Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Ten Year War

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • AlexBarghest
    replied
    Originally posted by OzzyIsDio View Post
    Hi Alex hope you're well, did your Ten Year War Box, come with the number on a sheet that was glued to the back, where it detaches easily and falls off?


    Kind of cheaply done instead of being permanently affixed to the box?
    Hi, OID, thanks, I'm fine, hope you're well too. Yupp, it is like that. But I think this pattern is used for a lot of boxes these days, alas.

    Leave a comment:


  • OzzyIsDio
    replied
    Originally posted by AlexBarghest View Post
    Got my "The Ten Year War" box at last... So, where's the whole new experience should come from? I've crosschecked it with the versions from "The Vinyl Collection 1970-1978" from 2012, which came with download codes in MP3. Sorry to say, but this MQA hyped variant uses the identical source! In Adobe Audition files look like identical twins. I have quite good headphones and both variants DO sound the same in foobar2000, MQA or no MQA. Hands down. I must admit, I don't own any MQA converting device so far, just ordered DAC with one for my PC, but if the source looks identical, how could it sound any different. I've listened closely to MQA version of the 1st albumr, and there're enough places with obvious distortion/clipping. You might not notice it, when listening on acoustic systems, but in headphones these spots are pretty evident. And yes, they are absolutely identical to the imperfections of "The Vinyl Collection 1970-1978" MP3s. To me it's just a rehash of "The Vinyl Collection 1970-1978". I know this box was limited, just like "The Ten Year War" , but still. They should have been more open about remaster sources.
    Hi Alex hope you're well, did your Ten Year War Box, come with the number on a sheet that was glued to the back, where it detaches easily and falls off?


    Kind of cheaply done instead of being permanently affixed to the box?

    Leave a comment:


  • AlexBarghest
    replied
    Originally posted by IRON-MaN View Post
    Alex , I would also recommend you skip comparing the first 3 albums (those were sonic-ally incredible anyway) , the real difference could be heard more on later albums like Vol.4 , SBS and Sabotage in particular , a lot of layering and instruments and which REALLY sound quite crisp and with amazing clarity on those later 2017 versions , I've just gave them both a quick spin for a few songs , those 2017 are definitely louder and clearer but still very close to those 2012 versions.
    I will listen to everything anyway But thank you for your opinion.

    Leave a comment:


  • AlexBarghest
    replied
    Originally posted by IRON-MaN View Post
    I've actually compared them to the 2012 first (cause those were the best versions I've heard till those 2017 editions, and yes , using headphones !) , they are significantly better , I'm not at expert in reading wave files , but even looking closely at those 2 versions you've sent you would notice some detailed differences between both versions , I assume the wave files looks very close cause apart from them being of the very same songs , the sources quality will be quite close for sure.
    Honestly, I don't see ANY differences, between them (left and right channels aside), let alone hearing anything. While I have at least 4 other versions of "Black Sabbath" album on CDs alone - and different remasters/digitized versions have only vague semblance with one another there. Only identical remasters/masters look this close - like for instance "Black Box" versions and "The Complete Albums 1970-1978" box, or deluxe editions from 2009 and Sanctuary LP+CD reissues and "Cross Box".

    If you have an example of audible difference, then I'd be only glad I'm wrong, but until then...

    I've read all about it before on MQA. Not convinced a single bit.

    Which equipment do you use for MQA?

    Leave a comment:


  • IRON-MaN
    replied
    Alex , I would also recommend you skip comparing the first 3 albums (those were sonic-ally incredible anyway) , the real difference could be heard more on later albums like Vol.4 , SBS and Sabotage in particular , a lot of layering and instruments and which REALLY sound quite crisp and with amazing clarity on those later 2017 versions , I've just gave them both a quick spin for a few songs , those 2017 are definitely louder and clearer but still very close to those 2012 versions.

    Leave a comment:


  • IRON-MaN
    replied
    Originally posted by AlexBarghest View Post
    To each his own. Now check this and tell me they are from different sources. Oh, and where's 2012 and where's this crispy, louder, clean and rich 2017 version

    https://yadi.sk/i/WWp4ru2R3Pq4Cv

    Have you tested both with headphones?

    I kinda avoid lossy if it's possible. MQAs are bigger, just because they have higher resolution and still they are lossy. I have worked,as an amateur of course, with audioediting for quite some time now, and if it looks like a duck, swims like a duck, and quacks like a duck, then it probably is a duck. If there would be any minimal differences in a sound wave I wouldn't argue even.

    I even can guess why they have distortion sometimes, when wave looks normally and not clipped, while distortion implies some clipping.

