Offord’s production style was unique; he wasn't afraid of "messy" sounds or extreme panning. He created a wall of sound that was dynamic yet incredibly layered. For years, this complexity posed a problem for digital transfers. Early CD releases (often labeled "mud" by audiophiles) flattened the soundstage, collapsing the separation between Squire’s bass and Wakeman’s synths. Later remasters often succumbed to the "Loudness Wars," compressing the dynamic range to make the album sound louder on cheap earbuds, thereby stripping away the very breath and life of the music.
However, in the modern era of digital hi-res audio, one specific designator has become a holy grail for serious listeners: Yes - Close To The Edge -2013- -FLAC 24-192-
Is 192 kHz necessary for Close to the Edge ? No—96 kHz would capture all analog tape content (max ~30 kHz). However, 192 kHz ensures in modern DACs, pushing the filter’s transition band far out of the audible range. In practice, many listeners find the 2013 24/96 version (often bundled with this 24/192) to be sonically identical but half the file size. If storage is not a concern, the 24/192 remains a definitive digital edition of the original mix. Offord’s production style was unique; he wasn't afraid
For audiophiles and progressive rock enthusiasts, represents more than just a digital file; it is the definitive high-fidelity capture of what many consider the greatest progressive rock album of all time. Early CD releases (often labeled "mud" by audiophiles)