Quote
stonesdan60

Quote
kowalski

Quote
WeLoveYou

Quote
dcba
Am I the only one who thinks the sound is not that great... I find it cold, digital, and glassy. To me it doesn't sound like a 32-48 analog multitrack tape from 1981.

There's no hiss no warmth and it sounds quite brick-walled, that is the instruments are blended together in a way that's not nice on the ears. Okay Ron's hard on the left and Keith's hard on the right but that's not what I mean.

I'll dig out my VGP for a quick A/B test...

[Disclaimer : I listen to this one at HIGH volume with headphones]

I totally agree. I notice the same with the new Exile and SG tracks. The unfortunate side of mixing and mastering in the digital domain.

Try comparing the new Hampton stonesarchive release with Still Life (mixed and mastered to tape)

Agree too. The band sounds like they're playing in a box. The good part of such a hot mastering is one can hear every instrument. But at the same time with everything on the same level there's almost no dynamics. Particularly noticeable on Charlie's drums. They sound very flat. Unfortunately that's the sound of today's music : no breath, glassy...
Red Hot Chili Peppers have made their live show available for download on their web site. They just sound the same.

Hmmmm.....Perhaps something is not right with whatever kind of system you're listening to it on. So far, I've just listened to it on my computer (Windows Media Player) through some very good headphones and I hear no box. In fact, it sounds like the band has been freed from any box and spread out wide open all over the stage. The sound is wide and dynamic and doesn't sound compressed even though I know it is compressed. maybe because my media player automatically converts mp3 files to lossless wav. files. I'm not technically savvy enough to explain the difference. All I know is it sounds great.

That doesn't happen

Quote
StonesTod

Quote
tipps
I havent heard this new download. Is it really better sounding than the bootleg that is out for years now which I have. My bootleg sounds very very good. So not much to remaster right. Would someone please explain how the new download differs from the boot already out.

it's not that big of an improvement. it's not like you're hearing things you've never heard before. given the low cost, it's perhaps worth the cost of finding out yourself, but if you're happy with your boot, my advice would be to not bother...

He? There's LOADS of things you can hear that I never heard before, and I think I have about every release of this show. There's loads more piano and wurly, much better background vocals (you can finally hear Mac singing as well), and there's loads of guitar licks I never heard before. Good example is TIOMS -I always thought this was a song where Wood would have a cig and a drink. As it turns out, he plays a lot of fantastic soul licks, really adding to the track. And I never noticed Stu's fantastic low piano additions on this track as well.

Mathijs

Quote
Mathijs

Quote
StonesTod

Quote
tipps
I havent heard this new download. Is it really better sounding than the bootleg that is out for years now which I have. My bootleg sounds very very good. So not much to remaster right. Would someone please explain how the new download differs from the boot already out.

it's not that big of an improvement. it's not like you're hearing things you've never heard before. given the low cost, it's perhaps worth the cost of finding out yourself, but if you're happy with your boot, my advice would be to not bother...

He? There's LOADS of things you can hear that I never heard before, and I think I have about every release of this show. There's loads more piano and wurly, much better background vocals (you can finally hear Mac singing as well), and there's loads of guitar licks I never heard before. Good example is TIOMS -I always thought this was a song where Wood would have a cig and a drink. As it turns out, he plays a lot of fantastic soul licks, really adding to the track. And I never noticed Stu's fantastic low piano additions on this track as well.

Mathijs

maybe your hearing just improved this week....i've heard all this hundreds of times b4....

Quote
DandelionPowderman

Quote
stonesdan60

Quote
kowalski

Quote
WeLoveYou

Quote
dcba
Am I the only one who thinks the sound is not that great... I find it cold, digital, and glassy. To me it doesn't sound like a 32-48 analog multitrack tape from 1981.

There's no hiss no warmth and it sounds quite brick-walled, that is the instruments are blended together in a way that's not nice on the ears. Okay Ron's hard on the left and Keith's hard on the right but that's not what I mean.

I'll dig out my VGP for a quick A/B test...

