[Kail]

http://rghost.net/14170791
http://rghost.net/14171111
http://rghost.net/14171331

 

[deadlylover]

They sound fine here, what's up?

 

[Kail]

 Um, you sure? Compare last track in OP with this one to get the "picture".
 http://rghost.net/14175921

 

[deadlylover]

Yeah it's a remix of that track, what's up?

 

[Kail]

 Well, all tracks from OP are highly distorted. With what are you listening?

Check with http://rghost.net/14175921 . You really don't hear the difference?

 

[deadlylover]

Stax Omega 2's, how would one know if the tracks are distorted without listening to the original? It could simply be an effect the artist was shooting for.
 
Eh? aren't they different songs?

 

[Kail]

Quote:

Stax Omega 2's, how would one know if the tracks are distorted without listening to the original?

 Me for example. It's not obvious? Omg. It's heard in the tracks that there's a ton of crappy distortion. Even hardcore have more respect to listeners ears.
Quote:

 Eh? aren't they different songs?

 Nope.
 First one is just a horribly ripped (raped will fit better) radio version of Original Above & Beyond Mix.
 
Quote:

It could simply be an effect the artist was shooting for.

 Why you need these Stax Omega 2's, really?

 

[deadlylover]

Sorry, I don't think I'm on the same page here =P
 
What do you mean the radio edit's are horrible? It seems like there's some more treble energy on that one, but not horribly distorted in anyway to me.

 

[Kail]

 Have you heard it at all? I'll help to you with this one, listen loudest moments of the track, for example at 1:21. It's extremely distorted.
 
 Here's the original radio version in flac. If you still don't hear the ugly difference, then I'm really sorry about your ears. Or Staxes sound so crappy that you just cant hear high distortion.
 http://rghost.net/14207061
 
 
 
 

 

[andrewberge]

I prefer the original's sound, but i find them both very listenable.
Note that my current audio setup isn't that great, though.

 

[deadlylover]

Quote:

 Have you heard it at all? I'll help to you with this one, listen loudest moments of the track, for example at 1:21. It's extremely distorted.
 

 
I really don't think they are the same, they're definitely mastered differently as the waveforms don't match at all, it's beyond the scope of simply a poor rip or whatever. The radio edit version in your OP looks as if it's from one of those compilation CD's, so different mastering is certainly within the realm of possibility.
 
For me, the main difference is the BGM is increased in volume/presence, giving slightly less focus onto the vocals, and much more focus on the BGM. I simply do not hear any distortion at all, which is why I'm very confused at the moment. You could argue that there is less dynamic range with the radio edit compared to the original, but I don't think that matters too much considering the type of song.
 
There is no distortion at 1:21, it's the synths that are playing loudly at that time.
 

 Here's the original radio version in flac. If you still don't hear the ugly difference, then I'm really sorry about your ears. Or Staxes sound so crappy that you just cant hear high distortion.
 http://rghost.net/14207061

 
I think your gear may be falling flat in terms of being able to properly resolve the radio edit version in the OP, resulting in what you hear as a messy grainy wall of distortion. When a track get's very busy like this, it clearly shows the limitations of a lower end system.
 
High end Stax is unable to reveal distortion? First time I've heard that

. It would seem quite the opposite here, your current equipment is unable to keep up with this track

.

 

[Digital-Pride]

     Quote:

I think your gear may be falling flat in terms of being able to properly resolve the radio edit version in the OP, resulting in what you hear as a messy grainy wall of distortion. When a track get's very busy like this, it clearly shows the limitations of a lower end system.
 
High end Stax is unable to reveal distortion? First time I've heard that

. It would seem quite the opposite here, your current equipment is unable to keep up with this track

.

X2  If Deadlylover isn't hearing any unusual distrotion while using one of the most revealing headphones available(Stax Omega-II), then you gear is most likely not able to keep up with complex musical pieces.  What audio gear are you using by the way?

 

[Kail]

Quote:

There is no distortion at 1:21, it's the synths that are playing loudly at that time.

 Strange, because there's a massive amount of distortion, even on lowest volume. I listening it with foobar2000 + ESI Prodigy X-Fi NRG (Juli@ DAC) + Sennheiser HD 598. Low end?
 
Why I don't hear such distortion on modern breakwall mastered hardtrance, hardstyle and hardcore tracks then, which are louder than OP examples? They're very loud (-7 RMS Power), hard, but at the same time clean. Far from this ****ty quality. An example:
 http://rghost.net/14218621
 
It's just a horrible rips, thats all, processed with some kewl fx'es by idiot ripper. I had licensed CDs of Dream Dance and tracks there were just copies of original radio versions. Without ****ty equalizing and distortion.

 

[RPGWiZaRD]

Relax I hear the distortion very well too and I'm using an Audigy 2 ZS and XB500. This is among the better trance songs around, I will check if the Satellite (radio edit) file I have on my comp also have it.
 
EDIT: Nope sounds clean.
 
BTW, what was the point of this thread, bad rips isn't like anything uncommon...

 

[deadlylover]

Quote:

Quote:
 Strange, because there's a massive amount of distortion, even on lowest volume. I listening it with foobar2000 + ESI Prodigy X-Fi NRG (Juli@ DAC) + Sennheiser HD 598. Low end?

There's still a loooooong way to go with that gear.

 
Yeah I think you're just confusing the distortion for an extra instrument/synth. It's not uncommon for those guys to mess around with the originals in an attempt to make it 'better'. It's very misleading too because it doesn't say "remixed" when clearly, it is!