R.E.M. Monster Frequency Problem

[tubes59]

Well this is my first problem post with a download from HDtracks and I have bought quite a few.

The first track on Monster as you know is What's the Frequency, Kenneth?. One of the tracks main features is, for lack of a more correct term, a guitar effect shimmer that is quite pronounced throughout the track. You know the one I am talking about.

 

Unfortunately, this key part of the song is just plain old missing in the HDtracks version I just downloaded. It's gone...not there. It's as if that central part of the recording was just left off and it's not a good thing at all. Just to check my sanity, I have been playing the redbook version and it's most certainly there and quite prominent in the original.

 

I have not contacted HDtracks but plan to tomorrow. In the mean time, hold off on this one if Track 1 is important to you and it is.

 

 

[boybruges]

I purchased this album this morning and on a quick listen this morning, was very disappointed with the sound quality. I have been happy with other downloads from HDtracks. I wonder if this is a messed-up fold-down from the 5.1 mix rather than the stereo DVD-A mix? It does seem a little strange that this is advertised by Hdtracks as 24bit/96khz, when the DVD-Audio stereo version was 22bit/88.2khz (the 5.1 mix on the DVD-Audio was 24 bit/96khz) ...

 

[dizziness]

I hear nothing wrong with my DVD-A rip. I'd bet dollars to donuts that its a 5.1 mix down.

 

[hamildad]

This was one of the few upcoming HD tracks releases I was really looking forward to.

 

a shame that we are getting this bounced down 5.1 version, especially masters for the DVD-A are in the Warner vaults.

 

Thanks for the warning

 

 

 

[ron spencer]

This is one of the reasons I never buy unless I have a coupon...they seem to be messing up some key releases.

 

[Son_of_Thor]

I bought the album over the weekend and noticed the issue - overall sound quality is good, but some of the guitar overdubs that really make the songs are there but are very low in the mix, suggesting they're on the surround channels that haven't been included when this was mixed down from the 5.1

 

Has anyone reported this to HDTracks?!

 

[tubes59]

I wrote HDTracks about the problem. They offered me credit to purchase another album and said they had reported it to WMG.

 

 

 

 

[Son_of_Thor]

I reported it as well and got the credit offer but they didn't mention reporting it to WMG (presumably because they already had). I'd rather they got the problem sorted TBH

 

[tubes59]

I also told HDtracks that my first choice was to get the problem fixed rather than receive a credit.

 

[wgscott]

They refuse to acknowledge any of my communications now.

 

So, I won't be spending any more money with them.

 

[The Hawk]

And you'd think by now, someone at HDT would give a new release a critical listen before unleashing it on the public. Doesn't it make you feel you're like a guinea pig? I've lost interest in their hi-res downloads. Makes me feel even better that I'm getting back into vinyl again.

 

Dave

 

[j.SoundLabs]

"And you'd think by now, someone at HDT would give a new release a critical listen before unleashing it on the public. Doesn't it make you feel you're like a guinea pig? I've lost interest in their hi-res downloads." - The Hawk

 

My thoughts exactly. I got to the point where I hesitated before following through with a purchase from them, now I just wait and see. More waiting than seeing I must admit.

 

-j.

 

[Priaptor]

of what I have purchased from HDT is garbage.

 

I have become much much more selective. My initial excitement to endorse high res led me to purchase many albums from HDT that I already owned on standard redbook. Unfortunately, more often than not, ripping from my CD proved better than much of the high res crap from HDT.

 

[ted_b]

a dedicated stereo layer?

 

I ask because Natalie Merchant's Tigerlily, for example, is a DVD-A that does NOT, and relies on the DVD-A spec cpability called SMART (system managed audio resource technique) that is basically included in the toc and has instructions internal to the player/playback engine how to mix the surround and center/lfe channels for the specific downmix to stereo. In the case of Tigerlily (which I own on DVD-A and ripped the downmix via DVDAExplorer according to the automatic SMART table) the resultant downmix is a very different mix than the redbook. It is unknown whether SMART is the issue, or if the downmix is a new mix, similar in mix to the 5.1. I have heard the versions on DTS, MP3 and my own DVD-A hirez rip and all of them are the same unusual non-redbook mix (for example, where some guitars are muted, yet others are overly highlighted). It's either creative decision-making or a problem with integrating surround channels using SMART. In either case, it's likely not HDtracks fault per se, but a "buyer beware" approach is definitely needed.

 

It is also known that some DVD-A's with dedicated stereo layers (where the downmix math is not needed) are very unique mixes and not anything like the redbook we are used to. Grateful Dead's American Beauty is an example.

 

I told one of the guys on Audio Circle that bought Tigerlily on HDTracks that I'd listen to Tigerlily in 5.1 and hear if I could tell whether the not-normally-muted rhythm guitars (in this example) continue to sound muted, or is it a case of bad downmixing.

 

[dizziness]

I'll have to dig up my Redbook copy of Monster and re-rip it against the DVD-A rip. I have no memory if it was a dedicated stereo layer. But I'm 99% sure it was, as was the case with the other REM DVD-As. (Some even had 24/192 dedicated stereo tracks.)

