Rush Vapor Trails Remastered? (1 Viewer)

[Herschel]

Sorry for the delay, I didn't make it back to this thread for a few days...

My comments were based on the screenshots of the waveforms in the prorec article. Those show the waveform that's on the CD being badly clipped at the maximum amplitude you can store on a CD. The only way to get that is at the mastering stage. Lets say the original tracks were badly recorded and clipped. Once those tracks get mixed (meaning the levels get adjusted, they get EQ'd, reverb and other effects get added, etc.) that kind of clipping wouldn't be visible. You might see artifacts from it, but it's unlikely that you're going to see flat lines, because of all the processing you've done to it. And once you mix in all the other tracks that you're using, clipping on any one track won't be visible at all in the final mix. Even if every track you're using was clipped, mixing them all together will mean no flat lines in the waveform (although it'll probably sound like crap).

It's only when you master that final mix for CD that you have the opportunity to clip the waveforms at the max amplitude and create the kind of pictures that prorec has in that article.

Now, like I said before, this doesn't mean that the original tracks weren't badly recorded. It just means that we should be able to get at least a somewhat better sounding version if it was remastered.

 

[Herschel]

Ok, I have too much time on my hands, apparently. I made an example.

Here's a really badly clipped drum track. Everything was way too loud for my poor sound card to deal with. This doesn't sound good:



Here it is after a quick mix with a slightly clipped bass track and an unclipped organ track:



There's no sign of the clipping from the original badly recorded drums, but the track still sounds pretty bad. The only way to get that mixed track to look like the Vapor Trails waveforms, though, is during mastering. But I could still do that even if the original tracks were perfect.

My point is just that the mastering wasn't good. The original tracks and/or the mix could have issues also, I have no idea.

 

[Paul.S]

Herschel, thanks for your posts. Re the second para of your post #21, what about an egregiously high amount of compression/limiting being applied to the final mix before mastering? Won't that create flat lines if you look at it on a scope?
Thanks for explicitly acknowledging this, Herschel. 'Proving' distortion at the mastering stage does not disprove the possibility of distortion at the recording stage.

-p

 

[Herschel]

Yes, it would be possible to do that in the final mix. But you really shouldn't be doing that kind of compression during the mixing process in the first place, since that's the mastering engineer's job. So while it's possible, I wouldn't say it's likely. Of course, if the person mixing it is completely clueless, you never know...

 

[ElevSkyMovie]

Paul,

I may stand corrected on the Rush.com VT re-master issue. I never saw it on there, so I assumed it never was. If you did, I stand corrected.

Herschel,

I agree with everything you've said. Only the band and producer know what this should sound like. I have seen an interview with Geddy and Alex where Geddy talks about how much trouble he had mixing the project. They made multiple mixes and had them mastered and he was not happy with the sound. He didn't say if he mixed it by himself or if someone else (Paul Northfield) helped. Geddy finally gave up and sent a test disc to Alex who was on vacation in Hawaii. Alex listened on a portable cd player with headphones and gave his approval. It wasn't said if Neil gave his, I assume he leaves that up to Alex and Geddy.

One thing I don't understand: Geddy recorded his solo album "My Favorite Headache" himself (with some help). I think it was recorded digitally, but it doesn't sound distorted. I'm not sure why Geddy would all of a sudden not be able to hear distortion on VT. I guess the fact that they worked on VT for over a year could have been part of the problem.

Here's hoping VT will be re-mastered. I would sure buy it!

 

[Mike Broadman]

I disagree. I listened to Presto for the first time last night and found a much stronger low-end. From what I read, it is the most improved of the four.

 

[Paul.S]

This has been discussed a lot in connection with VT SQ, too. Ged and Ben Mink 'met in the middle' of Canada (Ged coming from Toronto and Ben from Vancouver) with their hard drives for a week at a time every couple of weeks to work on MFH. Despite that kind of production, they ended up with a record that sounds much better than VT . . . even though both albums were mixed (David Leonard) and mastered (Howie) by the same people at the same facilities (Metalworks and Masterdisk respectively). I should have mentioned earlier in the thread in my exchange with Jeff that this is another reason I have long suspected problems with the original recording.

