Uploaded this into Apple Music last night, and listened to the album presentation early this morning while stockpiling groceries.
Man, is that a snappy album! Though I do wish that Jerry had not had the tendency to end the score suite with a quiet number before the big finish. I really love the way actual score builds and builds and suddenly gets so much more upbeat.
But who am I kidding - as others say, this is one of his best albums ever.
Glad you’re enjoying it. How’s Apple Music compare to iTunes in terms of ripping cds and listening to non-downloaded stuff? I still haven’t upgraded after reading some complaints.
Works for me, and I'm on PC. Just the same as when I was carrying 3 iPods around as recently as a year ago, and one of them turned into a brick. And I finally said, why the hell don't you just upload?
Tried Google Play and Amazon Music, but their interfaces were poor compared to Apple.
Took four days to automatically upload my existing library (and no, not everything loaded, but given that it was so huge, who cares). Works beautifully now, and I listen happily on my Samsung Galaxy S9 through my Samsung earbuds. And to the whole Apple library. (Though I'm still on Spotify as well, everybody has some different stuff.)
And now I've got 2 different versions of The Swarm at my fingertips whenever I want them. It's the most wonderful time of the year!
Uploaded this into Apple Music last night, and listened to the album presentation early this morning while stockpiling groceries.
Man, is that a snappy album! Though I do wish that Jerry had not had the tendency to end the score suite with a quiet number before the big finish. I really love the way actual score builds and builds and suddenly gets so much more upbeat.
But who am I kidding - as others say, this is one of his best albums ever.
Glad you’re enjoying it. How’s Apple Music compare to iTunes in terms of ripping cds and listening to non-downloaded stuff? I still haven’t upgraded after reading some complaints.
I've had no problems. I just put The Swarm on my Ipod.
I have tried to keep up with the technical gobbly-gook, but am failing.
I can hear the difference between the Prometheus "Blow Out" and the Intrada edition. I can hear the difference in the first Intrada release of "Dressed to Kill" from the second (the second is superior!) I can hear the distinct difference in LLL's The Towering Inferno from FSM (highly upgraded)
So my question is this - I did not like the compressed sound of the Prometheus release; Will the LLL release sound more like a sound scape and with a sharper, crisper full tone? In this case the answer is usually yes...but this MQA stuff has me concerned.
I have tried to keep up with the technical gobbly-gook, but am failing.
I can hear the difference between the Prometheus "Blow Out" and the Intrada edition. I can hear the difference in the first Intrada release of "Dressed to Kill" from the second (the second is superior!) I can hear the distinct difference in LLL's The Towering Inferno from FSM (highly upgraded)
So my question is this - I did not like the compressed sound of the Prometheus release; Will the LLL release sound more like a sound scape and with a sharper, crisper full tone? In this case the answer is usually yes...but this MQA stuff has me concerned.
Thank you in advance.
It absolutely sounds better than the Prometheus edition, no question about it.
I am personally responsible for the use of Jerry's "Swarm" score in this Wu-Tang Clan video:
I told Brett Ratner about it circa 1998-99, who directed the video, and who I had met at a scoring session for one of his films. (I even bought a copy of the LP at Disc-Connection to give him.)
I later saw Goldsmith at a reception for his Pasadena Pops concert and he grumbled, "I hear you're making me famous, Lukas." Nick Redman joked, "Well, somebody's got to" and Jerry gave him a stink-eye.
I am personally responsible for the use of Jerry's "Swarm" score in this Wu-Tang Clan video:
I told Brett Ratner about it circa 1998-99, who directed the video, and who I had met at a scoring session for one of his films. (I even bought a copy of the LP at Disc-Connection to give him.)
I later saw Goldsmith at a reception for his Pasadena Pops concert and he grumbled, "I hear you're making me famous, Lukas." Nick Redman joked, "Well, somebody's got to" and Jerry gave him a stink-eye.
I received the new CD for The Swarm a week ago. Once again a top notch production from LLL and team!
I hope the label will continue to explore the "Fantasy Words of Irwin Allen"! I know there are plans for Voyage to the Bottom of the Sea. I also hope we will finally see a release for LaSalle's great score for the TV Movie City Beneath the Sea. Long years ago there was a member here (I think Thomas Scofield) who said he had a copy of the recordings, possibly from the composer himself. So the recordings seems to be available.
I am personally responsible for the use of Jerry's "Swarm" score in this Wu-Tang Clan video:
I told Brett Ratner about it circa 1998-99, who directed the video, and who I had met at a scoring session for one of his films. (I even bought a copy of the LP at Disc-Connection to give him.)
I later saw Goldsmith at a reception for his Pasadena Pops concert and he grumbled, "I hear you're making me famous, Lukas." Nick Redman joked, "Well, somebody's got to" and Jerry gave him a stink-eye.
Lukas
Thanks, I was just looking for this video. Youre still making Goldsmith famous, Lukas.
