 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
Posted: |
Mar 29, 2012 - 10:02 PM
|
|
|
|
By: |
Bob Bryden
(Member)
|
VERY BAD NEWS: I have just a/b'd the La La Land 'Fall of the Roman Empire' with the PEG release. The PEG release blows it and the Varese out of the water. I swear this 're-mastering' syndrome is driving me (and my pocketbook nuts). The PEG release has a much richer, fuller sound than the LLL and a great stereophonic soundfield - which is 'pinched' and narrow on the LLL. The clarity in the various sections of the orchestra in the PEG release compared to the others is a revelation. The tympani in 'Balomar's Barbarian Attack' are a great example - they just thunder in the PEG. I just acquired the PEG about a month ago and was immediately struck by what a vast improvement it was over the Varese. Now, I'm disappointed and irritated to report that it also far surpasses the La La Land. Big bummer for me..
I've also a/b'd the two (PEG and LLL) and my opinion is the opposite in every respect. Compared to the LLL, the PEG masks detail in a wash of bloated bass and the highs have far less detail and no sheen. Individual instruments are far better defined in the LLL mastering, while a bass mask bleeds all over the PEG. Your personal preference is your own and no-one can argue with that, but to present an absurdity like "The clarity in the various sections of the orchestra in the PEG release compared to the others is a revelation" is simply nonsense. And so is the observation about the "stereophonic sound field" being pinched on the LLL. The very opposite is true, unless one considers "sound field" to be judged by how much bass is echoing around, irrespective of how much instrumental detail is lost.
The LLL sounds as if it has been mastered with some respect towards how the original instruments actually sounded, with detail exceptionally well managed to give us a vast improvement in presence without any trade off in terms of harshness. In contrast, the PEG just does the equivalent of switching on the maximum bass boost in a cheap Sony Walkman.
I'm not the biggest fan of some LLL releases, as past posts have shown. But to say their mastering of The Fall of the Roman Empire is inferior to the PEG would be risible, if not for the fact that it might direct readers to ignore a very fine disc and buy an old muffled one instead.
I'm talking here of the main body of the disc, the stereo tracks. I've not compared the mono bonus cues.
Well...ya know. I've been glueing my ear to this score since 1964 when I saw 'FOTRE' in 70 MM roadshow and I've had every incarnation of the score since then. I'd like to just say some hear apples and some hear oranges but I have a great sound system which has served me well through many of my own recordings from conception to disc and I can definitely say what I hear through my speakers is what I heard in the studio. So I know my system is honest and accurate. I disagree with your response because I hear no bass boom, bleed or 'over-modulation' in the PEG release. (I love that old-timey way of saying of 'so loud and 'in the red' that it's distorting' a la those MGM Rozsa releases). What I do hear in the PEG release is full, rich bottom end, brilliant mid-range and wonderfully crisp high end with no trace of shrillness. I can hear every instrument clear as a bell.
In the LLL what I hear is over-compressed overall sound and a somewhat 'tinny' high end.
What I think they've done is EQ the original album tracks 'down' and EQ the 'More Music From' tracks 'up' to make a coherent listening experience between the two. They even give you (thankfully) a chronological track listing in the booklet should you like to program the tracks that way. Which is all well and fine. However, by EQ'ing the original album 'down' they've lost some of the power in the original sessions. Another factor could be that the original master tape (if LLL used it - I mean the actual tape and not a DAT or otherwise digital copy) could have deteriorated a bit since the 1995 PEG release. Of course I'm just speculating about the last bit.
As for discouraging fans to buy this release, I do believe the improved sound on the mono tracks ALMOST makes the disc worth buying just for these.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: |
Mar 30, 2012 - 10:04 AM
|
|
|
|
By: |
.
(Member)
|
I know I am right... In the future I'll just keep my disappointment with all these re-re-re-re-re-masterings to myself. Clearly I'm providing no public service.
Very true. You apparently have a political point to make about "re-re-re-re-re-masterings" and it's your judgment that is "colored like sonic crayons", not the new Classic Film Scores releases.
Roger Hall of Film Music Review says "I must add praise for the Mastering Engineer, Maria Triana, who has remastered these tracks from the original analog tapes. The former CD release (RCA 0707-2-RG) was in Dolby Surround and sounded a bit distant. This new CD release is much more up front and as good as you are likely to hear music recorded back in the 1970s".
James Southall says "This Bernard Herrmann collection, released on LP in 1974 and then later on CD, has now been reissued by RCA in glorious sound".
Ian Lace of Musicweb International says "Very good sound enhanced by its re-mastering".
