 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
Posted: |
Jun 19, 2019 - 11:28 AM
|
|
|
|
By: |
Nono
(Member)
|
Mixing of multitracks can be very tricky, it is almost impossible to obtain the same balance of the initial mixing (I was also disappointed with Conan The Barbarian and a few others), but in this case I think the new mix is very good, allowing new details to be perceived but not deviating from the original sound.
It doesn't sound anymore like an Eric Tomlinson recording, some instruments which were behind are now very frontal, with no real depth, as if the players were all in the same line, they play all louder, without dynamic nuances etc.
It couldn't deviate more from the original recording, and Eric Tomlinson certainly knew better the acoustics of the Denham studio and how to make it sounds.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Like film prints, no two mixes are exactly alike
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I’d like to chime in with a few comments.
When I wrote my articles on Star Wars and Superman, I did so out of frustration and fandom. Frustration in that I felt the work of the engineer and composer weren’t being properly rendered for CD. Fandom in that I love these scores—the work of both the engineer and composer have shaped the trajectory of my life and career.
In expressing grievances over a decade ago, I did so with some knowledge—but not anywhere near the knowledge that I have accumulated in the intervening years by listening, discussing, and having the privilege of working on some soundtrack albums.
It’s amazing to think that if we want to listen to Superman, we have so many choices to dip into. And each have a different sonic character—the original WB album; the Rhino; the FSM; and now this latest release from La-La Land.
I rarely comment on releases these days because the Internet is forever.
But let me say this succinctly.
I’m thrilled with this new 40th anniversary Superman set from La-La Land! I think Mike did—and consistently does—a spectacular job.
This will be the edition I listen to.
Chris
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: |
Jun 20, 2019 - 10:42 AM
|
|
|
|
By: |
Bus_Punk
(Member)
|
As far as dynamic range is concerned, it was unaltered in both editions of E.T. and Raiders of the Lost Ark that bcommunal mentionned.
Not entirely true.
In an effort to make the CD release sound more like the vinyl, Mr Hoffman put that feed through a valve-based gizmo. Perhaps understandable in that era, when people were often complaining CD sounded too sharp and clinical (plus the Raiders masters are a little hot). Of course now that we have superb DACs Hoffman’s Raiders CD sounds exactly how it is, softened and a little diffuse, with slightly muted dynamics. Compare that to his DCC LP, which is absolutely first class as it came from a purer feed minus the manipulations for the CD version. The LP played on good quality gear ironically sounds far more dynamic and crisp than the CD.
Using tubes instead of transistors is not a gizmo. On a good CD player, the CD is also spectacular. I have both the LP and CD of the DCC edition. The better format will depend on the better source you have on your system.
I use both a Benchmark DAC3 HGC and a Chord Hugo TT2. And I stand by my findings.
You’re also objectively wrong about the ‘gizmo’. Steve added it as a form of ‘sweetening’ or taming the CD issue, baring in mind the quality of many CD players (non audiophile) it would be played in during that era. Played today in a neutral and revealing system you can hear this colouration, particularly in comparison with the superbly dynamic and crisp sounding DCC LP which is a real masterpiece of a release.
But you are obviously entitled to your opposing opinion, and that’s to be respected 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