[Disclaimer : I listen to this one at HIGH volume with headphones]

I totally agree. I notice the same with the new Exile and SG tracks. The unfortunate side of mixing and mastering in the digital domain.

Try comparing the new Hampton stonesarchive release with Still Life (mixed and mastered to tape)

Agree too. The band sounds like they're playing in a box. The good part of such a hot mastering is one can hear every instrument. But at the same time with everything on the same level there's almost no dynamics. Particularly noticeable on Charlie's drums. They sound very flat. Unfortunately that's the sound of today's music : no breath, glassy...
Red Hot Chili Peppers have made their live show available for download on their web site. They just sound the same.

Hmmmm.....Perhaps something is not right with whatever kind of system you're listening to it on. So far, I've just listened to it on my computer (Windows Media Player) through some very good headphones and I hear no box. In fact, it sounds like the band has been freed from any box and spread out wide open all over the stage. The sound is wide and dynamic and doesn't sound compressed even though I know it is compressed. maybe because my media player automatically converts mp3 files to lossless wav. files. I'm not technically savvy enough to explain the difference. All I know is it sounds great.

That doesn't happen

OK. Maybe I misread what I saw when I go into the settings on my media player. I won't argue. I told you I'm not too tech savvy. Guess I just proved it...

Well this sucks. After screwing around for 90 minutes I appear to be SOL. As I found out (and would have had I read the thread furher) only MP3 is avalible in the US. I bought the Mp3 through google but I guess I can not get it to my computer then to my eyephone. Sigh - what I would give to go to a record store.

Quote
Bob C.
Well this sucks. After screwing around for 90 minutes I appear to be SOL. As I found out (and would have had I read the thread furher) only MP3 is avalible in the US. I bought the Mp3 through google but I guess I can not get it to my computer then to my eyephone. Sigh - what I would give to go to a record store.

Bob

download it from Google to your computer....then you can put it on your eyephone your kneephone...even your headphones.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2012-02-03 17:12 by Munichhilton.

Bob, I think you should have access to your Google Music accoount thru your phone...???

Through the kindness of others I am OK. Looking forward to the ride home tonight.

Have they stated why they have MP3's for USA, but Flac for Europe etc?

It seems very crappy, unfair and odd.

It's encouraging those with Flac files to share them with those who only have access to MP3 files.

Bob,

If I remember correctly from when Brussels came out...

After I had paid for and downloaded to my computer at home, there was a way to link the google music account that was just created to my cell phone. If I remember correctly, it asked for some phone information (make/model, etc.) and all seemed to happen VERY easilly... I'm not all that tech savvy and I remember being pretty impressed with the ease of it all. That being said, it may have been somewhat easy for me as my family is on a cell phone carrier that is pretty intergrated with Google. Not sure how it is for other carriers or an I-Phone as again, I have some Motorola model.

Peace
Mr DJA

We would have been glad to own these live recordings like Brussel and Hampton in this quality back then in 73 resp. 81. No official live recording presented the uniqueness and inimitability of the special sound of The Rolling Stones. The old officials are obsolete now documenting the useless effort to record the live sound of the band and presenting a downsized version of the greatest Rock'n Roll band on this planet.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2012-02-03 17:37 by RobertJohnson.

Quote
His Majesty
Have they stated why they have MP3's for USA, but Flac for Europe etc?

i reckon it's the googlemusic deal that dictates mp3s for the US market,
and the good sense [sic!] of Rolling Stones Inc. that lets the rest of us have a better product

I cannot believe anyone truely does not hear the improvement of this release over the previous bootlegs. I wonder what bootleg they have that sounds anywhere near as good. If they have had anything this good before they must have been keeping it to themselves.

Quote
with sssoul
i reckon it's the googlemusic deal that dictates mp3s for the US market,
and the good sense [sic!] of Rolling Stones Inc. that lets the rest of us have a better product

Well spoken....or typed

Quote
stonesdan60

Quote
kowalski

Quote
WeLoveYou

Quote
dcba
Am I the only one who thinks the sound is not that great... I find it cold, digital, and glassy. To me it doesn't sound like a 32-48 analog multitrack tape from 1981.

