Pearl Jam Yield 25th Anniversary Edition Translucent Red and Black Hi-melt vinyl

CROJAM95

no slipmat....sticker only

a5pj

CROJAM95 said:

no slipmat....sticker only

Thanks, that slipmat with the moving images that was supposed to come with this (i think) was sweet. Was it ever released?

JBC7913

JBC7913 said:

It seems mine has taken a not so slight detour to Denmark after landing in Canada where it’s supposed to be. @Santos L. Halper. How the F? 

Super quick response from 10C about this! Very much appreciated! 

demetrios

JBC7913 said:

It seems mine has taken a not so slight detour to Denmark after landing in Canada where it’s supposed to be. @Santos L. Halper. How the F? 

Wow that's weird. I have had Nugs orders ship from USA to Sweden then to back to Canada.

Kearn5y

PJ Freak said:

Kearn5y said:

Any of these land in Europe yet. My copy has been sitting in LA since the 18th waiting for acceptance 

Same here, mine still in LA since 18th 

Any movement? Mine still has moved since then. That's 2 weeks now

2-feign-reluctance

So what will be the first pressing at the new VMP plant in Denver?

Garasauras

2-feign-reluctance said:

So what will be the first pressing at the new VMP plant in Denver?

The new PJ album 😜

demetrios

Levi Seitz

Just got my copy of the VMP exclusive Pearl Jam Yield 2-LP/45rpm cut and WOW! Big shout to VMP for the hype-sticker credit, that is so cool and means the world to me! We labored over making this a quality pressing at every stage. Record Technology Inc did a perfect job plating and Furnace Record Pressing pressed it nice and flat! The feedback online has been so positive but I figured I’d share just one quip since we cut the lacquers here Black Belt Mastering

demetrios

2-feign-reluctance said:

So what will be the first pressing at the new VMP plant in Denver?

Binaural

PJ Freak

Kearn5y said:

PJ Freak said:

Kearn5y said:

Any of these land in Europe yet. My copy has been sitting in LA since the 18th waiting for acceptance 

Same here, mine still in LA since 18th 

Any movement? Mine still has moved since then. That's 2 weeks now

Still stuck in LA 😔

BIGDaddyWil

demetrios said:

Levi Seitz

Just got my copy of the VMP exclusive Pearl Jam Yield 2-LP/45rpm cut and WOW! Big shout to VMP for the hype-sticker credit, that is so cool and means the world to me! We labored over making this a quality pressing at every stage. Record Technology Inc did a perfect job plating and Furnace Record Pressing pressed it nice and flat! The feedback online has been so positive but I figured I’d share just one quip since we cut the lacquers here Black Belt Mastering

Thanks D!

dobyblue

The problem is the source material, it suffers from too much dynamic range compression. Doesn't matter who cuts the lacquers or where it's pressed because the source material already handicaps it.

Hard to imagine MOFI wouldn't do a better job, but to be clear that's got nothing to do with who plates it, who cuts the lacquers or who presses it, it would be better because they would be starting with the mix files and it would be mastered with all the dynamics of the original performance. If they didn't have access to work with the mix files, they wouldn't release it. They don't issue albums that they can't master.

How much more dynamics would there be? Well, the Atmos mix gives us some good insight into that. Here's the approved stereo remaster that was used for the vinyl on the bottom, with the Atmos files downmixed to stereo on the top, Given To Fly - this is a significant difference in dynamics, not 1-2dB but some 7-9dB on average. I hate that the format with the lowest fidelity is trumping today's best vinyl and high resolution digital releases solely due to large differences in mastering. It doesn't matter for old albums that have dynamic stereo masters (ie anything before 1995), but for albums released during the ongoing loudness wars, it's very frustrating. This is why you'll see quite a few posts here pining for Blu-ray releases of the Atmos mixes, so we can get both fidelity and dynamics together, the way music is supposed to be.

whoyouare72

dobyblue said:

The problem is the source material, it suffers from too much dynamic range compression. Doesn't matter who cuts the lacquers or where it's pressed because the source material already handicaps it.

