 
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
|
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
77.18.78.213
In Reply to: RE: Allman Brothers "At Fillmore East": Anyone compared the new SHM-SACD to the '04 USA edition? Thanks. nt posted by avsBuddy on August 13, 2010 at 08:33:30
Yes. The SHM-SACD of Getz/Gilberto sounds better compared to the US version. Despite the facts that they are from the same digital DSD master, and therefore should be 100% bit-for-bit identical. The only thing different is that one of them creates less jitter when played back :)Here is my review:
http://www.stevehoffman.tv/forums/showpost.php?p=5646434&postcount=546
Edits: 08/13/10Follow Ups:
Since these are not really re-master, just reissue of the same DSD master using new SHM material?
Some titles use existing DSD master used for previous SACD releases, others use a new 2010 analog-to-DSD transfer.SHM-SACD home pages. Here you can read what sources that has been used (translated) :)
http://translate.google.com.au/translate?u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.universal-music.co.jp%2Fu-pop%2Fspecial%2Fsacd%2F02.html&sl=ja&tl=en&hl=&ie=UTF-8
Edits: 08/13/10 08/13/10
Sorry, I really like the U.S. surround SACD of Fillmore East. the extra material is nice as well. the only one of the new Japanese SACDs that I got was Aja. I think it sounds very good but there is just a hair of detail missing. I think you have to balance the source of the tapes (not sure but perhaps Japanese safety copies) and age of the tapes vs. the transfer done perhaps 5 years ago from the U.S. master.
Aja is nice but not the ultimate I was hoping for.
I listened to my MFSL LPs of Aja, and they sounded very toppy and a tad spitty, too much so (not a characteristic of my LP system). But overall, it was way fun to listen to.The SACD seems as if they didn't EQ very well. It is a bit rolled off, but not all treble sounds are.... Different tracks of percussion, and from song to song, seem to have inconsistent treble EQ, making it sound as if the instruments were all recorded differently and in different rooms. Of course, they were recorded that way! But it isn't supposed to sound that way, and never did before on other issues. Are these track differences perhaps simply made apparent here because it isn't as bright as earlier versions?
--
Keep your ears honest: Listen to live, unamplified music every week.
Edits: 08/17/10
Yes, these multitrack rock recordings are never going to win any audio awards no matter how meticulous Fagen was. The fact that the SACD makes you aware of the reality of the recording is proof that it was remastered properly and gets you closer to the source material. It's the other versions that sound artificial.
-------------
We must be the change we wish to see in the world. -Gandhi
Edits: 08/18/10
of soundstage.
Yes, the SACD gives us higher resolution, - so the instruments sound more real, PLUS the different EQ settings on an individual basis will get noticed.
How'd they get it so muddy and closed in sounding? We know that this music did NOT get remixed. So, how did they pull those instruments all to the center where they now sound so jumbled up, - running into each other? The right cymbal splash used to be on the, er, right. Why is the initial attack of aggressive upbeat, piano-key hits so smoothed out and unrealistic? Why can't we hear the drumstick's, quick-loud, first strike?
"I'm not locked in here with you, You're locked in here with ME"
Wish I had some answers there. I wonder if they were trying to make these recordings sound like MFSL SACDs? I really wish that it wasn't 5 million years since I've heard the regular vinyl, and the MFSL vinyl. In some ways it's a bit of fun to listen to them all and try to figure out what version is best on our own individual rigs. I'm disappointed as I was expecting the SACD to sound better than the SHM redbook, and at least approach the quality of the Gaucho SACD: (knowing of course that the Gaucho SACD was recorded better to two channel from the studio).
Oh well, at least the SHM redbook CD blows away the first redbook release from the 80s. (Maybe if someone buys my last Aja SHM-SACD, - I'll buy the MFSL redbook Aja: but they have a poor track record with non-hirez releases IMO).
"I'm not locked in here with you, You're locked in here with ME"
.
"I'm not locked in here with you, You're locked in here with ME"
That's not a sign it's closed or smoothed, although I will grant that the soundstage is narrower (and deeper which is true to every live performance I've attended).
-------------
We must be the change we wish to see in the world. -Gandhi
I heard that as well. Of course, it's possible to get both at the same time.
I guess that I just don't run a Sony or a Sony-like player and my system is too warm: (or at least comparatively). Never thought that I would've said that...
I also think that the Elton John, Peter Gabriel, and Getz/Gilberto SACDs are excellent: which many people here call bright and caustic.
Really curious as to what people think the SHM SACD of Gaucho sounds like. To me, - this disc is probably the best sending rock SACD that I have. If folks here like the SHM SACD of Gaucho better because it's smoother, then I know that I've made a wise choice to never buy another one of these discs again...
Out of the 123 million discs that would be cool to have on SACD, why Universal would bother to go out and re-do already excellent versions of previous SACD discs is beyond me.
"I'm not locked in here with you, You're locked in here with ME"
Post a Followup:
| FAQ |
Post a Message! |
Forgot Password? |
|
||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Top of Page ]
[ Contact Us ]
[ Support/Wish List ]
[ Copyright © 2024, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]