Classical CD Review stays "This new series of reissues is of particular importance as the remastering engineer, Maria Triana, has returned to the original analog stereo tapes—previous versions were in artifically-produced Dolby Surround. And the new versions sound wonderful".
All other reviews I've seen also insist the new Classic Film Scores releases sound much better than the old ones, but those reviewers must all be deaf, if as you say, the discs really sound awful.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: |
Mar 30, 2012 - 10:10 AM
|
|
|
|
By: |
Bob Bryden
(Member)
|
I know I am right... In the future I'll just keep my disappointment with all these re-re-re-re-re-masterings to myself. Clearly I'm providing no public service.
Very true. You apparently have a political point to make about "re-re-re-re-re-masterings" and it's your judgment that is "colored like sonic crayons", not the new Classic Film Scores releases.
Roger Hall of Film Music Review says "I must add praise for the Mastering Engineer, Maria Triana, who has remastered these tracks from the original analog tapes. The former CD release (RCA 0707-2-RG) was in Dolby Surround and sounded a bit distant. This new CD release is much more up front and as good as you are likely to hear music recorded back in the 1970s".
James Southall says "This Bernard Herrmann collection, released on LP in 1974 and then later on CD, has now been reissued by RCA in glorious sound".
Ian Lace of Musicweb International says "Very good sound enhanced by its re-mastering".
Classical CD Review stays "This new series of reissues is of particular importance as the remastering engineer, Maria Triana, has returned to the original analog stereo tapes—previous versions were in artifically-produced Dolby Surround. And the new versions sound wonderful".
All other reviews I've seen also insist the new Classic Film Scores releases sound much better than the old ones, but those reviewers must all be deaf, if as you say, the discs really sound awful.
They don't sound 'awful' they have been tweaked a lot and that is truly a matter of taste - but the tweaking is there. I, for one, will continue to play my original RCA Gerhardt releases minus the colouring. There are a number of re-masters which I think are absolutely superb - the new FSM 'Ben-Hur' or the entire 'Bernard Herrmann at Fox' for examples. I am simply looking for the best that's out there - and that can obviously be quite subjective. I can also listen a lot of stuff that sounds 'awful' - if - it's the best we have. The new 'It's Alive' by Herrmann an example. Sonically inferior but I love it. I held off buying 'The White Buffalo' for a long time because of negative reports on the audio. Finally, picked it up and love it. The audio is all over the map but again - it's the best we have. Getting back to 'Fall of the Roman Empire' - I firmly believe the PEG is the best we have as far as the original album and if anybody wants to forget the whole argument then just pick up the Tadlow because it's overwhelmingly good.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
'sfunny, the facial expressions on that poster ... they seem prophetic ...
Loren ...'Here we go again ...'
Boyd ....'Well wouldn't you just know it ...'
Guinness ...'Oh, if we really must ...'
Plummer .... 'Tell me you're not serious ...'
Mason .... 'It's hard to credit ...'
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Here's my take as someone who isn't much of a Tiomkin fan: Tiomkin's style is hard to conduct right. Many original Tiomkin recordings have relatively poor sound quality and maybe occasionally a sloppy performance, but they have a unique "correct" feel to them that Tiomkin re-recordings rarely can capture. The Tadlow Guns of Navarone is a good example of this. Some cues in it are really good; other ones really suffer in comparison to the original (incomplete) recording.
This is *not at all* a problem on Tadlow's Fall of the Roman Empire though. It is an amazing recording, and my go-to listen for the score. I do own LLL's gorgeous-looking set too, though. It's the best the original recording is going to be, and they do have a far superior booklet (in terms of both content and design). But if we're just talking musically, the Tadlow/Prometheus release is by far the definitive package.
Yavar
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
Posted: |
Jul 9, 2015 - 11:58 PM
|
|
|
|
By: |
Dana Wilcox
(Member)
|
...But if we're just talking musically, the Tadlow/Prometheus release is by far the definitive package.
Yavar
With all due respect, Yavar, we must have a diametrically opposite understanding of the meaning of the word "definitive." I can understand someone preferring one recording over the other, for any number of (chiefly subjective) reasons, but to say that a re-recording is "definitive," with the actual film tracks tracks, recorded under the composer's baton with all the composer's intentions for the score therein embodied, and in serviceably listenable condition, staring you in the face -- I don't think so. Words have meanings. The original defines the score, not someone else's approximation thereof, however technically superior the latter recording may be thought to be. That's no knock on your or anyone else's preferences for listening purposes. I prefer the original, or should I say, the truly definitive version of FALL. You prefer the Prometheus. To each his own!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
