Rush "Hemispheres" (40th Anniversary Box Set with 5.1 Blu-Ray Audio!)

[edisonbaggins]

Damn, a glaring inaccuracy in Rob Bowman's essay: "2112, released in April 1976, was the first Rush album to contain a side-long suite."
Now look, I know 2112 was the breakthrough, and that's where the anniversary sets start, but has Bowman ever listened to Caress of Steel? The Fountain of Lamneth is Rush's first side-long suite, released in 1975.

 

[GOS]

I just listened to the bonus, live concert stuff....and....the sound is like an old concert...so, don't think I'll be playing that again.
Anyway, never cared for audio from concerts...as you really had to be there. Concerts without the video is quite boring to me.

 

[Clint Eastwood]

I remember saying similar when I listened to Fly By Night. I admit my expectations were high following Wilson's work on Farewell To Kings.....but it is what it is. I have zero historical feelings about Rich as I didn't even know who he was until all the chatter on this release. Similar to Fly BN, I often get the feelings that Peart just sounds like he's in a box. I didn't get that feeling whatsoever with Farewell. I can't help but compare the two, doesn't mean anyone should...but I do. Had Farewell never came out as it did...would I have the same feelings? Probably not, but no way for me to know. I played the vinyl yesterday from this set and it just sounds spectacular. I suspect the stereo on the blu sounds just as wonderful and maybe better for obvious reasons. When I play the 5.1, I feel like something is lost (compared to the stunning stereo). I guess I expect more from a 5.1. And, I really do cringe when I hear the moog and Alex's guitar so loud in some of the solos. I love guitar just as much as the next guy and for the record...I'm a huge Rush fan......but that damn guitar. I promise you, I turn it down when it hits...it's just like shattered glass to my ears. Yes, I love to play music loud and I do all the time, but I want it all in balance.

I'm still not going to vote yet as I haven't played it all the way through in one setting yet. That tells me something right there...I keep playing White album...and well..last night I needed some smooth, quad and I played Art Garfunkel...front to back. That also tells me something.

I'm glad that some on here that really love this album are pleased...but I'm feeling the same as you on the overall feeling of this title...it just lacks something that Farewell had...an intangible quality...and to be candid...I wasn't in love with Farewell as an album either...so both of these titles hold the same place for me...and thinking about how I feel about Hemispheres...leads me back to the Sgt. Peppers release....I was so enamored with the content that the flaws didn't really matter to me...to me content is EVERYTHING...there is nothing more important...even after the White Album...as good as it sounds...which is better than Pepper...I still prefer Pepper...again...content is everything to me...I've got enough "demo" discs in my collection and I no longer need to bring friends around to impress them....

When you "love" an album you look for the positives and downplay the negatives...in this release there aren't any obvious negatives...no real "blunders" that I could detect...it checks off most of the wish list...but although there are the so called "discrete" moments..IMO... even though they exist...they don't serve the listener...at least it didn't work for me..they seemed at times awkward...instead of a "wow" moment..I got a WTF moment.....I agree with Ryan about this being Rich's best effort..and IMO the fidelity elevates this title...not the mix...I think a previous statement about serviceable is a great description of the mix...

Although there are differences in systems and listening environments...in this case I don't think that is going to be an issue...because the fidelity is good enough to satisfy the $500 or $500,000 home setup...so in searching for wisdom in a situation like this...I look for a higher source...a fountain of wisdom to formulate my conclusions...so I thought instead of Confucius or Einstein...I thought a member's philosophy might work here...I'm paraphrasing skherbeck.....if someone heard Hemispheres in surround....would it be good enough to convince them to upgrade their home system from stereo to surround capability....since this is his mantra...I'll let him answer that question when he hears Hemispheres

 

[edisonbaggins]

...If someone heard Hemispheres in surround....would it be good enough to convince them to upgrade their home system from stereo to surround capability...

On the strength of La Villa Strangiato, yes. The caveat being, you can put on Steven Wilson's or Elliott Scheiner's greatest mix and it won't convince some.

 

[GOS]

On the strength of La Villa Strangiato, yes. The caveat being, you can put on Steven Wilson's or Elliott Scheiner's greatest mix and it won't convince some.

