 59.0% Track 6 95.5% 82.0% 80.9% Track 7 95.5% 86.0% 82.0% Track 8 95.5% 86.4% 86.4% Track 9 43.5% 34.7% 34.7% Track 10 95.5% 73.8% 74.0% Code: Peter Gabriel IV Virgin PDO Charisma WG Virgin Holl. Geffen DADC Geffen Target Black Triangle Track 1 97.7% 96.4% 95.5% 100.0% Track 2 53.8% 49.2% 80.5% 55.1% Track 3 71.0% 67.0% 100.0% 72.7% Track 4 67.9% 58.2% 100.0% 69.5% Track 5 90.7% 89.3% 100.0% 92.8% Track 6 85.6% 78.3% 100.0% 87.6% Track 7 60.8% 57.9% 94.2% 62.2% Track 8 91.3% 100.0% 99.9% 93.5% Code: Peter Gabriel So Virgin Nimbus Virgin Austria Black Triangle Virgin Swindon Geffen Sanyo Geffen WEA Virgin Holl. Geffen JVC Track 1 100.0% 75.8% 98.0% Track 2 100.0% 75.8% 99.2% Track 3 100.0% 75.8% 96.7% Track 4 100.0% 75.8% 96.5% Track 5 100.0% 75.8% 98.6% Track 6 90.4% 68.6% 87.8% Track 7 100.0% 75.8% 98.3% Track 8 100.0% 75.8% 97.7% Track 9 100.0% 75.8% 97.6%
Ok, here is the full report on my WG pressing of III. It is Geffen 2035-2 made in West Germany by Polygram, matrix: 7599 02035-2 2896 570 01 * Peak levels: 77.5% - 75.1% - 27.4% - 74.3% - 56.6% - 78.9% - 79.4% - 84.6% - 34.3% - 72.4% Total time in EAC: 45:28.52 Note: I found this disc with regular looking U.S. inserts.
Thanks! Sounds good? Similar, but none of the values are the same, nor is there a definite pattern. Certainly not as big a difference as for the other WG Geffen. I still maintain something may have been done with EQ or whatever on these three. If it were a simple level shift why would they do it so minimally, and so randomly? If it were a whole new transfer it likely be way different. If I'm wrong, and it's just level shifted I doubt this small a change would be audible. Code: Peter Gabriel III Virgin Nimbus Virgin Holl. Black Triangle Geffen DADC 4 Geffen DADC 5 Geffen WG Track 1 95.5% 78.9% 79.1% 77.5% Track 2 95.5% 75.7% 76.1% 75.1% Track 3 37.1% 28.1% 28.3% 27.4% Track 4 95.5% 76.4% 76.3% 74.3% Track 5 95.5% 58.8% 59.0% 56.6% Track 6 95.5% 82.0% 80.9% 78.9% Track 7 95.5% 86.0% 82.0% 79.4% Track 8 95.5% 86.4% 86.4% 84.6% Track 9 43.5% 34.7% 34.7% 34.3% Track 10 95.5% 73.8% 74.0% 72.4%
Sheesh, what is with this constant trolling? All we're trying to do is find what different masterings exist, and on what discs, so then we can hunt them down and compare for ourselves. How is that so evil?
Lee, I don't think anybody's ears have told anybody anything yet. AFIAK no one is claiming to have listened to all these different masterings. The point is to sort out what is available, so interested parties can seek out different discs and compare.
If you are using peak levels to narrow the hunt maybe that's a reasonable approach but I think there is danger is letting peak levels be the final arbiter of the best masterings. Peak levels don't tell the whole story. They don't speak to things like timbre, soundstage, openness, and other aspects of sound quality.
I think the WG sounds fine, but I've never compared it to anything. I'll try to compare it to Shaking The Tree (assuming any of the tracks from III are included in their original mix). I think the WG Target of Security sounds better than Shaking The Tree, so I'd expect similar results. Does the total time of the DADC pressings match what I posted above? That would shed a little more light on whether all three discs were based on the same digital transfer.
US Geffen 2035-2 DIDX-001873 4 45:29:02 I don't know if that's enough different to declare it different? Probably not.
Hey, I referenced III, Security and Shaking The Tree in my post. Which Virgin/Charisma are you recommending?
I'm aware some folks hear differences in bit-identical CDs. That doesn't affect my listening, as all my favorite albums are ripped to a media server. (I certainly do not berate anyone for having pressing plant preferences though.) From what I understand discs that do not share the same data generally have a bigger difference on the sound then discs that do. So, I feel that's the best place to start on finding the best sounding Gabriel. Anyway, maybe post us up some listening impressions of your own, rather then coming in with another treadcrap about numbers?
Chill out dude. I'm not threadcrapping here. I am performing a public service announcement by suggesting that peak levels do not tell the whole story. Also, do peak levels equate to bit equality?
Peak levels can tell many things. Most importantly, if the same desired mastering is available on a CD version that will cost the listener much less than springing for a expensive rarity that may sound exactly the same to them.
Not necessarily, this is true. Only something like an EAC "compare waves" will tell you if the data is truly bit-identical. For an early CD, when digital audio workstations were nothing like today, if the volume on all the tracks are within a tenth of a percent - chances are pretty good the data is the same. It certainly has been every time I've checked. Even something like a small bit of EQ will throw off the peak value slightly. On a modern CD where everything peaks at 100%, or 99.6% like the Gabriel re-masters, it won't tell you much. Certainly when the peaks are different, we know for sure have different digital data.
Interesting! So, mine is one better!?!? I have no mono button on my pre-amp., so I couldn't tell you. However, I can post up a link to the track of your choice. In the meantime, EAC reports: 10 Tracks - Total Time = 45:29.02 (mm:ss.ff) - Size = 459.09 MB 1. - 4:53.55 - 49.41 MB 2. - 3:55.60 - 39.66 MB 3. - 1:20.60 - 13.59 MB 4. - 4:42.07 - 47.45 MB 5. - 4:28.63 - 45.22 MB 6. - 4:58.27 - 50.19 MB 7. - 4:06.30 - 41.45 MB 8. - 5:21.68 - 54.15 MB 9. - 4:14.62 - 42.86 MB 10. - 7:26.20 - 75.07 MB So, the TT of the '5' matrix matches that of the '4' matrix. How about the rest of the disc structure?
A bit late to this excellent and overdue thread. Same matrix as on my PG "III" WG Polygram disc. I also have a WG Polygram PG "Peter Gabriel Plays Live - Highlights". If data on that disc is needed i'll provide an EAC reading.
I think I made a laserdrop of 'So' SACD, I can try to dig up waveforms and peak levels if there is interest. I won't be home until late in the week, though.
