Jump to content
IGNORED

Yes The Yes Album HDTracks


Recommended Posts

Here we have a real winner:

 

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Analyzed: Yes / The Yes Album

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

DR Peak RMS Duration Track

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

DR11 -0.29 dB -13.42 dB 9:40 01-Yours Is No Disgrace

DR15 -1.82 dB -20.12 dB 3:17 02-Clap

DR10 0.00 dB -13.06 dB 9:27 03-Starship Trooper

DR9 -0.11 dB -14.02 dB 6:57 04-I've Seen All Good People

DR10 -0.87 dB -14.83 dB 3:19 05-A Venture

DR10 -0.29 dB -13.96 dB 8:51 06-Perpetual Change

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

Number of tracks: 6

Official DR value: DR11

 

Samplerate: 192000 Hz

Channels: 2

Bits per sample: 24

Bitrate: 4865 kbps

Codec: FLAC

 

Spectralanalysis (Track 1 and 3)

 

TheYesAlbum2.jpg

 

Sounds better then the MoFi and the Barry Diament Master...

 

Very interested is, that Barry Diament had not the master tape from this (correct me if I am wrong). The first one who was used the original master tapes was Joe Gastwirt for the Remaster. Though the Barry Diament one was my favorite long time...

Then came the MoFi which had also used the original master tapes, but it seems that they were compressed (which MoFi says that this was not the case). It has also a lower DR Value (MoFi: 8 to Barry Diament: 12).

 

So, this said: For my ears the best sounding version is the HDTracks (Sourced from Analog Flat Master stated on the HDTracks Homepage, looks for me like they used the same as Barry Diament).

TheYesAlbum1.jpg

Albert Einstein: Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former.

Link to comment
Sounds better then the MoFi

 

Can you expound on this? Why do you feel it sounds better?

 

I preferred the MoFi and posted my thoughts here and here.

Digital:  Sonore opticalModule > Uptone EtherRegen > Shunyata Sigma Ethernet > Antipodes K30 > Shunyata Omega USB > Gustard X26pro DAC 

Amp & Speakers:  Spectral DMA-150mk2 > Aerial 10T

Foundation: Stillpoints Ultra, Shunyata Denali power conditioner, Shunyata Alpha and Delta power cords, Shunyata Alpha interconnect, Shunyata Sigma Ethernet, MIT Matrix HD60 speaker cables, ASC isothermal tube traps, Stillpoints Aperture panels

Link to comment
It's more dynamic

 

Hhm, DR Value 8 vs. DR Value 11 (and that 8 is the MoFi)?

 

One is full of life, energy and color. The HDTracks 24/192 version ... not so much.

 

That energy comes from the compression (I think).

 

I will today once again make a shootout between the HDTracks and the MoFi.

Albert Einstein: Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former.

Link to comment

I had the MoFi since Day 1 and on my first listen, I thought, this sounds compressed to me (which was a really surprise, because that was the first time I heard compression on a MoFi Record). So I decided to run DR Values and my hearing was proved for the right suspicion. I also had the Barry Diament Master 20 years. The HDTracks Download sounds similar to the Barry Diament Master. Also the EQ choice from the MoFi, it sounds wrong to me. It is hard to describe, but there is anything what distracts me on the MoFi. If you play it quiet then it is OK, how louder it gets, then it sounds worse.

 

As I said on the previous post, I will once again made a shootout tonight...

Albert Einstein: Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former.

Link to comment
I had the MoFi since Day 1 and on my first listen, I thought, this sounds compressed to me (which was a really surprise, because that was the first time I heard compression on a MoFi Record). So I decided to run DR Values and my hearing was proved for the right suspicion. I also had the Barry Diament Master 20 years. The HDTracks Download sounds similar to the Barry Diament Master. Also the EQ choice from the MoFi, it sounds wrong to me. It is hard to describe, but there is anything what distracts me on the MoFi. If you play it quiet then it is OK, how louder it gets, then it sounds worse.

 

As I said on the previous post, I will once again made a shootout tonight...

 

I spoke to Rob LoVerde at MOFI when these claims about the MOFI Yes Album being "compressed" first came up on the Hoffman bored. Totally false, those amateur crude online programs are just not adequate to give a true studio measure. LoVerde told me that there are no test tones or notes on the Yes Album master tapes, and that he tracked down Eddie Offord to get his input on how to calibrate and EQ just as Eddie had done on the original. Rob told me that there was zero compression applied and that, in fact, MOFI never do. Which is true, armchair critics armed with an app notwithstanding. I still love that MOFI YES Album, and I love the HD Tracks, but I can't help but think that if the MOFI has been done with a DSD layer - or if the MOFI were at 192/24 - it would blow everything else away.