I admit, that particular song (to my ears) sounds very, very good. Peart's drums even do a bit of wrapping.....I noted that last night. I just didn't get that sensation nearly as much on other tunes.

The good thing about all this is.....I have always loved Hemispheres and once I get the stereo ripped...I'll have both 5.1 and 2.0 on my NAS and I can enjoy either one...at my fingertips. I truly do LOVE the 2.0, it sounds just amazing!!! Did I say it rocks? Well, it does.

 

[edisonbaggins]

Wow, I actually think this is my first time seeing this La Villa promo video!

 

[edisonbaggins]

Speaking of promo videos, they created NONE for Permanent Waves. We'll see what they offer up for extras...

 

[edisonbaggins]

Hmmm... Listened to the title track tonight at "reference volume" (db meter averaged 75).
In DTS HD Master, Armageddon lead guitar overdub buried, almost missing. Upper register vocal often buried (loses competition with guitars).
Switched to Dolby True HD. Guitar overdub emerges and vocal much more distinct.
My interpretation is that the surrounds are better balanced in Dolby True HD (the overdub sits mostly in the surrounds, which also feature some vocal effects).
At reference volume, in DTS, my rating is probably something like a 7. In Dolby True HD more like a 9. Maybe 10. It's punchy as hell. Toms do actually have decent wrap too. Not jumping out 3/4 of the way in to the room, but they don't exactly hug the front wall. More listens needed.

 

[4-earredwonder]

Hmmm... Listened to the title track tonight at "reference volume" (db meter averaged 75).
In DTS HD Master, Armageddon lead guitar overdub buried, almost missing. Upper register vocal often buried (loses competition with guitars).
Switched to Dolby True HD. Guitar overdub emerges and vocal much more distinct.
My interpretation is that the surrounds are better balanced in Dolby True HD (the overdub sits mostly in the surrounds, which also feature some vocal effects).
At reference volume, in DTS, my rating is probably something like a 7. In Dolby True HD more like a 9. Maybe 10. It's punchy as hell. Toms do actually have decent wrap too. Not jumping out 3/4 of the way in to the room, but they don't exactly hug the front wall. More listens needed.

Glad you're enjoying it, Mike, and a BIG WELCOME HOME.

One must remember that Dolby True HD is MLP DVD~A's twin bro [or sister] and those who love MLP DVD~A [like myself] have found that the Dolby True HD codec is better on a lot of current remasters [like, IMO,The White Album].

 

[himey]

Glad you're enjoying it, Mike, and a BIG WELCOME HOME.

One must remember that Dolby True HD is MLP DVD~A's twin bro [or sister] and those who love MLP DVD~A [like myself] have found that the Dolby True HD codec is better on a lot of current remasters [like, IMO,The White Album].

Is it the codec or the machine implementing it. The information should be the same going in.

 

[4-earredwonder]

Is it the codec or the machine implementing it. The information should be the same going in.

Himey, what Mike describes may be a mastering variation. I wonder if LPCM was likewise offered if it would be different than either DOLBY or DTS Lossless? Perhaps one of the QQ posters involved 'in the process' [i.e.Neil Wilkes] could chime in and clarify?

I've also noted similar 'variations' in reviews of BD~V discs where the reviewer chooses one codec over the other as his/her preference.

 

[himey]

Himey, what Mike describes may be a mastering variation. I wonder if LPCM was likewise offered if it would be different than either DOLBY or DTS Lossless? Perhaps one of the QQ posters involved 'in the process' could chime in and clarify?

Rip, uncompress, and compare the two wavs. I would be surprised if they are any different. Time is money and mastering takes time?

 

[4-earredwonder]

Rip, uncompress, and compare the two wavs. I would be surprised if they are any different. Time is money and mastering takes time?

I know a few QQ reviews alluded to the fact that The White Album's Dolby True HD codec is encoded at a lower level than the DTS MA codec. What would you make of that?

 

[himey]

I know a few QQ reviews alluded to the fact that The White Album's Dolby True HD codec is encoded at a lower level than the DTS MA codec. What would you make of that?

I wouldn't make anything out of it without comparing the two wavs. The variables are the player/players and the settings. Dolby volume, night mode, compression settings ect.

