The Rush cd mastering thread (part 2)

I say throw in all 8 in one poll!
If you have 2 polls of 4, there may be 3 in one poll that sound better than all of the ones in the other poll of 4, but the choice will be to pick the 'best' of that little group... which doesn't seem right.

Plus, the best is the 25.8P, so it's all moot anyway

 

ANC-1-1030 (or ANMD-1030, like Diablo has listed above). All you need for MP on disc, IMO.

 

Thing is there are there are tracks on several MP masterings I like best. To post sample from just a couple of tracks will not not cover all the bases. Then you have issue of the number of masterings which means more time and effort required,becomes daunting and will limit many from participating . In my opinion MP is not the best candidate for a poll.

 

All at once works for me too.

 

These are the EAC values?

Code:

VANK/US sf:       100 99.7 100 99.9 100 100 100
ANMD/ANC-1-1030:  95.7 89 94.8 82.1 99.5 91.5 75.6
ANC-11030         100 99.7 100 99.9 100 100 100

(That's what I have in my notes. Guess I never compared the two different Canadian CDs, but I like the VANK there.)

 

My BMG VANK has the AMND values. Why it has that mastering as opposed to the one from the standard VANK, I don't know.

 

Most of the Canadian CDs only had one mastering. I'd sure be curious why this one ended up with two!

 

You might say it was kind of a popular album up here, eh... lots of demand for repressings!

 

I have noticed this too.
I have the original us silverface cd.

 

Is the audio fidelity Counterparts better than the original cd?
How does the CRC atomic pressing for GUP stack up against other pressings?
Is the MFSL the best for Signals?

 

Disclaimer: I haven't done direct comparisons, so I am mostly going from my memory of versions I know well.

• Yes I think so.
• Is the CRC different than other Atomics? The Atomic I have sounds good but I find the 2015 remaster more powerful.
• Not sure, but it sounds good.

 

1) Yes and no. The AF CD is quieter, more narrow sounding and has a soft high end in comparison to the original CD. The original CD sounds a bit aggressive, but that was the intention of the band, breaking away from the muted presentation of their previous few releases.
2) The CRC of GUP is the same as the other Atomics. It's good compared to other pressings, and sounds extremely similar to my fave pressing, the AMCY.
3) The MFSL of Signals sounds good, but the AMCY has this analog warmth to it that just makes the album bloom (IMO). Comparing the two, you can hear how the MFSL pulled the mids back, which is a shame on this recording.

 

Ok Thanks to both of you for the feedback
I do have another question
Is there a glitch on the Enemy Within?
If there was one I didn't hear it.

 

There's an audible click around 2:25 on the Atomic. It doesn't exist on any of the other CDs AFAIK.

 

Ok Thanks
Are the Rush Anthem S/T, Farewell and 2112 the same mastering as the silverface/atomic masterings?

 

You'll probably find this page useful: Rush CD Mastering Comparisons

 

Yes Thanks

 

Sounds like I need to find an AMCY Signals as the MFSL Signals is may fave out of the US Atomic (The '97 which I probably shouldn't even mention) and the Sector.

 

↑
Collect 'em all!

 

What is the general preference for Presto?
I have heard that the 97 remaster doesn't sound to bad.

 

It's bad enough as it is!

 

For me on CD, the Audio Fidelity is the best of a weak bunch over the original , the 2004 (I think it was 2004.) and the one in the Atlantic box.

 

OK Thanks
Rush S/T (WANK-1001) or the Mercury silver face better?
I have the silverface sounds pretty good

 

Heared the slight glitch with headphones for The Enemy Within
What is a nice pressing(s) without it?

 

Only have three on CD US Atomic, 97 and Sector. It's close, but I might prefer the Sector over the other two. I'd have to think there's a better sounding CD out there, but I've not spent a lot of time trying to figure that out in this particular case. I'm OK with what I have.