Full Album Rolling Stones

[Ogier Dudley]

TheLP, the vinyl is a lot better. I would rate it an 8.

It's actually Ok.

The digital hi rez. download and the CD are awful. Compressed and squashed. Unplayable. And I tried.

The digital, CD and 96/24 files have average DR of 5.

The vinyl LP has average DR of 10.

The CD of the album, and at least one download version, has been measured and posted at the DR Database as being a shocking DR5. Terrible, awful.

There is apparently an atmos version that has a DR12 rating, which is fantastic. Any advice on where that can be found?

I had hoped against hope that we would be spared the limiting on vinyl, but my heart stopped when I saw a pic of how at least one side has virtually no dead wax, with content running right to the label. Loud mastering = more room needed for grooves. Ugh...UGH!!Your review and comments so far seem to cement that sad fact.

Audiophiles need to know where that DR12 version is - that's the only one worth listening to.

I listened to the vinyl at a friends hi-fi. The sound is so flat/loud that no warmth remained in the songs. The songs might be better, if the sound quality would be better.

I would rate ist Music 5, Sound 5. Maybe, better sound would lift the Music note. But, as it is now, no interest in buying the record in any format at all.

Ok, it's clear, 24-bit is better than 16-bit.

But, why digital (24-bit streaming/Blu-ray/SACD) is the Reference.

Wouldn't it be better to admit that the producer made the wrong decision, since it is possible to record Analogue, and also broadcast through digital remasters, for industrial streamers.

But, using a digital source for the Vinyl was a mistake, because this is a Band that can make High Fidelity Recordings, instead of recording in a mediocre digital studio.

I agree with all of You. All the hype and praise for the production really collide with the actual result, which is far worse than expected, far worse than 2005 Bigger Bang, way too much your ears and brain can tolerate. The album would be nice. If only the big guests could be given their share: who can appreciate Elton's piano amidst all that mess? Who can enjoy the sax when it's soaked in noise and distortion? And Paul's distorted bass?

We miss the long awaited date with this Stones album. Good ideas. Wrong engineering. A totally wasted opportunity for stones *and* music lovers.

We can safely give a 1 to the sound quality.

Hard to find worse out there.

that the many reviews of this album in all magazines (apart from the audiophile ones) do not say a word about the sound quality. Everybody gets nervous listen to the compressed music. All of my non-audiophile friends and colleagues, too. The Stones must miss a fortune by killing their own songs.

While we, of course, love the Stones to no end, it's quite obvious to our audiophile-centric ears that their new LP in particular could greatly benefit from another mix by, well, almost anyone -- but who? Don Was? Chris Kimsey? Steve Jordan? Rob Fraboni? Other suggestions are very much welcome... Log in or register to post comments funny thing is Submitted by PeterPani on Mon, 2023-11-06 02:31 the live youtube video of the Stones with Lady Gaga sounds so much better than the vinyl track. Crazy times, when a live youtube video gives better sound than a millions sold record.

I am pretty sure, that every music lover enjoys good sound. He/she might not be able to talk about it and thinks it is just "better" music, but in the end it is part of the decision to buy or not buy a certain piece of music.

3a8082e126