Post by Iet May 20, 2005 (1 of 4)
|
|
To your information this message from the Recording Engineer of this release at http://www.audioasylum.com:
--------------------
Mixing: "Brothers in Arms"
My buddy Chuck Ainlay spent about three months doing the surround mix on this at Mark Knopfler's surround room in London. Chuck has been working with Mark on all his projects for quite some time.
Anyone that knows Chuck's surround mixing work knows he will bring "BIA" to a whole new level of listening experience. Chuck described Mark's room, equipped with a full surround ATC scm-300 monitor system, as the best surround room he ever worked in. He was thrilled with the results he was getting from the masters and the system.
To those that think mixing from a 44.1 16-bit source will not yield any advantages over the original, consider this: D/A technology and quality has come a L-O-N-G way since "BIA" was originally produced. Far more resolution is possible now from the source than what the original D/As were capable of back then. Additionally, the new surround mix was performed in the analog domain - not through a 44.1 digital mixer! Chuck would have made full use of every great analog and/or digital tool at his disposal during the surround mix.
I, for one, will be anxiously awaiting MY copy of "Brothers in Arms," which I'm certain I'll use as a surround playback reference source.
Best Regards,
Michael Bishop
Recording Engineer
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hi Michael
I just put up a review about the stereo track not having read this. Now that I learn its a 16 bit 44.1K source it all makes sense. That explains why it is on one hand much improved while on the other not quite there in absolute resolution. I agree that the mixing at higher bit and sampling rates counts a lot to the final result, since a 16 bit/44.1K recording mixed at that rate effectively destroys the fidelity and that is where this new issue scores.
If only I had a surround set up!
|
|
|
Post by mdt May 23, 2005 (3 of 4)
|
|
Goodwood said:
Hi Michael
I just put up a review about the stereo track not having read this. Now that I learn its a 16 bit 44.1K source it all makes sense. That explains why it is on one hand much improved while on the other not quite there in absolute resolution. I agree that the mixing at higher bit and sampling rates counts a lot to the final result, since a 16 bit/44.1K recording mixed at that rate effectively destroys the fidelity and that is where this new issue scores.
If only I had a surround set up!
I think the hi-res stereo track is clearly better than the CD was.I can imagine that the playback process at home brings an improovement as well, since D/A conversion from DSD is more simple than from PCM.
Upsampling has brought advantages with CD players,transfering 16/44.1 to DSD and then converting to analog from there, could be seen as kind of sophisticated "upsampling".
|
|
|
Post by Myrantz May 25, 2005 (4 of 4)
|
|
Michael,
You won't be disappointed. I just received and played my copy of the "Brothers In Arms" 25th Anniversary SACD and the surround mix is excellent as is the fidelity.
My Rantz
|
|