My LaLaLand copy of THE SWARM arrived today, I just threw in the CD and compared just the opening Main Title music with the Prometheus CD (just the one piece, no time yet to actually listen to the whole thing), and just based on these few minutes: yes, there is a clear sonic improvement when compared to the Prometheus. The LLL sounds much more natural; it sounds excellent really.
I hope the label will continue to explore the "Fantasy Words of Irwin Allen"! I know there are plans for Voyage to the Bottom of the Sea. I also hope we will finally see a release for LaSalle's great score for the TV Movie City Beneath the Sea. Long years ago there was a member here (I think Thomas Scofield) who said he had a copy of the recordings, possibly from the composer himself. So the recordings seems to be available.
Chris, since Thomas died in 2005, the original recordings might have been tossed out unless he made arrangements, or previously copied and shared them with others.
The score is justly-praised as one of the great Goldsmith action scores, but if you've seen the film, you know that the amount of emotional heavy lifting he had to do is also appreciable. There are many, many utterly laughable scenes of romance and pathos, for which Goldsmith provided music of delicacy and sincerity. HOW DID HE DO IT??? And so often!
And the end title is unique even among Goldsmith's accomplishments. Triumphant, but in an almost, manic, crazed fashion, what with the constant shifting of the mixed meters and the repeated, strident rising figures in the mid-to-low brass.
To top it all off, there are those nutty liner notes for the original album. Does anyone know who this Habeeb guy is or was? He seems to be quite the Irwin Allen hypeman.
I have tried to keep up with the technical gobbly-gook, but am failing.
I can hear the difference between the Prometheus "Blow Out" and the Intrada edition. I can hear the difference in the first Intrada release of "Dressed to Kill" from the second (the second is superior!) I can hear the distinct difference in LLL's The Towering Inferno from FSM (highly upgraded)
So my question is this - I did not like the compressed sound of the Prometheus release; Will the LLL release sound more like a sound scape and with a sharper, crisper full tone? In this case the answer is usually yes...but this MQA stuff has me concerned.
Thank you in advance.
My advice - don't worry too much about the technical gobbly-gook, the LLL will almost certainly sound better, despite the MQA concerns. They have gone back to the master recordings and the team at LLL has almost certainly done a better job in the remastering. That's where most of the improvement is going to come from - the remastering, not the hi-rez / MQA
The discussions that some of you have had (John, Nicolai, Nono, et. al.) have been very instructive, inspiring and enjoyable, thanks!
They also make me very nostalgic for the wonderful times I enjoyed back in the 70s when you could actually find brick-and-mortar audiophile stores, with listening rooms, decent acoustics, various hardware, equipment, devices, etc.
I don't currently have a functional stereo system - I have the components, but my AR-15 speakers (1979) need new caps and to be refoamed - so, I have to listen over some decent bluetooth earbuds.
So glad you enjoyed the technical discussion, lol. I have been afraid to come back to this thread since I thought I derailed it too much.
AR made a terrific speaker in its day (I used to own a set of AR9s, and before that, a set of AR38s). You might look into upgrading rather than re-coning - almost all the speaker research that I wrote about was done well after the AR15 was on the market, and thanks to this research, many speakers today sound much better. And can be quite inexpensive to boot (see my post below).
See! I did bring it back around to THE SWARM ..to summarize: if 86 - 99% prefer the same type of speaker, it is an evolutionary conclusion that 86 - 99% of the speakers built will one day be that type of speaker. If most people prefer the same, most offers will then be the same (with the rest of offerings catering to the remaining percentages). Chances are, I fall into the 86-99%, so good for me, most likely.
There will be a few random bumps in the equation, as there are some other factors which will wager in when choosing a speaker which are independent of a blind listening test (price, looks, size of speakers, size of room, etc.), so is the best speaker turns out to cost $500,000.-, not too many people will be able to afford it even if they prefer its sound.
Nevertheless, the logical conclusion is that if there is a speaker that 86-99% of people would choose, that speaker would be a good starting point for any listener to then find out if it fits his own purposes.
Good points, but of course marketing and availability also influence things. And the other issue is that most listening tests aren't level matched and blind, which means that the louder speaker will often sound "better" to may people, because they don't know how to level the playing field by matching volumes. And like you say, some people buy based on looks.
But yes, the industry is starting to converge around these targets, and that is very good news.
Case in point of where availability and marketing can skew things in the wrong direction, though. Best selling speaker brand on the market these days is Klipsch, but they do terrible in both measured performance and in controlled listening tests. Why are they best selling? Brand recognition ("my grandfather owned Klipsch!") and the fact that they clutter the shelves of Best Buys around the country (in fairness, Best Buy also carries KEF, which do pretty well despite some inherent flaws in their UniQ point source design).