 

[4-earredwonder]

I wouldn't make anything out of it without comparing the two wavs. The variables are the player/players and the settings. Dolby volume, night mode, compression settings ect.

I don't have the RUSH Hemispheres set so I personally cannot comment on the differences but trust Mike's [edisonbaggins'] ears as he is a musician and his perceived differences between the two codecs, IMO, are hardly subtle.

There has to be an explanation that we CANNOT resolve as we're not involved in the mastering/authoring of BD~As.

 

[himey]

I don't have the RUSH Hemispheres set so I personally cannot comment on the differences but trust Mike's [edisonbaggins'] ears as he is a musician and his perceived differences between the two codecs, IMO, are hardly subtle.

There has to be an explanation that we CANNOT resolve as we're not involved in the mastering/authoring of BD~As.

Yes, the simple explanation lies within the two ripped wav files. They are either the same or different. I seriously haven't seen much talk about the formats until this last batch. Someone also swears the PCM tracks on Ladyland sound better than the dtsma. It remains just a preference until the scientific data is in the way I look at it. I have never gotten caught up in that. When I have read about others about the subject, it usually turns out to be a setting or set up issue of some sort. I rip to FLAC and discs rarely spin in the Oppo so no Dolby or DTS lossless.

 

[4-earredwonder]

Yes, the simple explanation lies within the two ripped wav files. They are either the same or different. I seriously haven't seen much talk about the formats until this last batch. Someone also swears the PCM tracks on Ladyland sound better than the dtsma. It remains just a preference until the scientific data is in the way I look at it. I have never gotten caught up in that. When I have read about others about the subject, it usually turns out to be a setting or set up issue of some sort. I rip to FLAC and discs rarely spin in the Oppo so no Dolby or DTS lossless.

#355
Hmmm... Listened to the title track tonight at "reference volume" (db meter averaged 75).
In DTS HD Master, Armageddon lead guitar overdub buried, almost missing. Upper register vocal often buried (loses competition with guitars).
Switched to Dolby True HD. Guitar overdub emerges and vocal much more distinct.
My interpretation is that the surrounds are better balanced in Dolby True HD (the overdub sits mostly in the surrounds, which also feature some vocal effects).
At reference volume, in DTS, my rating is probably something like a 7. In Dolby True HD more like a 9. Maybe 10. It's punchy as hell. Toms do actually have decent wrap too. Not jumping out 3/4 of the way in to the room, but they don't exactly hug the front wall. More listens needed.

Himey, what struck me about Mike's analysis of the two codecs was the actual placement of instruments and vocals within the 5.1 remix......why would they appear to be SO different? That's THE question? And correct me if I'm wrong...but even though you're ripping to FLAC, those SAME variations would appear on the ripped files if you chose one codec over the other. So I'm sure some care would have to be taken to ensure you've ripped the 'preferred' codec to FLAC instead of 'assuming' they both sound the same.

 

[himey]

#355
Hmmm... Listened to the title track tonight at "reference volume" (db meter averaged 75).
In DTS HD Master, Armageddon lead guitar overdub buried, almost missing. Upper register vocal often buried (loses competition with guitars).
Switched to Dolby True HD. Guitar overdub emerges and vocal much more distinct.
My interpretation is that the surrounds are better balanced in Dolby True HD (the overdub sits mostly in the surrounds, which also feature some vocal effects).
At reference volume, in DTS, my rating is probably something like a 7. In Dolby True HD more like a 9. Maybe 10. It's punchy as hell. Toms do actually have decent wrap too. Not jumping out 3/4 of the way in to the room, but they don't exactly hug the front wall. More listens needed.

Himey, what struck me about Mike's analysis of the two codecs was the actual placement of instruments and vocals within the 5.1 remix......why would they appear to be SO different? That's THE question?

I will be sure to rip both once I get it.

 

[4-earredwonder]

I will be sure to rip both once I get it.

BTW, I would very much like YOUR personal assessment of BOTH codecs. I don't plan to buy Hemispheres.

 

[himey]

BTW, I would very much like YOUR personal assessment of BOTH codecs. I don't plan to buy Hemispheres.

If it was SW mixing again I would have already picked it up! Not in any hurry now but it is my favorite Rush album.