I have the chance to replace my 1994 remaster of Queen I with an earlier EMI pressing. Could someone post the EAC peaks of an early EMI pressing, so I can check that my Parlophone is (or isn't) different? These are the peaks for my Parlophone pressing: Queen Parlophone, Made In Holland 0777 7 89276 2 4 92.6/95.5/89.6/95.4/80.4/85.5/86.7/86.5/90.5/74.2 I'm looking for the EAC peaks of a Sonopress or Swindon EMI pressing.
Barry, I don't have the UK/Germany version handy (if no one posts them today, I'll do them later this evening), but I did run the CP32 Japan pressing..which interestingly shows different values. I say interestingly, because it's been said that this is the same as the UK/Germany pressing IIRC . Ooops hang on a sec, The version you are looking at is the Remastered version as it has catalogue 077778927624 (see below) Track 1 Peak level 99.3 % Track 2 Peak level 100.0 % Track 3 Peak level 90.6 % Track 4 Peak level 87.9 % Track 5 Peak level 97.8 % Track 6 Peak level 100.0 % Track 7 Peak level 70.1 % Track 8 Peak level 79.4 % Track 9 Peak level 89.3 % Track 10 Peak level 70.5 % All tracks accurately ripped No errors occurred End of status report CDs 1973 version United Kingdom Queen CD EMI CDP 7 46204 2 United Kingdom Queen CD EMI UK-CD-FA 3040 CDP 7 46204 2 Fame reissue United Kingdom Queen CD Parlophone CDPCSD 139 remaster Netherlands Queen CD EMI CDP 7 46204 2 - Netherlands Queen CD Parlophone 0777 7 89276 2 4 remaster Hungary Queen CD VTCD RCD1040 red disc with silver Freddie, different track order Hungary Queen CD Euroton EUCD-0011 different sleeve United States Queen CD Hollywood HR-61064-2 long box Japan Queen CD Toshiba-EMI TOCP-6651 - Japan Queen CD Toshiba-EMI TOCP-8271 remaster Japan Queen CD Toshiba-EMI TOCP-65101 card sleeve, with insert
Yep, that was my recollection too - same mastering with a volume boost?? Thanks for posting these though, they are clearly different masterings. So now we need to see if the UK/Germany matches either of the above.
I'm sure that I found them to be the same. Roland and I swapped a few different EAC logs for Q & QII. They will be different to that Holland pressing of course, because that's the remastered version.
Just to confirm, I now have the Sonopress EMI version CDP 7462042 of Queen I. EAC peak values exactly match the CP32 Japan pressing. Thanks for your help!
I have a Korean Redface EMI "Greatest Hits". A friend has the Japanese Redface EMI of the same CD. We compared both at my house. Both identical sounding. My Korean pressing was pressed by Samsung.
The Works channel reversal Thanks so much for a great topic - it's posts like these which save hours and hours of searching the forums for all the golden nuggets of info! I have the unremastered EMI CDP 7 46016 2 (EMI SWINDON) version of "The Works" and I noticed that the first 4 tracks are stereo channel reversed compared to the 1994 remaster. Track 1 (Radio Gaga) is the same on Greatest Hits II as on the remaster, so I assume this was a mastering error on the original CD. Has anyone else noticed this? Any chance someone could check with vinyl which one is correct?
I recently compared the MFSL News Of The World CD to the UK EMI CD and I had a huge preference for the EMI. I guess it all depends if you like your music with or without midrange. The EMI is a very nice sounding disc but the MoFi is tweaked. Lots of EQ on that one.
The CP32 is even better than the UK. It's a little clearer, with a bit less noise. I've really grown to love this album.
I don't think the source is different, it sounds similar. Same EQ, level, etc. Just clearer and cleaner. Less noise. Chalk it up to pressing/plant differences, I guess.
I had the chance to compare all 3: MFSL, EMI and the CP32 a few weeks ago - I can only agree. I much prefer the EMI and CP32 versions to the MFSL (which is mastered very loud!). The EMI and CP32 sound very similar, but the dynamic range is better on the CP32, particularly on Spread Your Wings.
I am planning a big Queen European EMI CDs sale in the classifieds for next week, but the thing is I have a couple of "Parlophone" 1992 pressings. For Queen I and Queen II to be precise. Now I've read that in fact the Parlophone CD for Queen I is exactly the same as the previous EMI version i.e. with no Noise Reduction applied. If someone would be kind enough to check that, I'd like to know what is the total time that appears in your CD player counter when you pop your original EMI Queen I CD. Mine reads 38:49. As for Queen II, I have already checked, the original EMI is 40:36, whereas the 1992 Parlophone is 40:50 and is definitely NRed.
Great! Thanks maidenpriest! Looks like the masterings are identical then. I think I can make out faint hiss at the beginning of the first track, when the guitar kicks in. It doesn't seem NRed.
Would it be safe to assume that ALL European CD version of Queen I (issued before the 1993 Remasters) are identical and don't use NR?
Early Queen? Ahhh...yeah! Queen II does it for me really! The song White Queen is one of their finest songs.
I did a little shoot-out between the original EMI CD and my original UK vinyl copy yesterday. The LP has matrix YAX 4881-4U/YAX 4882-4U and also TML-M on side 1. There is a lot more tape hiss apparent on the CD than on the vinyl. Overall the vinyl sounds better on all aspects. Better low end, better body and it is more detailed. To me it sounds like the CD is mastered from a higher generation source. In this case I find the LP to be superior on all aspects. Comparing the EQ between the two using samples from “killer Queen” this is how you must EQ the vinyl to get similar tonality to the CD. As you see there is quite a bit more top end on the CD than on the LP.
Sorry but it's the other way around. It is the vinyl that has more top end. The graph shows how you must EQ the CD to have a similar EQ to the vinyl.
I thought Queen I in its 1992 Parlophone version was the same as the earlier EMI, but peaks show the contrary: 97.0 % 97.7 % 88.6 % 85.9 % 95.6 % 97.7 % 68.5 % 77.6 % 87.3 % 68.9 % It is also different from the CP32 and the 1993 Digital Remaster. Anyone's interested in the 1st minute of the 1st track for comparational purposes?
