| Review by emilsjr June 1, 2003 (3 of 3 found this review helpful)
|
Performance:  Sonics:  |
Toto made it big with their best album IV. Sony has released this disc twice, with the second being this multi-channel/stereo release.
The original stereo only release was marked by lackluster sonics and annoying pop sounds that were sprinkled throughout the disc. This was one of my very first SACD purchases. It was so bad that I avoided SACD for almost 1 year after. This new version has an improved stereo mix w/o the pops. Compared to other digital versions I have heard, IV in stereo is the best you can get.
Now, the multi-channel mix. The word that pops into my head is "uneven". The sonics are acceptable for an 80's release. However, there are moments in the mix where the rear channels become too dominant. "Africa" is the best example of this. The rears so over power the mix that the lyrics are lost. "Lovers in the night" also shows this. However, on other tracks, like "Rosanna" and "I won't hold you back", the mix is effective. Although there is some interesting ideas in this mix, I stay stick with stereo.
As for the album, I do not think there is much more to stay. You will either have found memories, have never heard of it or have hated it. There rarely seems to be apathy when it comes to Toto. If you fit into either of the first 2 categories, pick this disc up.
|
Was this review helpful to you?
yes |
no
|
|
|
| Review by Noonions April 1, 2004 (2 of 2 found this review helpful)
|
Performance: Sonics: |
| The multichannel SACD of Toto's 1982 mega-seller is pretty good;though the surround aspect is overdone on "Africa"(sadly),the rest are very well done,most notably on "Rosanna","I Won't Hold You Back" and "Afraid Of Love".The 2-channel SACD,however,is probably the best way to hear this 80's pop gem,possibly the best 2-channel SACD I've heard yet!
|
Was this review helpful to you?
yes |
no
|
|
|
| Review by Goodwood December 9, 2006
|
|
Stereo set up only for me so all comments for 2 channel. I don't know if the 2 channel mix is similar or not to the originally released SACD. Some say yes others say no.
Listening in isolation this disc sounds OK. If I were to pinpoint one aspect which I am a little uncomfortable with its the prominent upper mids (on my system anyway). If anyone has played with a graphic eq they will know that even a minor hump in the mids can change everything. Thats the impression I get with most of this disc. Maybe its the classic double edged sword of tighter bass.
So what about resolution? I did some comparisons with my original CD (I sold my 20 bit mastered 24 carat diamond encrusted (OK I made the last bit up) version a while ago. The SACD does seem to have more clarity and dynamics (especially with the occasional tom toms that are put in for drama). I thought the treble on the SACD sounded fuzzy and fizzy but in truth the CD has the same characteristics. In fact it seems to me that the source probably isn't that great. I wonder if this album was recorded using early digital technology? For whatever reason this album, while musically a classic, doesn't seem to have taken advantage of my system upgades as well as other discs have.
Conclusion? Not a showpiece for SACD. The Boston album for example is in a different league but for what is its OK. I think rather than ruin the material SACD has simply revealed the sources limitations. Your mileage may vary. What do I know - I just listened to it several times on my system.
|
Was this review helpful to you?
yes |
no
|
|
|
| Review by sportbigred October 6, 2007 (1 of 2 found this review helpful)
|
|
| I was disappointed after listening to the SACD surround mix. The stereo mix is by far more solid and has more depth than the SACD mix. Some of the panning of instruments is kind of strange and didn't seemed to fit properly in the surround mix.
|
Was this review helpful to you?
yes |
no
|
|
|
| Review by analogue May 20, 2009 (4 of 4 found this review helpful)
|
|
1982 was a great year for Toto and they released one of the best albums of the year for pop music. There is some filler on this sacd to be sure but the musicianship truly shines. There are three well known songs that most of us remember. There are other tracks that are good and some that I just skip.
That being said this is a decent sounding sacd. Its slightly but not overly bright, has good dynamic sound with crisp drumwork and well defined vocals. The bass is not overly deep however but the soundstage is decent. I dont know what source they used for make this sacd but I suspect it was not the original master tapes. At least not for the stereo version which this review is based upon. I say this because even though this transfer sounds good it lacks some warmth, a more defined midrange and more defined instrument layering.The treble is a little brittle as well.
Recommended but could have been better.
|
Was this review helpful to you?
yes |
no
|
|
|
| Review by Bob--- April 6, 2015
|
|
I don't know who did the 2.0 remastering on this disc, but it sounds awesome. An earlier reviewer commented that the treble sounds "brittle." I disagree completely. The previous (grey box) issue certainly does, but this one (CS 86544) is really nice and musical. It is also really dynamic and punchy, with a Dynamic Range score of 12, which in the Rock genre is a fine score indeed.
It also, IMO, beats the MoFi, having a less exaggerated bottom end. The higher resolution definitely doesn't hurt either, but my priority has always been high quality remastering, i.e. tasteful EQ and minimal compression, with hi-res coming in a close second. This one fits the bill on all counts.
I can't comment on the multichannel, but for 2.0 users I cannot recommend this issue enough.
|
Was this review helpful to you?
yes |
no
|
|
|
Sonics: 
Sonics: 