Hard to imagine MOFI wouldn't do a better job, but to be clear that's got nothing to do with who plates it, who cuts the lacquers or who presses it, it would be better because they would be starting with the mix files and it would be mastered with all the dynamics of the original performance. If they didn't have access to work with the mix files, they wouldn't release it. They don't issue albums that they can't master.

How much more dynamics would there be? Well, the Atmos mix gives us some good insight into that. Here's the approved stereo remaster that was used for the vinyl on the bottom, with the Atmos files downmixed to stereo on the top, Given To Fly - this is a significant difference in dynamics, not 1-2dB but some 7-9dB on average. I hate that the format with the lowest fidelity is trumping today's best vinyl and high resolution digital releases solely due to large differences in mastering. It doesn't matter for old albums that have dynamic stereo masters (ie anything before 1995), but for albums released during the ongoing loudness wars, it's very frustrating. This is why you'll see quite a few posts here pining for Blu-ray releases of the Atmos mixes, so we can get both fidelity and dynamics together, the way music is supposed to be.

Thank you for posting this!

strangespotinthesky

dobyblue said:

The problem is the source material, it suffers from too much dynamic range compression. Doesn't matter who cuts the lacquers or where it's pressed because the source material already handicaps it.

Hard to imagine MOFI wouldn't do a better job, but to be clear that's got nothing to do with who plates it, who cuts the lacquers or who presses it, it would be better because they would be starting with the mix files and it would be mastered with all the dynamics of the original performance. If they didn't have access to work with the mix files, they wouldn't release it. They don't issue albums that they can't master.

How much more dynamics would there be? Well, the Atmos mix gives us some good insight into that. Here's the approved stereo remaster that was used for the vinyl on the bottom, with the Atmos files downmixed to stereo on the top, Given To Fly - this is a significant difference in dynamics, not 1-2dB but some 7-9dB on average. I hate that the format with the lowest fidelity is trumping today's best vinyl and high resolution digital releases solely due to large differences in mastering. It doesn't matter for old albums that have dynamic stereo masters (ie anything before 1995), but for albums released during the ongoing loudness wars, it's very frustrating. This is why you'll see quite a few posts here pining for Blu-ray releases of the Atmos mixes, so we can get both fidelity and dynamics together, the way music is supposed to be.

So is this why I am noticing some high frequency distortion?  Like it sounds overdriven and broken up in some parts?  I just changed my stylus and thought that was the issue.  But maybe it's just the way the vinyl was pressed?  There is a ton of detail but I do hear things break up at parts on the high end at points.

tylerj

dobyblue said:

The problem is the source material, it suffers from too much dynamic range compression. Doesn't matter who cuts the lacquers or where it's pressed because the source material already handicaps it.

Hard to imagine MOFI wouldn't do a better job, but to be clear that's got nothing to do with who plates it, who cuts the lacquers or who presses it, it would be better because they would be starting with the mix files and it would be mastered with all the dynamics of the original performance. If they didn't have access to work with the mix files, they wouldn't release it. They don't issue albums that they can't master.

How much more dynamics would there be? Well, the Atmos mix gives us some good insight into that. Here's the approved stereo remaster that was used for the vinyl on the bottom, with the Atmos files downmixed to stereo on the top, Given To Fly - this is a significant difference in dynamics, not 1-2dB but some 7-9dB on average. I hate that the format with the lowest fidelity is trumping today's best vinyl and high resolution digital releases solely due to large differences in mastering. It doesn't matter for old albums that have dynamic stereo masters (ie anything before 1995), but for albums released during the ongoing loudness wars, it's very frustrating. This is why you'll see quite a few posts here pining for Blu-ray releases of the Atmos mixes, so we can get both fidelity and dynamics together, the way music is supposed to be.

While I don't like the new Yield sounds "bad," I did listen to it yesterday after listening to a MOFI record. Could really tell a difference between the 2 with the MOFI being very noticeably better. Most of Pearl Jam's albums are noticeably compressed. The only album that really "wows" me is the OG VS. I doubt we'll ever truly audiophile stuff from PJ, but their recent vaults and releases at least signal to me they're trying to make them sound at least a little better. 

mrussel1

tylerj said:

dobyblue said:

The problem is the source material, it suffers from too much dynamic range compression. Doesn't matter who cuts the lacquers or where it's pressed because the source material already handicaps it.

