HiRez Poll King Crimson - Red [DVD-Audio/Blu-Ray Audio]

[Clint Eastwood]

Hey hey hey..let's not be too hasty here...I understand a low vote...the thing is that there's a HUGE chance of hirez changing her/his opinion .....I could be wrong , it could take a loooooong time....

Hey Kap'n...I don't understand what you mean about changing their opinion..."splain it me"

 

[timbre4]

Everyone will always have the right to their opinion. The thing to keep in mind on the voting is that a low score IMPACTS the rating average. Let's move on please for future readers sakes.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[edisonbaggins]

Gull dern, this album kicks so much @$$!!!
Powerful and clear. Active, but not gimmicky.
Nifty extras. I'm enjoying the alternate versions.

 

[edisonbaggins]

Ended up going with a solid 9 on this one. It's not quite as crankable as I'd like, though I appreciate it keeps its balls.
I don't always love the vocals, but they aren't bad and suit the material. I looooooove the drums spread all around me!
I also think the violin sounds killer on this record. A stand-out feature.
If we weren't being treated to the amazing mixes we are lately this would easily be a 10.

 

[ssully]

FWIW: the BluRay Wilson 5.1 mix of 'Red' (from the boxed set) is, both objectively (measurement of the waveforms) and subjectively, notably different from the DVD-A -- it has either been EQ'd differently or otherwise processed differently. (I doubt it has been literally remixed....)


<strike>The DVD-A has more bass , and therefore more 'impact', but it's muddier too. The BluRay version is leaner but can be cranked higher.</strike>


I was not expecting them to be different. But they are.

EDIT: This is what happens when I respond without my notes in front of me. Strikethrough doesn't work (mods? can this be enabled?), see next post

 

[ssully]

FWIW: the BluRay Wilson 5.1 mix of 'Red' (from the boxed set) is, both objectively (measurement of the waveforms) and subjectively, notably different from the DVD-A -- it has either been EQ'd differently or otherwise processed differently. (I doubt it has been literally remixed....)


<strike>The DVD-A has more bass , and therefore more 'impact', but it's muddier too. The BluRay version is leaner but can be cranked higher.</strike>


I was not expecting them to be different. But they are.

EDIT: This is what happens when I respond without my notes in front of me. Strikethrough doesn't work (mods? can this be enabled?), see next post

Here's the actual case. The Bluray front left and right channels , and LFE channel, have been re-balanced. There's now louder bass in the LFE channel of the NEWER release (the BluRay). Also, the overall level of of the front Left and Right channels is reduced by ~0.4 dB across the audible frequency range (this is interesting, though not necessarily audible when you're being bombarded with multichannel sound) Surround channels were unchanged (I think that's true of center too, but I'd have to re-check).

Here's a plot of frequency response raw data from the LFE channel of the title track, derived from rips of the old (DVD-A) and new (BluRay) 6-channel releases. Log frequency is at top (I only plotted LFE to 500Hz, so the curves stop before 1 kHz), level (dBFS) is on y-axis. The levels start to diverge around 45Hz, which is possibly where the actual musical content (bass and bass drum) starts. And above 80 Hz or so , the new/old difference (the space between the red and blue lines) is a fairly consistent ~18 dB. The levels themselves are still all low (even the peak level of the new LFE, around 80Hz, is about -40dbFS) so these differences don't *sound* gigantic, but they are audible.

Whether the DVD-A or the BluRay sounds more or less impactful or lean is actually going to depend on how your system is set up. If your crossover is set to 80 Hz, and the slope is steep, the main objective difference between old and new will be the increased output from around 45Hz to 100 Hz from your sub, from the newer version.

 

[Juggsnelson]

Still working my way through the Crimson catalog in depth! I listened to the lossless 5.1 DVD-A. I really like this one. Experimental for sure but a few more mainstream sounding bits as well. A nice balance and I have always loved Wetton's voice. The surround mix is killer of course! The trio versions are excellent too. Just great stuff. A 10 from me.

 

[WBP]

I'm gonna go for an 8 on this one - another great KC album for sure but the mix not quite as good as some other Crimson titles imo, gradually picking up all the KC 5.1's - Starless next..

 

[Mj33]

This is an amazing surround mix. The extras are incredible, especially the video. Wow! Just a well oiled machine at this point. Awesome to see this band at the height of their power.

 

[Beefalo]

You lost me with TPDF

Sounds like someting from an old Star Trek episode, or a feature on a Carver amplifer.

 

[jefe1]

Hey Carver. My old system. I had a lower level amp TFM 25 with meters and a preamp with sonic holography. Cant run it anymore keeps going into protection default shutdown every time I power it up..... But Red can do that.

 

[anibal]

When I first heard this DVD-A, 14 years ago, It really felt like a perfect 10, even an 11

Now I am older, I have a better audio setup, and I have come to know a lot more music and surround mixes. Now I think there is room for improvement in the sonics, but It would be like a 9.5 so it is still a rounded 10.

Musically, I think it is a perfect album, 4 amazing songs and a nice impro. This is definitely the most accessible Wetton-era record, but in a good way, I would not categorize it as "commercial".

The surround mix is very faithful to the stereo mix, it really opens up the album tastefully without being gimmicky. The trio version of Fallen Angel is fantastic, there are a lot of details I can not appreciate in the full mix. This leads me to my only complaint, I think the surround mix is "too faithful" to the original, including the compressed feeling. The full version of Fallen Angel sounds congested, like there is not enough space even in 5.1 for all the stuff that is happening, I can hardly hear the snare in some passages. I would also like the voice to be less prominent in the mix (again, the 5.1 is consistent with the original mix).

I have not heard the blu-ray version, I read there is a difference in mastering so maybe it sound less compressed. But I will wait for a potential atmos version to buy this album _again_

 

[anibal]

When I first heard this DVD-A, 14 years ago, It really felt like a perfect 10, even an 11

Now I am older, I have a better audio setup, and I have come to know a lot more music and surround mixes. Now I think there is room for improvement in the sonics, but It would be like a 9.5 so it is still a rounded 10.

Musically, I think it is a perfect album, 4 amazing songs and a nice impro. This is definitely the most accessible Wetton-era record, but in a good way, I would not categorize it as "commercial".

The surround mix is very faithful to the stereo mix, it really opens up the album tastefully without being gimmicky. The trio version of Fallen Angel is fantastic, there are a lot of details I can not appreciate in the full mix. This leads me to my only complaint, I think the surround mix is "too faithful" to the original, including the compressed feeling. The full version of Fallen Angel sounds congested, like there is not enough space even in 5.1 for all the stuff that is happening, I can hardly hear the snare in some passages. I would also like the voice to be less prominent in the mix (again, the 5.1 is consistent with the original mix).

I have not heard the blu-ray version, I read there is a difference in mastering so maybe it sound less compressed. But I will wait for a potential atmos version to buy this album _again_

I forgot to mention:
The surround version of Providence is infinitely more fun than the stereo counterpart, since you can hear everything that is going on more clearly and there is a natural change of focus that corresponds with the speaker placement.

 

[Degrundt]

Balancing between 8 and 9... First track Red was slightly disapointing even in MLP surround. But to be totally honest, i've always thought that this track sounded "weak" and deserved more power. Starless and surround extras (and Red trio mix) + video archives have finishing to extend my vote to 9.