    I would really appreciate if you could point out any REALLY audible difference in any song between "The Ten Year War" & "The Vinyl Collection 1970-1978"
    I've actually compared them to the 2012 first (cause those were the best versions I've heard till those 2017 editions, and yes , using headphones !) , they are significantly better , I'm not at expert in reading wave files , but even looking closely at those 2 versions you've sent you would notice some detailed differences between both versions , I assume the wave files looks very close cause apart from them being of the very same songs , the sources quality will be quite close for sure.

    I thought I might be exaggerating with how good those 2017 versions sound so I've uploaded a few songs for a friend and he was quite impressed with their significant quality as well (anyone who's interested drop me a line and I will link you a couple of songs I still have uploaded on drop box).

    Also here are some links for those who are interested to watch and read more about MQA technology :

    https://www.whathifi.com/advice/mqa-...can-you-get-it
    http://www.mqa.co.uk/
    https://www.forbes.com/sites/melissa.../#7f00e5bd14fe

    P.S - To be more accurate , the digital 2012 versions from the Vinyl Box set are incredible too , those new 2017 are yet louder and bit more detailed when compared to the 2012 versions , but compared to older remastered versions (like say the Black Box) , they're SIGNIFICANTLY way better on every single aspect.
    Last edited by IRON-MaN; 11-19-2017, 07:09 AM.

    Leave a comment:


  • AlexBarghest
    replied
    Originally posted by IRON-MaN View Post
    I've wrote a review for the site here and it might up sometime soon , but till then and in brief , I totally disagree with everything you say here ! Those MQA versions of the first 8 albums are the absolute best I've ever heard ( and I do own The Vinyl Collection 1970-1978 box set as well) , they're remarkably better in every single aspect , much louder and yet more crisp , clean , rich with dynamics and you definitely hear a lot of details that weren't that audible on previous versions ! MQA is not a hype , its INCREDIBLE and its definitely the future , a few years from now I believe it will replacing all those standard MP3 formats in the market ! Size wise they're much bigger too ! They're triple the size to those of those digital downloads from 'Vinyl' box set for instance. For me , those MQA versions of the first 8 albums are worth the price a lone !
    To each his own. Now check this and tell me they are from different sources. Oh, and where's 2012 and where's this crispy, louder, clean and rich 2017 version

    https://yadi.sk/i/WWp4ru2R3Pq4Cv

    Have you tested both with headphones?

    I kinda avoid lossy if it's possible. MQAs are bigger, just because they have higher resolution and still they are lossy. I have worked,as an amateur of course, with audioediting for quite some time now, and if it looks like a duck, swims like a duck, and quacks like a duck, then it probably is a duck. If there would be any minimal differences in a sound wave I wouldn't argue even.

    I even can guess why they have distortion sometimes, when wave looks normally and not clipped, while distortion implies some clipping.

    I would really appreciate if you could point out any REALLY audible difference in any song between "The Ten Year War" & "The Vinyl Collection 1970-1978"
    Last edited by AlexBarghest; 11-19-2017, 06:43 AM.

    Leave a comment:


  • IRON-MaN
    replied
    Originally posted by AlexBarghest View Post
    Got my "The Ten Year War" box at last... So, where's the whole new experience should come from? I've crosschecked it with the versions from "The Vinyl Collection 1970-1978" from 2012, which came with download codes in MP3. Sorry to say, but this MQA hyped variant uses the identical source! In Adobe Audition files look like identical twins. I have quite good headphones and both variants DO sound the same in foobar2000, MQA or no MQA. Hands down. I must admit, I don't own any MQA converting device so far, just ordered DAC with one for my PC, but if the source looks identical, how could it sound any different. I've listened closely to MQA version of the 1st albumr, and there're enough places with obvious distortion/clipping. You might not notice it, when listening on acoustic systems, but in headphones these spots are pretty evident. And yes, they are absolutely identical to the imperfections of "The Vinyl Collection 1970-1978" MP3s. To me it's just a rehash of "The Vinyl Collection 1970-1978". I know this box was limited, just like "The Ten Year War" , but still. They should have been more open about remaster sources.
    I've wrote a review for the site here and it might up sometime soon , but till then and in brief , I totally disagree with everything you say here ! Those MQA versions of the first 8 albums are the absolute best I've ever heard ( and I do own The Vinyl Collection 1970-1978 box set as well) , they're remarkably better in every single aspect , much louder and yet more crisp , clean , rich with dynamics and you definitely hear a lot of details that weren't that audible on previous versions ! MQA is not a hype , its INCREDIBLE and its definitely the future , a few years from now I believe it will replacing all those standard MP3 formats in the market ! Size wise they're much bigger too ! They're triple the size to those of those digital downloads from 'Vinyl' box set for instance. For me , those MQA versions of the first 8 albums are worth the price a lone !
    Last edited by IRON-MaN; 11-19-2017, 06:14 AM.