Link to comment
I spoke to Rob LoVerde at MOFI when these claims about the MOFI Yes Album being "compressed" first came up on the Hoffman bored. Totally false, those amateur crude online programs are just not adequate to give a true studio measure. LoVerde told me that there are no test tones or notes on the Yes Album master tapes, and that he tracked down Eddie Offord to get his input on how to calibrate and EQ just as Eddie had done on the original. Rob told me that there was zero compression applied and that, in fact, MOFI never do. Which is true, armchair critics armed with an app notwithstanding. I still love that MOFI YES Album, and I love the HD Tracks, but I can't help but think that if the MOFI has been done with a DSD layer - or if the MOFI were at 192/24 - it would blow everything else away.

 

You won't accuse chris of following SH.tv ruling, isn'it it?

If compression at the mastering stage is the core of the affair, a soundwave would tell us what we need to know. But Chris is also referring to EQ choices. That would be interesting if both of you can go a bit further in your characterization of the SQ.

I have the Diament, personaly, but has not listened to it in a log while.

Link to comment
You won't accuse chris of following SH.tv ruling, isn'it it?

If compression at the mastering stage is the core of the affair, a soundwave would tell us what we need to know. But Chris is also referring to EQ choices. That would be interesting if both of you can go a bit further in your characterization of the SQ.

I have the Diament, personaly, but has not listened to it in a log while.

 

Tonality is everything in music, not some amateur app. The MOFI has tonality, in spades. It is quite open, has a wonderful tone, has a sense of dynamics that no other has - not even the HDT. But it is still redbook, and the HDT is all over it in upper end extension and inner transparency. If listening through redbook - the MOFI is the ultimate. Now that I have the HDT, it is the go to.

Link to comment
Tonality is everything in music, not some amateur app. The MOFI has tonality, in spades. It is quite open, has a wonderful tone, has a sense of dynamics that no other has - not even the HDT. But it is still redbook, and the HDT is all over it in upper end extension and inner transparency.

 

This is very well said and nearly aligns with with my take on these two. You are absolutely correct about tonality and dynamics on the MoFi. I think the MoFi trounces the HDT in those areas. And yes the HDT does beat the MoFi in highs, but not to the same degree.

 

(Our different take could very well be system-dependent. The MoFi's almost seems as if it was produced with my Aerial 10T speakers in mind.)

 

If listening through redbook - the MOFI is the ultimate. Now that I have the HDT, it is the go to.

 

Both have their failings. The positives qualities of the MoFi make it far easier for me to overlook the MoFi's failings though. I get a much greater emotional reaction from the MoFi. That tonality and sense of dynamics combine to really bring the music to life. But I can certainly understand why one might favor the HDT version.

 

If MoFi had been come out with an SACD instead - I agree - it would have blown everything else away.

Digital:  Sonore opticalModule > Uptone EtherRegen > Shunyata Sigma Ethernet > Antipodes K30 > Shunyata Omega USB > Gustard X26pro DAC 

Amp & Speakers:  Spectral DMA-150mk2 > Aerial 10T

Foundation: Stillpoints Ultra, Shunyata Denali power conditioner, Shunyata Alpha and Delta power cords, Shunyata Alpha interconnect, Shunyata Sigma Ethernet, MIT Matrix HD60 speaker cables, ASC isothermal tube traps, Stillpoints Aperture panels

Link to comment
Totally false, those amateur crude online programs are just not adequate to give a true studio measure.

 

Tonality is everything in music, not some amateur app.

 

Please re-read my post once again (and I will quote this for you, Robert):

 

I had the MoFi since Day 1 and on my first listen, I thought, this sounds compressed to me (which was a really surprise, because that was the first time I heard compression on a MoFi Record).

That said, I have AFTER the first listen run a DR-Value...

Albert Einstein: Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former.

Link to comment

If compression at the mastering stage is the core of the affair, a soundwave would tell us what we need to know.

 

Here we go: Post from @jon9091 on the SH Forum:

 

starship.gif

 

-Waveform 1 shows Starship Trooper from the MFSL, and it's Peak and RMS levels.

-Waveform 2 shows Starship Trooper from the ATL, and it's Peak and RMS levels.

-Waveform 3 shows Starship Trooper from the ATL, after matching the Peak level to that of the MFSL. Hmmm. The waveforms don't match, nor do the RMS levels.

