Does anyone know which is the best version of Brothers in Arms released? This album has been on my "to-buy CDs" list for a long time and I have only seen the 1996 remaster, SACD, Dualdisc and XRCD versions available in my local store.

I don't own an SACD player and I've read the 20th anniversary remasters are rubbish. The 1996 remaster isn't as good as the original either I've heard. So I have a choice of getting the original via ebay or some 2nd hand store or getting the XRCD version.

There's some samples on the XRCD page
http://www.elusivedisc.com/prodinfo.asp?number=JVCXRH3572
But it seems that it is affected by the loudness war as well. Track 3 and 8 have Replaygain values of around -7dB which I don't think any CDs mastered in the 80s would have.

So which should I get? The original or XRCD?

The rip of my brothers in arms disc comes out @ +3.2dB album gain. I assume its the original release, I don't remember when I bought it.

I don't know anything about the xrcd release, but I'd suggest looking for an original disc at a used record store or perhaps library.

The original of course. It was one of the first fully digitally processed recordings and some kind of a demo of the possibilities of CD. If I remember well, this one would even clip when mp3gained to the replay gain reference level.

You are correct about that.

Anyway, I haven't listened to all the various versions, but I can say the original sounds outstanding. One of the best sounding CDs ever, I think.

is there any way to differentiate the original from the others besides obvious text on the cover? a SKU maybe? i know of several record/cd stores that are still in business and maybe i'd get lucky if i did some looking.

Mine has an album gain of +4.99dB.

This is a UK original release and has 824 499-2 on the spine.

It was released under Warner Bros. and my copy has "25264-2" on the spine.

Edit: To be clear, this is the original US release.

I'd buy the original - 1985 (again). Mine has a replay gain of +5.01 dB; where my XRCD has a replaygain of -6.30 dB

excellent, thank you!

824 499-2 11 on the disc. Vertigo, made by Polygram, W.Germany.

Thanks for all your replies, I'll look for the 1985 original.

BTW, since we're talking about the loudness war, I have a few live concert DVDs I plan to buy. And they were released/re-issued recently. Would the loudness war affect DVDs as well? Lots of over-compressed parts

Yeah, this one is the keeper. Beautiful sound, just begging you to crank it up!!!

Generally the 2.0 audio was well are affected by this (not at all). I have Nazareth Live In Brazil the RG from the 2.0 audio is -9,36 dB (it sound like Vapor Trails from Rush (CD))... in other hand in Steve Vai Visual Sound Theories the RG gain is near of 0 dB...
About the 5.1 and DTS i don't know at all, I never "see" any over-compressed track\album in the "5.1\DTS version".

For multichannel audio, especially if "Dolby Digital" or "DTS" trademarks are involved, there are well-defined standards for mastering levels which leave plenty of headroom - and these are used for all cinema soundtracks.

I don't know if the same standards formally apply to multichannel *music*, but I would hazard a guess that advertising using those *trademarks* requires that the standards have been followed.

I *have* come across at least one AC3/DTS encoded recording, which had the correct level but sounded very compressed. Level is not a guarantee of quality. But it does give the engineer room to back off the processing.

I own the 1996 remastered version of "Brothers in Arms".
It has an album gain of -4.11 dB.
To my ears the CD doesn't sound overly compressed in dynamics.
It is one of the best sounding CDs I own.

824 499-2 02 on the disc, here. And, yes it was the first 'mastered for CD' recording IIRC.

It should be noted that the original Vertigo has pre-emphasis. If your replaygain value is about +3.16 the album has not been de-emphasized (using sox it should drop to +4.13, at least for me.)

I think I have the 1996 remaster(RG: -4.14db), and I've always been floored by the audio quality(not to mention the music ). Looks like I'll have to seek out the 1985 release. I'm having trouble finding any information or reviews on the remasters though. Anyone have any links?

According to EAC, mine isn't pre-emphasized.?

I have seen that too, which is a bit puzzling. My ears say it is (very bright out of the CD, and very nice after deemphasis), and this article discusses what they had to for 20th anniversary edition to get rid of pre-emphasis which was already present on the original tracks.

No, but IIRC it's not just a "remaster" - it's actually remixed.

On the UK versions I compared, the CD artwork and text isn't as crisp as the original either.

Cheers,
David.

The High Fidelity Review claims that there is no way to do de-emphasis in the digital domain. Is that true, or only analogue purists would say so (then again no compressor is good enough for them)?

The 20th anniversary release of Brothers In Arms has Neil Dorfsman's original mix, remastered by Bob Ludwig. The only "remix" was done for the multi-channel release. But even on that release, the 2 channel version was still Neil Dorfsman's original.

What remix are you speaking of? Was there one in 1996?

That sounds like complete hogwash to me. With enough terms, digital processing can match an analog response to any precision you want.

Exactly. I think the "problem" was that some people were building filters graphically(drawing lines with FFT filters, or using a graphic equalizer) that approximated the frequency response somewhat inaccurately, while completely ignoring the phase response. The analog filter is pretty simple, and digitally modeling it shouldn't be that difficult. Whether or not these two approaches sound different is a whole other question, but it would be nice to have a filter with the intended response, especially since it shouldn't be much trouble to generate.

I must have been mistaken. Some tracks sounded so different to me that it seemed to be a remix. I guess it could have been mastering.

They weren't my CDs, I just borrowed them in 1996 (and gave them back soon after).
(Apologies if that's heresy!).

Cheers,
David.

I bought the SACD version and have to say I think it's just fantastic. It really shows how an "old" recording can still sound out of this world if done properly.

My setup is a bit esoteric - using a Pioneer DV757 DVD player with firewire interface to a Sony STR-DA7100ES digital amplifier. It drives some Monitor Audio speakers. The clarity is nothing short of sensational. The multi-channel version is fun, but a bit of a gimmick. The two-channel is the best version I've ever heard. For example, the intro of Money for Nothing where the lead guitar is playing the riff, there's a closeness, an intimacy as if he was right in front of your nose. It's kind of raw-like, unprocessed, live performance.

P.S This probably appears strange as a first post I did use to read an awful lot on here but I think my account must have been deleted as it's been ages since I've been on HA. Actually rejoined to post a technical sound card question, but saw this post and felt compelled to reply

I'm puzzled as to how there could be a so-called "high-res" SACD version of this recording, aside from the obvious multichannel capabilities. BIA was an early DDD disc, IIRC, which means that the master would be likely be PCM. Weren't they only using 44.1/16 back in '85? That would make digital remastering or releasing a DSD version sort of pointless.....

I just got my used 1985 copy in the mail(already have the 1996 remaster and love the sound), but oddly enough, the TOC doesn't have the pre-emphasis flag set. It appears to be a US pressing. I was hoping to use iTunes to rip it and apply de-emphasis, but without the flag set, I'm not sure if that'll happen. Did all '85 copies have pre-emphasis, or just the German pressings?

After listening for about 5 seconds, it was obvious my copy has pre-emphasis. At first I tried ripping to a WAV+CUE with EAC, adding the pre-emphasis flag to the CUE, mounting the WAV+CUE as virtual CD, and then re-ripping with iTunes. I also tried using WaveEmph for de-emphasis, and I got similar results.



So it seems that if you have a 1985 copy with an album gain of +3.18dB, de-emphasis needs to be applied.
Note that if you re-normalize after de-emphasizing, you'll end up with an album gain somewhere around +2dB.