    Leave a comment:


  • Billy Underdog
    replied
    Seems like the biggest difference is the "Collection" only had Evil Woman/Wicked World on 7", whereas 10 yr War have two; Evil Woman/Black Sabbath and Paranoid/The Wizard? And a cross-shaped USB stick and some booklets, hardback book and a consert poster...

    Leave a comment:


  • AlexBarghest
    replied
    Got my "The Ten Year War" box at last... So, where's the whole new experience should come from? I've crosschecked it with the versions from "The Vinyl Collection 1970-1978" from 2012, which came with download codes in MP3. Sorry to say, but this MQA hyped variant uses the identical source! In Adobe Audition files look like identical twins. I have quite good headphones and both variants DO sound the same in foobar2000, MQA or no MQA. Hands down. I must admit, I don't own any MQA converting device so far, just ordered DAC with one for my PC, but if the source looks identical, how could it sound any different. I've listened closely to MQA version of the 1st albumr, and there're enough places with obvious distortion/clipping. You might not notice it, when listening on acoustic systems, but in headphones these spots are pretty evident. And yes, they are absolutely identical to the imperfections of "The Vinyl Collection 1970-1978" MP3s. To me it's just a rehash of "The Vinyl Collection 1970-1978". I know this box was limited, just like "The Ten Year War" , but still. They should have been more open about remaster sources.

    Leave a comment:


  • BACK TO EDEN
    replied
    ^^^^ Hope your well my brother ,,,, on "Ultra" high end , state of the listening art , neutrally acoustic - room's and sound system's .... Black Sabbath (all 27) are absolutely astounding - YES even "Born Again" ,,,, Sabbath on Vinyl (from MANY of a source) , through 'true' tube high end , with sensitive "transducers" / speakers , has no peer , Sabbath has NEVER sounded better ..... very few exceptions exist -


    "Heaven n Hell" on SACD - only through state of the SACD art , otherwise will sound compressed , muddy and or bright - is absolutely breathtaking!

    "7th Star" on Reel-to-Reel - astounding!

    "Mob Rules" and "Iommi" on CD (from MANY of a source) / 176.4 and 352.8 - vinyl can't touch this , stop on a dime speed is beyond words.


    The world of Sabbath in State of the Art , is beyond comprehension awesome (and I highly doubt anyone in Sabbath has heard it properly themselves) .... great stuff!
    Last edited by BACK TO EDEN; 10-07-2017, 06:35 PM. Reason: GOD BLESS

    Leave a comment:


  • IRON-MaN
    replied
    Originally posted by Jeff View Post
    I agree completely. Those first three are sonic masterpieces, IMO. The first two, especially. I love MoR, but the drums were maybe a bit too padded and boxy in comparison. Vol. 4 solved that but had issues of its own. I think Iommi produced that album at the end of the day and it's all over the map. "Snowblind" is one of the best produced Sabbath tracks, IMO. Whereas "Wheels On Confusion" (adore it as I do) I can see why some people find it a muddy mess.

    Sabotage is maybe the best production, for my money. I think Iommi and Mike Butcher worked so hard on that and it shows. Apparently WB even had a Quad mix at one time as there is an old catalog I've seen posted on the net that shows it on a list of upcoming releases (obviously that never transpired).

    Sabbath on analog vinyl is (IMO) untouchable. I hope Sabbath work out a deal one day with a company like MFSL or Analogue Productions to have limited edition pressings that are AAA and never touch a computer. Probably what they'd want to license out the catalog would blow the deal with those boutique companies. Although MFSL is now owned by Music Direct and have been doing other stuff that I would assume is super expensive to license actual analog tapes for these days like Miles Davis, Derek and The Dominoes, etc.
    I think although MOR is a bit raw it came a bit flat compared to the first 2 (partly due to down tuning a step and half down to C#) , but even Tony wasn't happy with the end product and thus deciding to take over production for the rest of the Ozzy era albums at the time ! Although Vol.4 is a brilliant album and had Sabbath experimenting and expanding their sound , I believe the mixing wasn't spot on as the first 3 (in particular Geezer's bass) , also Geezer had his Fender's neck destroyed on tour by Canadian customs on tour and had to go for a Dan Armstrong as a replacement (long story) , but anyway it just didn't sound that great on the record and even Geezer said its probably his worst tone on any Sabbath album ! SBS was definitely a step up but I guess Tony's masterpiece from a pure production prospect should definitely be 'Sabotage' , in my humble opinion it captures the rawness and power of the first 3 while consistently maintains the experimentation direction from Vol.4 and SBS , also Geezer's bass sounds better the mix although it wasn't until Martin Birch took on the helms on H&H and Mob Rules till Geezer's bass was perfectly nailed in the classic sound mix.