-p

 

[ElevSkyMovie]

If I remember correctly from the interview, Geddy recorded the band jamming in Alex's studio and pieced together parts he liked into songs. He would try to create cohesive songs from the parts. Alex would come in and either approve it or make some changes. However, most of the songs were not recorded as one piece and the band recorded themselves.

I think they should have taken the finished songs and then re-recorded them in a pro studio with an engineer.

Oh well, at least they're back and touring again. I think there is a good chance we'll see a new studio album next year.

 

[Andrew Bunk]

I'll have to A/B them. I was going off memory, but I'm pretty familiar with the sound of the original version.

 

[Nathan Eddy]

We can go back and forth on this issue . . . I know I've seen every side presented since the CD came out, since there was a message board at Rush.com (I was Malik23). However, this album is the WORST sounding recording in my collection, by my FAVORITE band, doing their best work in 20+ years! I love VT. Surely the band must have the same love for this album, I know what it must have meant for them to come back together and make this masterpiece. So what is the problem? Why isn't there a remaster? Why is there no word from the band?

This silence and absence of a remaster must mean SOMETHING, given the fact that they are obviously not too shy to release remasters (isn't every album now remastered except VT?). So what can we conclude from this? It has to be more than them not wanting to admit that there's something wrong with VT . . . they clearly have no problem admitting that there's something wrong with albums which sounded much better than VT BEFORE remastering. So either it's a just a matter of time, or VT can't be fixed. I can't imagine any other remaster having a larger potential market than VT, given the horrible SQ and the wonderful songs. So the delay can't be due to lack of demand (relative to all their other remastered CDs).

What can we conclude from their silence and the lack of a remaster? I fear the worse: it can't be fixed. This REALLY pisses me off. I'm not sure who to be mad at, but I'm pissed all the same. Maybe I'm pissed at Rush and I just don't want to admit it.

Rerecord it, Rush! You can go back to your "roots" and record a bunch of cover tunes from the 60s, so why can't you go back and record your best album since the 80s?!? Grrrrr! I just hope the new album is as good and is recorded properly. At least the last two tours have been kick-ass.

 

[Paul.S]

Nice post, Nathan--enjoyed reading your comments. -p

 

[Kevin C Brown]

Somebody previously did state that the mix on the lp is better. Maybe not as good as we'd all like, but still better than the CD.

 

[Nathan Eddy]

So any word on the remaster? It was listed on the Atlantic site as an item you could pre-order. But now I've read on Power Windows that Atlantic has delayed the expected June release. Does anyone know more?

 

[ElevSkyMovie]

From a rush fan site:

 

[Jeff Ulmer]

Is Atlantic offering a free replacement for this obviously defective first release?

 

[Jeff Ulmer]

That they know that the orignal release was screwed up, and by releasing a remaster this soon it would be admitting that fact.

 

[TheLongshot]

Just because you don't like the way it was mastered, does not mean it was "defective". Obviously, the way they released it was as intended by the record company.

I'll take a "wait and see" approach to see if this comes out, and if it is signifigantly better than what was released.

Jason

 

[Jeff Ulmer]

Sorry, but the original release IS defective. This isn't a subjective observation, it is a glaring technical fault. When you can't play a CD without audible digital distortion, there is a defect. That this defect can be proven by those of us with professional analysis equipment at our disposal is further evidence. This should have been recalled from the beginning.

 

[TheLongshot]

The fact that you need professional equipment to prove your point, makes my point. Maybe it is because I don't have golden ears, but I don't have a problem listening to Vapor Trails. Could things sound better? Perhaps. It does seem to be a victim of mush mixing, which isn't unique to this album, but I still like listening to the songs, and it still a lot more listenable than a few CDs in my collection.

Anyways, I don't think the record company is going to see it your way. A defect is a glitch in the process in getting out the product. I don't think that's the case here. I certainly think this is what the record company wanted to release. A poor mix? Probably. But a defect? probably not in their view.

Jason

 

[Paul.S]

Jason, pray tell what CDs from major artists do you have that sound worse than VT? (I want to be sure to avoid them!)

-p