 

[greentrumpet]

Was keen to buy this album but seems again there are "issues" with quality. HD tracks were very fair in replacing a previous purchase that turned out not to be HD (and was withdrawn) but the AKUS album I got in its place sounds like each track is faded in during the first note.

I am disappointed that in spite of WB support liner notes are an exception. I think by now we should be able to expect proper HD stereo mixes, correctly and fully presented with all tracks and liner notes. For a "virtual" product with a strong profit margin we deserve better.

 

[Jud]

It is also known that some DVD-A's with dedicated stereo layers (where the downmix math is not needed) are very unique mixes and not anything like the redbook we are used to. Grateful Dead's American Beauty is an example.

 

Apologies for the (temporary) OT. ted_b, how does the stereo mix on American Beauty compare to the vinyl, just in terms of the levels of the various instruments/vocals, and clarity? (I own the vinyl and am very familiar with its sound. Never have had the CD.) I ask because that's a DVD-A purchase I'm strongly considering.

 

[dizziness]

I re-ripped the Redbook CD of Monster and compared to the DVD-A 2.0 rip. They are definitely the same mix, with improved depth and bass resolution on the DVD-A. Yes, there is audible fuzz distortion on the guitar on both rips. If the mix available from HD Tracks sounds different, you're likely hearing a 5.1 mix down.

 

[ted_b]

I certainly own the original in vinyl and have for almost 40 years, but as I said in the post, the dedicated 2 channel from the DVD-A is a completely different mix than what the classic AB sounds like.

 

[dizziness]

I believe the liner notes for this and "Workingman's Dead" both credit Mickey Hart as mixing engineer for both the 5.1 and the stereo mixes.

 

[Son_of_Thor]

Still nothing back from HD Tracks re: REM Monster. Don't suppose anyone has gone for REM Green yet? If so, is it OK?

 

[Spungopeen]

There is definitely a problem. It sounds terrible. Lifeless. They really need to remove it from the store until the problem is resolved.

 

All of the other R.E.M. releases (includng Green) sound great.

 

[Trev or Trevor]

Hi, long time reader, first time poster...

 

I just bought Monster today before checking this site. I was happy

with the other R.E.M downloads, so I just went ahead and

downloaded it.

 

It doesn't sound like a 5.1 downmix to me. It sounds like the

front channels from the 5.1 mix. As others have posted, there are

instruments missing altogether. I haven't heard the 5.1 mix, so I

can't say for sure, but if I were to imagine what it would sound

like, this would come pretty close.

 

Green does sound good to me, but the meta tags are missing a

TRACKNUMBER tag, so it really does seem like HDtracks can really

use a QA department. I purchased the 24/96 version. I hope this

meta tag means it was downsampled from the 24/192 version and not

upsampled from the red book version.

 

 

comment[1]: software=Weiss Engineering Saracon 01.61-31

(libsndfile-1.0.23)

 

OT: ted_b, when Tigerlily came out the local FM station played a

version of Carnival with a loud guitar track that kind of reminded

me of Mark Knopfler. I was so disappointed when I bought the cd

and the guitar track wasn't on Carnival. I've searched for a radio

promo, but I've never found one. I wonder if the guitars you speak

of is this missing guitar track. I'll have to download it and find

out.

 

Btw, I'm pretty sure Running On Empty is also a multi-channel

downmix. Many of the tracks are extended and wikipedia says the 25

seconds of audience is missing from the 2 channel disc on the 2005

remaster, but present on the multichannel disc. The date tag on

the download says 2005. Personally, I really like this version, so

downmixes aren't necessarily bad, but they should indicate it in

the description for the download.

 

 

 

[bottlerocket]

I think you know that the American Beauty DVDa is a different mix. It is remixed by Mickey Hart and some tracks like Sugar Magnolia sound really different. The bass is more "Phil forward" and the drum kit seems to be moved. I've read other opinions saying the bass is too loud, but I think it is just right.

 

If you want a good explanation of what is different, just buy it, and there is a 5 minute video with Hart explaining it all.

 

It really does sound great.

 

[SchaqFu]

My experience is the same as others here have described -- I downloaded Monster from HDTracks a few days ago and instantly was struck by the awful sounding mix with layers of audio obviously missing or diminished. The problem is common to all 12 tracks. Michael Stipe's vocals, and even backing vocals, are far more emphasized than on the redbook version, which I own, and the crunch and shimmer of guitars and other effects are missing or diminished. It's actually kind of fun to listen to because it's like having a clearer window into the words being sung, breaking through the wall-of-sound to a large degree, but it's enjoyable purely as a novelty. The quality of the audio sounds like absolute trash to me, and I'm normally pretty forgiving. As others have observed, the other 24/96 R.E.M. downloads from HDTracks all sound great, simply higher quality versions of the same redbook stereo mixes. Monster absolutely should be pulled until the true stereo mix is made available.

 

I should say that, notwithstanding this debacle with Monster, I've purchased a large number of 24/96 albums from HDTracks over the last few years and never had another complaint.