Hard to imagine MOFI wouldn't do a better job, but to be clear that's got nothing to do with who plates it, who cuts the lacquers or who presses it, it would be better because they would be starting with the mix files and it would be mastered with all the dynamics of the original performance. If they didn't have access to work with the mix files, they wouldn't release it. They don't issue albums that they can't master.

How much more dynamics would there be? Well, the Atmos mix gives us some good insight into that. Here's the approved stereo remaster that was used for the vinyl on the bottom, with the Atmos files downmixed to stereo on the top, Given To Fly - this is a significant difference in dynamics, not 1-2dB but some 7-9dB on average. I hate that the format with the lowest fidelity is trumping today's best vinyl and high resolution digital releases solely due to large differences in mastering. It doesn't matter for old albums that have dynamic stereo masters (ie anything before 1995), but for albums released during the ongoing loudness wars, it's very frustrating. This is why you'll see quite a few posts here pining for Blu-ray releases of the Atmos mixes, so we can get both fidelity and dynamics together, the way music is supposed to be.

While I don't like the new Yield sounds "bad," I did listen to it yesterday after listening to a MOFI record. Could really tell a difference between the 2 with the MOFI being very noticeably better. Most of Pearl Jam's albums are noticeably compressed. The only album that really "wows" me is the OG VS. I doubt we'll ever truly audiophile stuff from PJ, but their recent vaults and releases at least signal to me they're trying to make them sound at least a little better. 

Agreed that the OG Vs is the only studio record that I think sounds really good.  

demetrios

https://instagram.com/p/CzUlqHVPzL8/embed/

dobyblue

strangespotinthesky said:

dobyblue said:

The problem is the source material, it suffers from too much dynamic range compression. Doesn't matter who cuts the lacquers or where it's pressed because the source material already handicaps it.

Hard to imagine MOFI wouldn't do a better job, but to be clear that's got nothing to do with who plates it, who cuts the lacquers or who presses it, it would be better because they would be starting with the mix files and it would be mastered with all the dynamics of the original performance. If they didn't have access to work with the mix files, they wouldn't release it. They don't issue albums that they can't master.

How much more dynamics would there be? Well, the Atmos mix gives us some good insight into that. Here's the approved stereo remaster that was used for the vinyl on the bottom, with the Atmos files downmixed to stereo on the top, Given To Fly - this is a significant difference in dynamics, not 1-2dB but some 7-9dB on average. I hate that the format with the lowest fidelity is trumping today's best vinyl and high resolution digital releases solely due to large differences in mastering. It doesn't matter for old albums that have dynamic stereo masters (ie anything before 1995), but for albums released during the ongoing loudness wars, it's very frustrating. This is why you'll see quite a few posts here pining for Blu-ray releases of the Atmos mixes, so we can get both fidelity and dynamics together, the way music is supposed to be.

So is this why I am noticing some high frequency distortion?  Like it sounds overdriven and broken up in some parts?  I just changed my stylus and thought that was the issue.  But maybe it's just the way the vinyl was pressed?  There is a ton of detail but I do hear things break up at parts on the high end at points.

Could be any number of things, you'd likely need to listen to the record on a different set-up to determine if the problem is on the record. Most local hifi stores will let you demo equipment if you appear to be a serious buyer, like...I wouldn't listen to it on my friend's AT-LP60 to determine if it's the record because that's just not a good turntable.

Spiritual_Chaos

If the artistic intent at the time was to have it compressed and loud. That intent should be respected. 

ya George Lucs-people

dobyblue

Nah, had nothing to do with the artist, sorry to disappoint you. Your respect is headed for the A&R guys that wanted it loud because they thought it needed to be to compete with other records on the radio, unaware that FM compression (given that was the dominant way people listened to radio when Yield was released) actually made louder records sound more muted.