|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I will get this one, 'luckily' I didn't buy any of the previous issues.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
But I'm surprised, since the Intrada team already has an ear for it, why it wasn't noticed when the first CD was created that something was "missing" compared to the old one. Mastering is extremely subjective, as I'm sure you know. So while Intrada "missed it" on the 2014 album, Varese did the same (albeit in the other direction - "brickwalling") with stuff like their Club release of Starship Troopers. So its by no means the first time for anyone to miss a swing when it comes to this stuff. Indeed, because there is no one "right" way to master something, but various different approaches.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Amer: ...should I still listen to it for a first time and experience it and then when all is done re-order in the new remaster? danbeck: ...If I were you I'd wait for the new edition - so you don't get "used" to the multitracks mix and then thinks that something is lacking when you get the original stereo mix... That's pretty brilliant advice. The enemy of being able to enjoy two different, good versions of a thing is being really used to one. We have two different, good mixes of Goldsmith's The Mummy, but to people who'd lived with the original for 20 years, these instruments are too muted and less punchy, those are too loud and now sound like overlays, and you know what? To people who've listened to that score 10s of times, that's exactly how the new one feels to them. They aren't contriving an issue; it simply presents that way, it sounds like that. While you probably won't listen to your currently unopened CD that many times, Amer, there's still an effect with first hearings. If the new one is a new mix, then it's likely some instrumentation balance is different, maybe enough to disappoint a recently introduced ear, and why have that? Especially if the new one does indeed sound better, as seems to be the case. Listen to the new one. Sometime later, break out the other one, and if either has to accidentally disappoint a previously attuned-to-it ear, let it be the one that perhaps sounds a little less great, if only by comparison.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Just want to echo what others are saying - this is a dynamite new edition, very happy I paid for it for the third time. Just love how Safan used Sibelius as his Classical model vs. the more typical Wagnerian idiom or Holst's Planets- helps make this score very distinctive. Even if once in a while I get pulled out for a moment when I hear, for example, a pretty close copy of a section of the 5th symphony. But he does it so well, makes it his own, this is the kind of musical homage that really works for me!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Yeah, this edition is a lot brighter than the previous one, which now sounds dull by comparison. The main benefit is to the brass, but since this is one brass-heavy score, that means that there is quite a bit of benefit.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|