There's no hiss no warmth and it sounds quite brick-walled, that is the instruments are blended together in a way that's not nice on the ears. Okay Ron's hard on the left and Keith's hard on the right but that's not what I mean.

I'll dig out my VGP for a quick A/B test...

[Disclaimer : I listen to this one at HIGH volume with headphones]

I totally agree. I notice the same with the new Exile and SG tracks. The unfortunate side of mixing and mastering in the digital domain.

Try comparing the new Hampton stonesarchive release with Still Life (mixed and mastered to tape)

Agree too. The band sounds like they're playing in a box. The good part of such a hot mastering is one can hear every instrument. But at the same time with everything on the same level there's almost no dynamics. Particularly noticeable on Charlie's drums. They sound very flat. Unfortunately that's the sound of today's music : no breath, glassy...
Red Hot Chili Peppers have made their live show available for download on their web site. They just sound the same.

Hmmmm.....Perhaps something is not right with whatever kind of system you're listening to it on. So far, I've just listened to it on my computer (Windows Media Player) through some very good headphones and I hear no box. In fact, it sounds like the band has been freed from any box and spread out wide open all over the stage. The sound is wide and dynamic and doesn't sound compressed even though I know it is compressed. maybe because my media player automatically converts mp3 files to lossless wav. files. I'm not technically savvy enough to explain the difference. All I know is it sounds great.

Sound is even more compressed than on last years Brussels Affair FLAC release.

To give it a proper listening I've burned the FLAC files on a CD and listened it on my hi fi audio system.
It may sound good because everything is mixed upfront. But sound is so compressed that at the end it makes music flat. That's why I'm saying it sounds like in a box.


Below is how looks the first minute of Under My Thumb in an audio editor :

2012 release from Stones Archive :




Same song from Still Life (CBS CD) :

Quote
kowalski

Below is how looks the first minute of Under My Thumb in an audio editor :

2012 release from Stones Archive :




Same song from Still Life (CBS CD) :

You are aware that the 2012 Hampton release of Under My Thumb is not the same as the New Jersey performance of Under My Thumb on Still Life?

Quote
Munichhilton

Quote
kowalski

Below is how looks the first minute of Under My Thumb in an audio editor :

2012 release from Stones Archive :




Same song from Still Life (CBS CD) :

You are aware that the 2012 Hampton release of Under My Thumb is not the same as the New Jersey performance of Under My Thumb on Still Life?

I know about that. Just a way to show what I mean by music being overly compressed.

Heard it now until "Neighbours". And I must say: I was a little too euphoric above, unfortunately Ronnie is mixed in the background, Keith is too prominent, and it is somewhat muddy, hollow, bad balance, fear to profess: the Swinging Pig is the better choice. I have to hear the complete recording ...

Quote
RobertJohnson
Heard it now until "Neighbours". And I must say: I was a little too euphoric above, unfortunately Ronnie is mixed in the background, Keith is too prominent, and it is somewhat muddy, hollow, bad balance, fear to profess: the Swinging Pig is the better choice. I have to hear the complete recording ...

If you think the TSP release is the best version...then you gotta get the VGP release. Miles better than the Swingin Pig release (which I find "unlistenable" )

That being said.....I like the official version better, obviously

Quote
Stones Blah
I cannot believe anyone truely does not hear the improvement of this release over the previous bootlegs. I wonder what bootleg they have that sounds anywhere near as good. If they have had anything this good before they must have been keeping it to themselves.

No I've not kept it to myself, I've shared it to about 1200 dowloaders. Obviously you don't pay attention to torrent trackers. And there's 1000s of other who has the "same" bootleg and doesn't need to download it.

Don't blame others about your ignorance


...and yes the official release IS better, but the difference is nothing to jump in the air for

Quote
kowalski

Quote
stonesdan60

Quote
kowalski

Quote
WeLoveYou

Quote
dcba
Am I the only one who thinks the sound is not that great... I find it cold, digital, and glassy. To me it doesn't sound like a 32-48 analog multitrack tape from 1981.

