gfxgfx
 
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
logo
 
gfx gfx
gfx
640777 Posts in 25595 Topics by 3639 Members - Latest Member: treblephone December 10, 2018, 11:48:35 AM
*
gfx*HomeHelpSearchCalendarLoginRegistergfx
gfxgfx
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.       « previous next »
Pages: 1 2 [3] Go Down Print
Author Topic: CD Twofers Sound Quality 1990 vs. 2001  (Read 7566 times)
BiNNS
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 177



View Profile
« Reply #50 on: October 28, 2018, 01:24:35 PM »

Sorry to bring up an old topic, but i need an answer to something.  I Just picked up the Party/Stack O Tracks and Smiley Smile/Wild Honey 1990 twofers. I am hearing pretty constant static noises running through both cd's? I know these cd's are no-noised, but is THAT the audio end result of that process? If so, yikes. Let me know if i just simply have faulty discs or if those are indeed how they truly sound. Thanks.
Logged
Fall Breaks
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1218


How it really got to my soul


View Profile
« Reply #51 on: October 29, 2018, 04:32:20 AM »

Had the same problem, some info in the replies to this topic:

https://smileysmile.net/board/index.php?topic=7137.0
Logged

"I think people should write better melodies and sing a little sweeter, and knock off that stupid rap crap, y’know? Rap is really ridiculous" -- Brian Wilson, 2010
BiNNS
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 177



View Profile
« Reply #52 on: October 29, 2018, 04:53:27 AM »

Thanks. They sound the same in every player I've tried and they sound horrendous when played through iTunes. So I'm to believe these are due to cd rot? Both were purchased from the same seller on Ebay. I'm awaiting more of the '90 twofers (from different sellers). If they are static free then it looks like I'll be picking up these two titles again.
Logged
mustomax
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Online Online

Posts: 31


View Profile
« Reply #53 on: October 29, 2018, 08:26:23 AM »

I love the 2001 mixes, especially, "Carl And The Passion", and "MIU/Love you". I have a very good headphone, and the sound is excellent!
Logged
The Heartical Don
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 4729



View Profile
« Reply #54 on: October 30, 2018, 03:09:41 AM »

I love the 2001 mixes, especially, "Carl And The Passion", and "MIU/Love you". I have a very good headphone, and the sound is excellent!

Thank you -

since I got a new hifi set up (partly reshuffled old gear, new connection cables, new speakers, a new player), I guess I'll give these two a go this evening.
Logged

80% Of Success Is Showing Up
Bicyclerider
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 2004


View Profile
« Reply #55 on: October 30, 2018, 10:00:36 AM »

I love the 2001 mixes, especially, "Carl And The Passion", and "MIU/Love you". I have a very good headphone, and the sound is excellent!

The mixes are the same as the 1990 twofers, it's the mastering that's different.

I've always preferred the 1990 CD's despite the noise reduction because the EQ is less harsh and the volume isn't maximized (less compression than on the 2001's).  But I hear if you listen to them with a processor that's HDCD capable, the 2001's sound better.
Logged
37!ws (hint: turn it upside-down)
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 1346


All baggudo at my man


View Profile WWW
« Reply #56 on: November 05, 2018, 10:33:37 AM »

In 2001 I didn't want to re-buy all the CDs again unless I knew for sure I'd be getting an upgrade. I bought the Today!/Summer Days... re-master, and...HATED IT. Distortion throughout. Ughghh. That was enough to convince me to not get the rest. So to this day, my main source for many of the Beach Boys' Capitol-era albums are the 1990 twofers.

The 2012 reissues, though....those sound phenomenal. There are some exceptions, though...the "s" is missing from the opening "Sto-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-oked!" on the mono mix, and some of the songs on the mono Today! play back slow and/or are not properly centered. But they really sound great otherwise.
Logged

Check out my new podcast: Autobiography of a Schnook - SchnookPodcast.com
james666
Smiley Smile Newbie

Offline Offline

Posts: 9


View Profile
« Reply #57 on: November 24, 2018, 04:45:50 PM »

I've always preferred the 1990 CD's despite the noise reduction because the EQ is less harsh and the volume isn't maximized (less compression than on the 2001's).  But I hear if you listen to them with a processor that's HDCD capable, the 2001's sound better.

It turns out that, like many HDCDs, the 2001 Capitol twofers don't use the peak extension feature so there is absolutely no difference in the dynamic range when they are played back with HDCD decoding.  The 1997 Pet Sounds box does use HDCD peak extension and has a significantly wider dynamic range when properly decoded (at least when I look at the spectrum in Audacity - I must admit I struggle to hear the difference with computer speakers). 

HDCD was a strange beast.  If the peak extension feature is used, the playback will be inferior if the disc is not decoded with HDCD.   On the other hand, a normal CD has sufficient dynamic range that the disc would have sounded just as good on a normal CD player if had been mastered without compression in 16 bits.  It may be worth noting that HDCD can now be decoded in software (e..g with Windows Media Player or libhdcd on Linux).   
Logged
gfx
Pages: 1 2 [3] Go Up Print 
gfx
Jump to:  
gfx
Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines Page created in 0.107 seconds with 21 queries.
Helios Multi design by Bloc
gfx
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!