-Waveform 4 shows Starship Trooper from the ATL, after matching the RMS level to that of the MFSL. Again, baffling. The waveforms don't match, nor do the Peak levels.

 

Robert, any conclusions? As I wrote, I don't think that my hearing was wrong...

Albert Einstein: Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former.

Link to comment
What is the ATL? Barry's remastering?

 

Yep, the old Atlantic mastered by Barry Diament.

Albert Einstein: Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former.

Link to comment

With a maximum peak at -2.38, I'm wondering if that is actually from the CD master I created.

It is *possible* insomuch as peak readings in those days were arrived at by staring at the meters on the Sony 1630 A-D converters for the duration of the program. (They did have a peak hold feature but no finer than 1 dB increments.)

The reason I question it is that in those days, I always made sure the max peak used all the "real estate" on the meters, i.e. the highest LED below the "overload" was lit.

 

The replication facility (i.e., "pressing plant") *should not* change anything. I just find it odd the max peak isn't higher than this. Still, with all that said, -2.38 is still using all the *digital* "real estate". (Anything with max peak at -6.02 or greater is using that top bit.)

 

To some folks, a recording that has its original dynamic range 100% intact (i.e., no peak limiting or any other form of compression) is going to sound "low" in level. In my opinion, if all the digital real estate is being used and the dynamics left intact, it would be the other versions that are *loud*, not this one being "low".

 

Further, if the source is the same and the one with the -2.38 peak contains the full dynamics of that source, the only way to create a version that is more than 2.38 dB louder would be to limit the dynamic range (or allow "over"s, which would effectively be the same thing). Again, this assumes the same source. It is possible *another* source, with less dynamic range, could be used without further compression to create a louder version. (It is also possible that a very "hot" analog source, if not brought down in level for analog playback, could engender compression in the playback cards of the analog deck - along with an increase in harmonic distortion.)

 

As it was a quarter century ago, I can't say for sure with regard to the level. Another possibility is that after I'd left Atlantic, someone there made a clone of the CD master to send to a new replication facility and inadvertently did not have the level for the copy set to 0. (The fader on the Sony DAE-1100E editor, used during the copying process, might have been loose. Once again, I wasn't there so I don't know but it *is* within the realm of possibility. I've always paid a lot of attention to the max peak level when mastering. This is why I'm a but suspicious of the -2.38 peak.

 

Best regards,

Barry

Soundkeeper Recordings

Barry Diament Audio

Link to comment
Totally false, those amateur crude online programs are just not adequate to give a true studio measure.

 

What "amateur crude online programs" are you talking about? The ones that apply the ITU R 128 broadcast dynamic range calculation standard?

Link to comment

Barry, just wanted to thank you - you know one of the major reasons I hang out here is to learn, and that was a wonderfully informative comment.

One never knows, do one? - Fats Waller

The fairest thing we can experience is the mysterious. It is the fundamental emotion which stands at the cradle of true art and true science. - Einstein

Computer, Audirvana -> optical to EtherREGEN -> microRendu -> ISO Regen -> Pro-Ject Pre Box S2 DAC -> Apollon Audio 1ET400A Mini (Purifi based) -> Vandersteen 3A Signature.

Link to comment
Robert, any conclusions? As I wrote, I don't think that my hearing was wrong...

 

So it sound like the only reason you feel that HDT version "sounds better then the MoFi" is because you feel that some compression was used on the MoFi? Is that correct?

 

I can't say whether MoFi used some compression. Given how great it sounds overall, I can't get all hung up by its DR number or how it looks on graphs.

 

Also, above you wrote:

 

It is hard to describe, but there is anything what distracts me on the MoFi. If you play it quiet then it is OK, how louder it gets, then it sounds worse.

 

Exactly the opposite is true in my system.

Digital:  Sonore opticalModule > Uptone EtherRegen > Shunyata Sigma Ethernet > Antipodes K30 > Shunyata Omega USB > Gustard X26pro DAC 

Amp & Speakers:  Spectral DMA-150mk2 > Aerial 10T

Foundation: Stillpoints Ultra, Shunyata Denali power conditioner, Shunyata Alpha and Delta power cords, Shunyata Alpha interconnect, Shunyata Sigma Ethernet, MIT Matrix HD60 speaker cables, ASC isothermal tube traps, Stillpoints Aperture panels

Link to comment
With a maximum peak at -2.38, I'm wondering if that is actually from the CD master I created.

It is *possible* insomuch as peak readings in those days were arrived at by staring at the meters on the Sony 1630 A-D converters for the duration of the program. (They did have a peak hold feature but no finer than 1 dB increments.)