Amir Majidimehr - formerly head of Digital Media Technologies at Microsoft (and developer of the VC1 codec used by Blu-ray) - has invested in Klippel test gear and has been creating Spinorama measurements for a large variety of speakers:
Here are his measurements of a popular Klipsch model, the RP600M:
Pretty bad. Comments from the listening sessions: "I was expecting bad sound but man, this is really, really bad sound. No detail. Muddy bass and somewhat but not extremely bright. I dial in my room mode bass correction and that helps a tiny bit but suffering continues as I go to track after track...Out of the box, the Klipsch RP-600M throws out the rule book, thinking that if you just sold boosted lows and highs and leaving mids behind is a good idea. It is not. Objective and subjective testing shows this to be a horrible choice ranking the speaker as one of the worst I have tested."
Interestingly, he was able to fix some of the speaker problems using a little outboard EQ. But the above describes how they perform out of the box.
As a comparison, here are measurements of a Revel M16, which are only $450 each. Revel is a Harman brand, so follows the research:
Pretty decent, especially for $900 per pair!
From Amir's review of the M16: "If you want to have a taste of what all of Harman research and engineering is about, get a pair of M16s and listen. They are delightful "bookshelf" speakers showing what can be done when you combine serious research with a decent budget for pats and manufacturing...these are wonderful sounding speakers. It is what "high-end" sound reproduction is about in smaller budget. The combination of measurements and subjective listening impressions left me to no room but to give them my highest award (in the context of a small, lower cost speaker)."
Here is a really inexpensive JBL powered monitor, the LSR305, which also follows the research, and available online for around $300 per pair:
Amazing for $300. Perfect? No, but a friend of mine uses these in blind listening tests against speakers that cost thousands, and they win. From Amir's review conclusion: "The JBL 305P Mark ii is a delightful little speaker. It gives a smooth, very realistic sound impression, beating many "hi-fi" speakers. Problems are two fold: there is a tweeter hiss that you can hear in near-field applications. And it runs out of power in a large room and high volumes...It is hard to believe such great performance can be had for so little money in the form of JBL 305P Mark ii. We get it because of research and measurements like I have been showing that resulted in the advanced waveguide that it has for the tweeter...get a pair so that you can get calibrated on what good sound is like, and correlation between that and the measurements I am showing."
As a comparison, check out this measurement on Soundstage for the Zu Cable Druid, which list out at $10K per pair:
Staggeringly bad. Yet you can find rave, gushing reviews in the "audiophile" press - the same guys who refuse to participate in truly blinded, scientifically controlled listening tests. These are the same "reviewers" who tout the supposed advantages of high end speaker cables or power cords.
The good news for almost everyone is that we now know what we need to do to get good sound from a speaker, and that price does not always equate with quality. Spending more can get you more refinements (Revel's top of the line at $22K per pair, the Salon2, has still never been beaten in the blind listening tests, and is used by Dolby in their Critical Standards Reference Lab in San Francisco), but basic good sound is quite affordable.
Again, a novel, but considering that several people said they enjoyed what I posted, I thought I should at least write an epilogue
As a comparison, check out this measurement on Soundstage for the Zu Cable Druid, which list out at $10K per pair:
Wow, I have not seen such a frequency response in any of the higher end speakers in a while. Not familiar with the brand, but if people pay $10,000.- for it, there is likely to be still something that these speakers have that people buy them. I work in marketing, and believe me, I know marketing can only go so far. :-)
Anyway, I think there are quite a few people who enjoy your contributions, me included. But I don't want to derail THE SWARM threat... er, sorry, I mean thread, either.
As I said, if most people prefer a certain type of speaker, that is how most speakers will sound. On the other hand, if 86 percent prefer a certain type of speaker, that still means 14% would buy a different speaker. Not to mention that, of course, many people don't care much about sound at all, or low-res streaming and $30.- plastic earbuds would not be the primary music source for most.
When I bought a new set of speakers some time ago, I sure listened to a lot of different makes and models. A pair of Gauder Akustics (would have to check the model) sounded really nice to my ears, but was out of my price range. A pair of Heco Dreiklang sounded also really nice to my ears, but the design did not fit.
So while the most important thing in a loudspeaker is its sound, it is not the only thing. It is not just important how well it sounds, but how do they disperse the sound? There are studio monitor speakers that sound quite well... if you sit exactly at the right spot.
Another important thing: do they fit into your living room? That's why blind tests only go so far. That does not mean design matters more than sound, but since speakers are also furniture, they still have to fit into your living room (and be accepted by your spouse). So before most people select and buy a pair of speakers, they can already eliminate certain speakers just because of pricing, size, design, and of course availability.
In fact, one model I was really interested in were the Q-Acoustics Concept 500, but I there was no hifi retailer within reach where I could set up a listening session.
So while frequency response measurements etc. are obviously very valuable (and sure provide orientation before shopping around), they are still just one part of the equation when selecting a pair of speakers for home listening. (For most people... if you just have a studio man cave, it may not matter if the speakers look like a square oak baby coffin. )
Now back to our regularly scheduled programming: THE SWARM.
Direct but brief comparison of certain tracks between the Prometheus release and the LaLaLand release (both ripped to ALAC and played over my stereo system) definitely make the LaLaLand the winner. Much more natural soundscape. I never had a problem with the Prometheus, really, but now in comparison with the LaLaLand, the latter is clearly the superior release.