There's no hiss no warmth and it sounds quite brick-walled, that is the instruments are blended together in a way that's not nice on the ears. Okay Ron's hard on the left and Keith's hard on the right but that's not what I mean.

I'll dig out my VGP for a quick A/B test...

[Disclaimer : I listen to this one at HIGH volume with headphones]

I totally agree. I notice the same with the new Exile and SG tracks. The unfortunate side of mixing and mastering in the digital domain.

Try comparing the new Hampton stonesarchive release with Still Life (mixed and mastered to tape)

Agree too. The band sounds like they're playing in a box. The good part of such a hot mastering is one can hear every instrument. But at the same time with everything on the same level there's almost no dynamics. Particularly noticeable on Charlie's drums. They sound very flat. Unfortunately that's the sound of today's music : no breath, glassy...
Red Hot Chili Peppers have made their live show available for download on their web site. They just sound the same.

Hmmmm.....Perhaps something is not right with whatever kind of system you're listening to it on. So far, I've just listened to it on my computer (Windows Media Player) through some very good headphones and I hear no box. In fact, it sounds like the band has been freed from any box and spread out wide open all over the stage. The sound is wide and dynamic and doesn't sound compressed even though I know it is compressed. maybe because my media player automatically converts mp3 files to lossless wav. files. I'm not technically savvy enough to explain the difference. All I know is it sounds great.

Sound is even more compressed than on last years Brussels Affair FLAC release.

To give it a proper listening I've burned the FLAC files on a CD and listened it on my hi fi audio system.
It may sound good because everything is mixed upfront. But sound is so compressed that at the end it makes music flat. That's why I'm saying it sounds like in a box.


Below is how looks the first minute of Under My Thumb in an audio editor :

2012 release from Stones Archive :




Same song from Still Life (CBS CD) :

Yes, it sounds good but it's kind of dead.

What's the solution to this problem?

Do they have to compress to music like this or is it only the preferred sound today?

I hear clipping during the Satisfaction track. Annoying as hell.

Quote
Carster
I hear clipping during the Satisfaction track. Annoying as hell.

Careful now.....all the "never heard the VGP-bootleg members" of IORR is going to jump at you.

Heard it now until Let It Bleed and compared it to VGP 127 from my Hard disc. The boot is the better choice, better balance between RW and Keith, clearer, more different sound, all is more prominent.

Quote
RobertJohnson
Heard it now until Let It Bleed and compared it to VGP 127 from my Hard disc. The boot is the better choice, better balance between RW and Keith, clearer, more different sound, all is more prominent.

The original VGP number is 270.
but thanks for hearing some sanity here and not just the hypocrites

Quote
You Got to Roll Me
BTW, an easy cheat around the whole USA flac deal is just putting your country as canada, thats what i did

On a Windows computer (Win 7), how does one go about changing the country?

Quote
You Got to Roll Me
BTW, an easy cheat around the whole USA flac deal is just putting your country as canada, thats what i did

You can change your credit card billing address and have it go through?
Interesting

Quote
Erik_Snow

Quote
RobertJohnson
Heard it now until Let It Bleed and compared it to VGP 127 from my Hard disc. The boot is the better choice, better balance between RW and Keith, clearer, more different sound, all is more prominent.

The original VGP number is 270.
but thanks for hearing some sanity here and not just the hypocrites

Yes, I think you're right, write just from my iPhone and can't see on my hard disc.

Quote
Carster
I hear clipping during the Satisfaction track. Annoying as hell.

All over the track...

I'm confused...all I want to do is to buy it & play it. I'm in the US and I don't want to muck about with changing card info to Canada - what's the difference between FLAC and MP3? It sounds like FLAC has better sound - is that it? (be kind - I'm not too savvy)...

So I go to Google, buy the album for $4.99, then download it to my computer and then put it on iTunes or keep it on Google music. From either place play it and/or burn a CD. Is this right? Thanks for any help - I've never used Google Music before.

If it's as simple as I outlined - then it sounds easy. But your graphs and images kind of making me a bit dizzy
Muddled in Memphis