The reason I question it is that in those days, I always made sure the max peak used all the "real estate" on the meters, i.e. the highest LED below the "overload" was lit.

 

The replication facility (i.e., "pressing plant") *should not* change anything. I just find it odd the max peak isn't higher than this. Still, with all that said, -2.38 is still using all the *digital* "real estate". (Anything with max peak at -6.02 or greater is using that top bit.)

 

To some folks, a recording that has its original dynamic range 100% intact (i.e., no peak limiting or any other form of compression) is going to sound "low" in level. In my opinion, if all the digital real estate is being used and the dynamics left intact, it would be the other versions that are *loud*, not this one being "low".

 

Further, if the source is the same and the one with the -2.38 peak contains the full dynamics of that source, the only way to create a version that is more than 2.38 dB louder would be to limit the dynamic range (or allow "over"s, which would effectively be the same thing). Again, this assumes the same source. It is possible *another* source, with less dynamic range, could be used without further compression to create a louder version. (It is also possible that a very "hot" analog source, if not brought down in level for analog playback, could engender compression in the playback cards of the analog deck - along with an increase in harmonic distortion.)

 

As it was a quarter century ago, I can't say for sure with regard to the level. Another possibility is that after I'd left Atlantic, someone there made a clone of the CD master to send to a new replication facility and inadvertently did not have the level for the copy set to 0. (The fader on the Sony DAE-1100E editor, used during the copying process, might have been loose. Once again, I wasn't there so I don't know but it *is* within the realm of possibility. I've always paid a lot of attention to the max peak level when mastering. This is why I'm a but suspicious of the -2.38 peak.

 

Best regards,

Barry

Soundkeeper Recordings

Barry Diament Audio

 

Thanks Barry, you make things sound logical...

 

 

somehow I just like my old original cut plastic record better than some of these hi-rezze outcroppings

The Truth Is Out There

Link to comment
So it sound like the only reason you feel that HDT version "sounds better then the MoFi" is because you feel that some compression was used on the MoFi? Is that correct?

 

No, this is not correct. It was my first impression as I heard the MoFi. Another one (as I wroted) was the EQ choice. Hear the HDTracks or the Barry Diament CD and compare it to the MoFi. They sounds different. The HDTracks and the Barry Diament sounds EQ-wise like twins.

I had no time yesterday, but I will definitly compare it once again (if I get some spare time).

 

But, kennyb123, enjoy your ride with the MoFi. No problem at all. I don't say the MoFi sounds bad, not at all, there are only little things what distracts me from the MoFi.

Albert Einstein: Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former.

Link to comment
Barry, just wanted to thank you - you know one of the major reasons I hang out here is to learn, and that was a wonderfully informative comment.

 

+2

 

(As always very informative the posts from Barry)

Albert Einstein: Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former.

Link to comment
Another one (as I wroted) was the EQ choice. Hear the HDTracks or the Barry Diament CD and compare it to the MoFi. They sounds different. The HDTracks and the Barry Diament sounds EQ-wise like twins.

I had no time yesterday, but I will definitly compare it once again (if I get some spare time).

 

This is a good point. The MoFi does venture into different territory in terms of frequency balance - particularly in the bass. I love the way Squire's bass thunders on the MoFi as it sounds more like I'm in the same room as his bass amp. The bass is not this prominent on any version I've heard, including any vinyl version.

 

I place a higher value on recordings that get me closer to thinking I'm hearing the real thing. That a reissue sounds like prior versions wouldn't matter as much - unless those prior versions are closer to the real thing. But if one expects to hear a certain EQ balance, I can see why they would prefer the HDT version.

 

I have two original plum UK pressings of The Yes Album. A mistake was made with EQ in these early pressings - the highs were sliced off. Good thing that wasn't held as the standard by which subsequent re-masterings should attempt to emulate. Both the MoFi & the HDT versions are far better.

Digital:  Sonore opticalModule > Uptone EtherRegen > Shunyata Sigma Ethernet > Antipodes K30 > Shunyata Omega USB > Gustard X26pro DAC 

Amp & Speakers:  Spectral DMA-150mk2 > Aerial 10T

Foundation: Stillpoints Ultra, Shunyata Denali power conditioner, Shunyata Alpha and Delta power cords, Shunyata Alpha interconnect, Shunyata Sigma Ethernet, MIT Matrix HD60 speaker cables, ASC isothermal tube traps, Stillpoints Aperture panels

Link to comment

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


×
×
  • Create New...