Post by terence September 20, 2013 (1 of 19)
|
|
The sound on this was fairly abysmal in the first place, so you wonder whether it can really be any better in SACD format?!
|
|
|
Post by Espen R September 20, 2013 (2 of 19)
|
|
terence said:
The sound on this was fairly abysmal in the first place, so you wonder whether it can really be any better in SACD format?!
Read some reviews when it's released :-)
From original UK master tapes.
|
|
|
Post by onenairb September 23, 2013 (3 of 19)
|
|
terence said:
The sound on this was fairly abysmal in the first place, so you wonder whether it can really be any better in SACD format?!
Frankly it depends on the quality of the analogue Studio Master and whether it will be remastered for this release. Personally I don't think the original vinyl was that bad although John Lydon once commented that he did not like the sound of NMTB in digital format. Think he was talking about the original CD release which was probably produced by a third party company with a third generation analogue source converterd to 16 bit digital with little care for the quality of product.
When CD became the format for the masses there was such a huge backlog in the catalogue for the music labels that it was a case of get them out as quick as possible - little effort was made in the conversion from analogue to digital.
Well I'm going to give it a shot. Just ordered from CDJapan.
|
|
|
Post by onenairb October 29, 2013 (4 of 19)
|
|
onenairb said:
Frankly it depends on the quality of the analogue Studio Master and whether it will be remastered for this release. Personally I don't think the original vinyl was that bad although John Lydon once commented that he did not like the sound of NMTB in digital format. Think he was talking about the original CD release which was probably produced by a third party company with a third generation analogue source converterd to 16 bit digital with little care for the quality of product.
When CD became the format for the masses there was such a huge backlog in the catalogue for the music labels that it was a case of get them out as quick as possible - little effort was made in the conversion from analogue to digital.
Well I'm going to give it a shot. Just ordered from CDJapan.
CDJapan are also now showing "The Great Rock 'N' Roll Swindle" available on SHM-SACD in December.
|
|
|
Post by gazkitch October 30, 2013 (5 of 19)
|
|
My copy is on order from cd japan too!!!
|
|
|
Post by Simon V. December 6, 2013 (6 of 19)
|
|
The Banshees could do with the super-audio treatment (not that I can afford popular-music prices).
|
|
|
|
|
|
Here is a section of Scotty's latest review which 3 out of 3 people have rated as helpful.
"Now lets talk about the sonics...this is not compressed as some others have mentioned"
Wrong. It is compressed and the dynamic range has been squashed to give you that bright, fatiguing sound. jcarr73729 covered this as well in a previous review.
"The SACD layer has a DR of 8, whereas I have a redbook CD with a DR of 13. The SACD is another 'loudness' victim"
Avoid this disc. At $50 its embarrassing. Notice how my review which stated facts was rated 2 out of 7 helpful.
|
|
|
|
|
|
audiogirl said:
Here is a section of Scotty's latest review which 3 out of 3 people have rated as helpful.
"Now lets talk about the sonics...this is not compressed as some others have mentioned"
Wrong. It is compressed and the dynamic range has been squashed to give you that bright, fatiguing sound. jcarr73729 covered this as well in a previous review.
"The SACD layer has a DR of 8, whereas I have a redbook CD with a DR of 13. The SACD is another 'loudness' victim"
Avoid this disc. At $50 its embarrassing. Notice how my review which stated facts was rated 2 out of 7 helpful.
Are you saying the reviews on SA-CD.net are not trustworthy?
|
|
|
Post by Claude April 15, 2014 (9 of 19)
|
|
Less experienced listeners don't notice compression immediately. Many will even favor the more compressed version, as details are more apparent, so the music has more impact at the first impression, although it is more annoying and fatiguing in the long run.
That's the reason why compression is so widely used. It's like electronics stores yanking up the color intensity settings on TVs to impress potential buyers.
A general problem with reviews on this site is that many people have not compared the SACD to other releases of the same album, and they just assume that the SACD is as close as it gets to the actual recording.
|
|
|
Post by echo April 15, 2014 (10 of 19)
|
|
Quote:
"The SACD layer has a DR of 8, whereas I have a redbook CD with a DR of 13. The SACD Is another 'loudness' victim"
I'm sorry, but you can't compare the dynamic range of a SACD 1:1 with that of a redbook cd.
You can, however, compare the DR between two versions of a cd. That SACD is based on the same remastering job (also of Tim Young as master engineer) one year before, in that case for a redbook cd, and that shows the average of DR9, instead of DR8. So yes, it's still clear there was some compression used. For both the redbook cd and the SACD.
I have to say, however, it's not bad sounding at all. The EQ is much better (but indeed, the DR somehow lower)
|
|
