|
|
|
I do agree that the surround mix of the DVD~A is a revelation and that MoFi could've included it on their new release......theoretically, they also could've included the mono and stereo remixes, as well, for a rather definitive release of Pet Sounds.
Perhaps on the re~release of the re~release, they'll do so!
|
|
|
|
|
|
rammiepie said:
I do agree that the surround mix of the DVD~A is a revelation and that MoFi could've included it on their new release......theoretically, they also could've included the mono and stereo remixes, as well, for a rather definitive release of Pet Sounds.
Perhaps on the re~release of the re~release, they'll do so!
LOL I do hope you are right about the release or the re-release, or how many time is it now? Whatever, let us hope for an SACD surround version, for me they are the only real reason for buying a re-released disc as a surround mix is much more powerful than just a re-mastered one.
|
|
|
|
|
|
This anti~surround mentality, especially when a fantastic 5.1 channel master exists and the fact that an original stereo mix and rbcd layer can ALSO be included is a real rip off.
When are these companies going to realize that that is the real beauty of SACD.......VERSATILITY.
Do we really keep having to spell this out?
IMO, this would've been a great AP release utilizing the Grimm audio converter............
|
|
|
|
|
|
Well, I'm sure to some, this is not worthy of it, being "crap" pop music and all. The higher resolution, especially evident in God Only Knows, of the DVD-A release is so beautiful. God Only Knows is probably my favorite pop song ever.
|
|
|
|
|
|
flyingdutchman said:
Well, I'm sure to some, this is not worthy of it, being "crap" pop music and all. The higher resolution on this, and especially evident in God Only Knows, in the DVD-A release is so beautiful. God Only Knows is probably my favorite pop song ever.
All I'm going to add, FD, is that I'm glad I ventured into DVD~A before I ventured into SACD because I have a lot of outstanding Pop/Rock/JAzz and yes, even classical releases in the DVD~A format and they are now fetching big bucks on Amazon and E~Bay.......
And let's stop being defensive about so~called "pop crap"............it's not crap, IMO, and if one has eclectic tastes in music, as we both do, NO apologies needed.
To each his own!
And "God Only Knows" is one gorgeous pop confection that a lot of VERY famous musicians wish they had written (including the Beatles). And in 5.1, it soars!
IMO, the DVD~A 5.1 Capitol release IS the definitive version......period {and a quick check on Amazon (US) has the DVD~A in stock for a remarkable $17.72.....brand new!}
Addenda: Just ordered one for a back~up!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Wow. Didn't see this coming. And the "To buy" list just keeps growing...
|
|
|
|
|
|
Blu Falcon said:
Wow. Didn't see this coming. And the "To buy" list just keeps growing...
Recession, WHAT RECESSION?
Besides, Possession trumps recession!
|
|
|
Post by wolf359 May 22, 2011 (18 of 33)
|
|
Tourboots said:
I also have the DVD-A, a format I do not really like using at all as I hate having the TV switched on the navigate the disc. The surround sound mix is however excellent and I would have loved this album as an SACD but only with multichannel, so I will not be buying to just listen in stereo, it would just not be the same, the surround sound being so good.
I am sure there is good reason for the trend of stereo only SACD releases, but I can't help but feel that there is a substantial market who enjoys surround sound and is being ignored with opportunities to sell more SACD discs being lost.
I have had and loved this album since its orginal vinyl release back in the sixties. When the DVD-A came out it was for me a no-brainer release bought without a thought as they say. Like Tourboots I would have bought as SACD if multichannel but an SACD stereo only remix is a retrograde step after hearing this in surround. For exactly this reason I did not buy the Doobie Bros "Captain & Me" That is 2 sacd sales lost because they were not multichannel and were duplicates of albums I already had as a DVDA. I want albums that have been recorded in multichannel and are new to either format no duplicates.
As others have mentioned there is a mountain of releases of all genres from the "quad" era to be mined which by the time they are released(if ever) I will be 6 feet under the earth. This is especially true of EMI who apart from a large number of official quad releases also released a number of discs officially as stereo which were alleged to be SQ Matrix encoded and have never been acknowledged by EMI as such.
There are some posters on this site who dismiss all pop of whatever genre as rubbish. Equally there are those who claim that anything that is not 2 channel stereo as heretical. They are entitled to their views of course and while I would never decry their choice of music or equipment yet they snipe at mine. I do feel hard done by as my multichannel/musical needs are constantly being ignored.
Quite why classical music can be released easily in multichannel and a particular classical work can be released in different interpretions on SACD while the other genres suffer a paucity of choice somewhat baffles me. All I would hope for is parity but I know that I will not get it
|
|
|
|
|
|
wolf359 said:
As others have mentioned there is a mountain of releases of all genres from the "quad" era to be mined which by the time they are released(if ever) I will be 6 feet under the earth.
There are some posters on this site who dismiss all pop of whatever genre as rubbish. Equally there are those who claim that anything that is not 2 channel stereo as heretical. They are entitled to their views of course and while I would never decry their choice of music or equipment yet they snipe at mine. I do feel hard done by as my multichannel/musical needs are constantly being ignored.
It would be nice to think that someone out there will put 2 and 2 together and tap into a market that whilst not huge is probably still substantial enough to warrant releases in surround sound. If the industry can respond to those who want vinyl releases why cannot they do the same for those who want SACD. Many industries focus on niche markets and I think the major labels could do the same for those who want SACD multichannel. I think UMG have no idea how, as a customer, it is frustrating to see UMG releasing SACDs, which I fully support, but only in stereo and at a high price. Again, this is a niche market so I have no problem at all with them following this policy, the frustration is borne out of the fact that there is nothing in between cd and the expensive SACDs and there is no multichannel option. They have proved that they can release multichannel releases at an affordable price, where they went wrong I feel is not adopting a single inventory release policy, which would be confusing. One good example of why UMG should look again at their SACD policy is the recent release on the Decca label of the Striggio 40 part Mass. This stereo cd comes with a DVD for surround and a video. The experience is awful. They do not include the whole programme and the programme does not flow, having to start each track following the on-screen menu. The video is unecessary, that can be watched on YouTube. An SACD is a greener option as single disc and the whole programme could have been in surround and enjoyed properly.
I have no problems with any type of music coming out on SACD, the more the better in my view, as it all helps to establish SACD out there and who knows perhaps even attract a wider audience.
|
|
|
Post by wolf359 May 22, 2011 (20 of 33)
|
|
The single inventory option is the only way to go. There has been many discussions in the past on this site as to why SACD failed to take off. Chief among them was the dual inventory followed by many record companies at the time of SACD's introduction. I remember seeing for example Michael Jackson's Thriller going for 24.99 single layer in HMV while its RBCD equivalent was selling for 8.99 in the same store. Joe public even if he knew the difference would not buy the SACD because of the price differential and the fact it wouldnt play on his CD player. Sony in their infinite greed and control freakery made it difficult for companies to produce SACD without a hefty premium the list goes on and on. Although the Rolling Stones SACD's from Abkco came in for a lot of stick at the time I now belive that this release policy was the right one. I.E release them as a stealth disc with virtually no mention of SACD on the package. After all don't want to frighten the public keep the price down make them hybrid of course and largish runs of proven sellers to bring the unit costs down. Dark side of the Moon almost follows this formula as well. I wonder how many non SACD owners are aware of what they have got.? The current trend for single layer stereo only SHM - SACD is not something I like, high cost , cannot play in car on CD player, often from an inferior master and most tellingly often a duplicate of an already existing multichannel disc. we are paying through the noses for far less than the orginal issue brilliant marketing if you can get away with it
|
|