    I personally find it quite funny how Tony NEVER gets properly asked on any of his interviews on his venture as producer with Sabbath ! He isn't Jimmy Page when it comes to production but he arguably did a brilliant job on many Sabbath records that I would personally argue to be not only Sabbath's finest hours , but arguably the greatest rock records made by anyone EVER ! (Sabotage and SBS to be quite specific).

    Leave a comment:


  • Jeff
    replied
    Originally posted by IRON-MaN View Post
    Yeah I'm much looking forward for those new versions as well ! The 2012 indeed weren't compressed (and thus maintained those beautiful dynamics and details of the original records) , I'm quite interested to know what other people here think comparing other remastered versions as well ! One thing I've noticed for sure , hearing those classic Sabbath records on a high quality sound system could be a whole different experience all together ! One of my friends got a high end Klipsch home theater and I got to play some of those records ... I can't even describe the beauty and the warmth of the sound you get from such brillaint sound system ! I think many fans overlook Rodger Bain masterpiece of mixing and production on the first 3 (Black Sabbath & Paranoid in particular) , almost 50 years ago and they still totally blow anything on todays digital age.If anyone already got there hands on those new 'Ten Years' box set , please let us know your thoughts on those digital downloads !
    I agree completely. Those first three are sonic masterpieces, IMO. The first two, especially. I love MoR, but the drums were maybe a bit too padded and boxy in comparison. Vol. 4 solved that but had issues of its own. I think Iommi produced that album at the end of the day and it's all over the map. "Snowblind" is one of the best produced Sabbath tracks, IMO. Whereas "Wheels On Confusion" (adore it as I do) I can see why some people find it a muddy mess.

    Sabotage is maybe the best production, for my money. I think Iommi and Mike Butcher worked so hard on that and it shows. Apparently WB even had a Quad mix at one time as there is an old catalog I've seen posted on the net that shows it on a list of upcoming releases (obviously that never transpired).

    Sabbath on analog vinyl is (IMO) untouchable. I hope Sabbath work out a deal one day with a company like MFSL or Analogue Productions to have limited edition pressings that are AAA and never touch a computer. Probably what they'd want to license out the catalog would blow the deal with those boutique companies. Although MFSL is now owned by Music Direct and have been doing other stuff that I would assume is super expensive to license actual analog tapes for these days like Miles Davis, Derek and The Dominoes, etc.
    Last edited by Jeff; 10-05-2017, 03:54 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • IRON-MaN
    replied
    Originally posted by Jeff View Post
    The 2012 downloads are dynamic, for sure. But IMO they are WAY too crisp. Sure, when you add that much treble you hear more "detail," but it's at the expense of overall tonality and warmth.

    I do agree they are better than some other remasters, but I am hopeful that these will exceed what was offered there. That much top end boosting wears on your ears after extended listening, IMO. But al least they weren't compressed. From what I've read it sounds like these won't be either, which is great!

    Ymmv.
    Yeah I'm much looking forward for those new versions as well ! The 2012 indeed weren't compressed (and thus maintained those beautiful dynamics and details of the original records) , I'm quite interested to know what other people here think comparing other remastered versions as well ! One thing I've noticed for sure , hearing those classic Sabbath records on a high quality sound system could be a whole different experience all together ! One of my friends got a high end Klipsch home theater and I got to play some of those records ... I can't even describe the beauty and the warmth of the sound you get from such brillaint sound system ! I think many fans overlook Rodger Bain masterpiece of mixing and production on the first 3 (Black Sabbath & Paranoid in particular) , almost 50 years ago and they still totally blow anything on todays digital age.If anyone already got there hands on those new 'Ten Years' box set , please let us know your thoughts on those digital downloads !

    Leave a comment:


  • Jeff
    replied
    Originally posted by IRON-MaN View Post
    You must be kidding ! Those remasters are ahead a shoulder above any other remasters I own (crisp sound with lots of dynamics and you can literally hear a lot of details that weren't that audible on earlier versions !) , fingers crossed those new ones on 'Ten Years War' box set would be even better !
    The 2012 downloads are dynamic, for sure. But IMO they are WAY too crisp. Sure, when you add that much treble you hear more "detail," but it's at the expense of overall tonality and warmth.

    I do agree they are better than some other remasters, but I am hopeful that these will exceed what was offered there. That much top end boosting wears on your ears after extended listening, IMO. But al least they weren't compressed. From what I've read it sounds like these won't be either, which is great!

    Ymmv.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X