Post by Khorn June 5, 2005 (11 of 112)
|
|
The reviews of this SACD’s 2 CHANNEL STEREO Track on a few sites on the net that I frequent are driving me nuts. The disparity is absolutely amazing. Some people love the sound and think that for the time period of the original recording and digital equipment available it (the SACD version) sounds as good as can be hoped for and they really enjoy it.
The problem is, just as many if not more think it is horribly compressed and so “hot and in your face” that it is unlistenable at reasonably normal sound reproduction levels. Some are also posting graphs to support this.
The reviews here have been generally good and, when it is released “domestically” here on the Universal label at the end of the month I’ll grab it if not just to satisfy my curiosity.
I do hope they bring out the “self titled” album on SACD as IMHO it is the most musically satisfying.
|
|
|
Post by sgb June 6, 2005 (12 of 112)
|
|
Khorn said:
The reviews of this SACD’s 2 CHANNEL STEREO Track on a few sites on the net that I frequent are driving me nuts. The disparity is absolutely amazing. Some people love the sound and think that for the time period of the original recording and digital equipment available it (the SACD version) sounds as good as can be hoped for and they really enjoy it.
The problem is, just as many if not more think it is horribly compressed and so “hot and in your face” that it is unlistenable at reasonably normal sound reproduction levels. Some are also posting graphs to support this.
The reviews here have been generally good and, when it is released “domestically” here on the Universal label at the end of the month I’ll grab it if not just to satisfy my curiosity.
I do hope they bring out the “self titled” album on SACD as IMHO it is the most musically satisfying.
Khorn:
Well, on my system the new SACD is less compressed than the 2000 SBM remaster (which, to me, sounds the worst of the lot), and doesn't have the midrange life of the the original German CD pressing from 1985. There's a little more clarity to Knopfler's voice on an original early LP pressing than any of the CD/SACD versions that friends of mine & I compared, but the LP otherwise sounds as brittle as the SBM version.
Too be sure, the folks over at the Hoffman site who are warning of the compression are correct, however I would disagree with the *hot and in your face* description. As I said in another thread in THIS forum, my impression is that the highs are significantly more palatable on the SACD than on any of the earlier versions, but that there's a lack of body and clarity to the midrange - especially the vocals.
You have to remember that BIA is a very early all digital recording, and that as such it would be foolish of anyone to think that Knopfler and Ainsley would have been able to make a silk purse out of a sow's ear. Although there's not much here to glorify their achievements, IMO they deserve a gold star for their efforts.
|
|
|
Post by Khorn June 6, 2005 (13 of 112)
|
|
sgb said: I would disagree with the *hot and in your face* description.
Glad to hear that anyway. I like the XRCD version and hope that the SACD surpasses that. I'm looking forward to checking it out when released here.
|
|
|
Post by soundboy June 6, 2005 (14 of 112)
|
|
Hmmmm....I have the US domestic CD and the European Vertigo SBM remastered CD, and both of these pales in my comparison to the hi-rez stereo mix on the SACD. But that's just me. No comment on the multi-channel mix since I only have a 2 channel setup.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Just curious if anyone compared SA-CD layer stereo track to Redbook CD layer track on hybrid BIA. Also would be interesting to know how Redbook CD layer of the new BIA hybrid SA-CD compares to 80s CD, 90s SBM CD, and finally XRCD.
|
|
|
Post by soundboy June 6, 2005 (16 of 112)
|
|
testikoff said:
Just curious if anyone compared SA-CD layer stereo track to Redbook CD layer track on hybrid BIA. Also would be interesting to know how Redbook CD layer of the new BIA hybrid SA-CD compares to 80s CD, 90s SBM CD, and finally XRCD.
Since the CD layer of the BIA SACD is HDCD-encoded*, it would be interested to hear about the sound quality on BIA w/ HDCD decoding.
* First time the entire BIA album appear as HDCD-encoded?
|
|
|
Post by sgb June 7, 2005 (17 of 112)
|
|
soundboy said:
Since the CD layer of the BIA SACD is HDCD-encoded*, it would be interested to hear about the sound quality on BIA w/ HDCD decoding.
* First time the entire BIA album appear as HDCD-encoded?
Although I had sampled the CD layer on the SACD using my SA-14, I was unaware that it is HDCD encoded. I will sample this in my other player (which is HDCD-compatible) to see if this makes a difference.
My impressions of the CD layer are close to those of the SACD layer, but I did not seem to get quite the spatial benefits in CD. Maybe HDCD will help this, maybe not.
|
|
|
Post by sgb June 15, 2005 (18 of 112)
|
|
sgb said:
Maybe HDCD will help this, maybe not.
Not much help at all when listening to the CD layer in my HDCD Rotel player. This is a hardware thing, as the SA-14 plays its CD layer in a manner far more to my liking, even though it can't do HDCD.
|
|
|
Post by ferret-e June 23, 2005 (19 of 112)
|
|
Hey, what stereo may be talket about !???
Totally new expirience - multichannel mix of BIA ! The mix is example of how mch can sound !
|
|
|
Post by Timpani August 24, 2005 (20 of 112)
|
|
I'm a little late but here's my 2 cents worth anyway.
I (like a host of others) unhesitatingly bought the 20th aniversary edition of BIA pretty much as soon as it became available. My first disappointment was with the price. HMV in the city (Sydney) had a hefty $49.00 price tag attached. Secondly, and most importantly, the sound quality is inferior to the original CD release (and Vinyl) in terms of dynamic range. It's very obvious (to my ears) that some sort of multi band processor has been used and along with some L-R emphasis the dynamic range has been deliberately (??) reduced to presumably make the recording more palatable for playback in low(er)-fi systems. I should point out though that these comment relate to the stereo layer. My Marantz SA-11 is stereo only so I'm unable to rate the multi channel mix. That said, I'm still very disappointed. I was under the impression that SACD was supposed to be aimed at audiophiles with high fidelity systems. Have record labels completely lost the plot ?? I was similarlty disappointed with Dark Side of the Moon. My early release CD is also more dynamic than the SACD (stereo layer) version.
What's the point of having a standard (*SACD) with higher res and wider dynamic range if the remastered software is going to be deliberately doctored to reduce resolution or dynamic range?
|
|
