|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
66.167.204.241
Now that the Analogue Productions version of Dave Brubeck's Time Out is available, there are three different versions of this title on SACD. The first three are from Sony.
1999 two-channel single layer
2000 multichannel version
2002 stereo JSACD
2012 multichannel/hybrid APO SACD
I have Sony's multichannel version, but would be interested in any comments on the new APO.
-------------
We must be the change we wish to see in the world. -Gandhi
Follow Ups:
An outstanding Jazz masterpiece, 2nd only to 'Kind of Blue' IME.
A very fine title, for sure, not up to Kind of Blue standards, but both are so overrated, overplayed and overreleased on every format under the sun, to the exclusion of far more interesting titles, as to be a disservice to the artists, the formats and the genre.
-------------
We must be the change we wish to see in the world. -Gandhi
Compared with the CD I have and barely remember, in MC the piano is not so hard right and the sax not so hard left (both of which are better). The bass is still centered, and the drums are still hard left and still most of the time barely audible. The piano and sax can be blended ('moved') toward the center by increasing the CC level. There seems to be a little more space around the drums that's audible when Joe is soloing.
IMO it's still a typical example of Columbia's multimono, little-fone-booths style of recording that sounded unnatural then and still does. Now it's just higher-rez.
I also have on hand a friend's copy of what I believe is the Columbia MC release (barcode # 0 7464-658122-6) that I heard weeks ago. I guess it's time for me to compare them. More later.
----------
Tin-eared audiofool, former fotografer, and terrible competitive-pistol shootist.
"Everything that can be counted does not necessarily count; everything that counts cannot necessarily be counted." Albert Einstein.
-------------
We must be the change we wish to see in the world. -Gandhi
I REALLY NEED TO STOP BUYING!
1999 two-channel single layer
1999 two-channel JSACD
2000 multichannel version
2012 multichannel/hybrid APO SACD
I really wish you haven't mentioned the 2002 stereo jsacd, now I'll get sleepless nights until I hunt down that copy to complete my collection......, especially after I discovered that the stereo layer on the 2000 m-ch disc isn't as bad as I remember it sound that many years ago. It is really quite good after I had given it a few spin (something that will blow away the stinky static...)
Time out! Time out!
Got the 6 eye mono and stereo LP somewhere too. Trouble is I don't know where I chucked them :-)
I really like Time Out, but do I need to buy this one anymore. I have the SACD and other Cd versions. I have the Classic Records 45rpm vinyl and a few other vinyl versions. They all sound good.
You know, Dave Brubeck has other great titles out there why not release some of those on SACD.
Do you have Jazz at Oberlin? One of his best on SACD.
-------------
We must be the change we wish to see in the world. -Gandhi
Each disc has a different sound.
It's nice to be able to compare and learn about how each disc media and mastering practices affect the sound.
It's all in the fun about this hobby.
what a crappy photo.
Regards,
Geoff
Here's one done with a Samsung phone.
It's not that much better either.
Must be my photography skills......! :-)
Surprised at how bad the iPad photo was in poor light.
Regards,
Geoff
Latest gen Touch has crappy camera too. Convenience increasingly matters more than quality, otherwise folks would have a quality standalone digital SLR, but after blowing all the green on sacd and gear to play it on - the cheap-o camera must do.
I'm sure some guys can make better pictures than I can on the iPad and the Samsung hand phone. Posting a photo via either of these 2 devices is certainly more handy than having to extract the storage card out from the standalone camera, powering up the pc and uploading the photo onto the web. I find myself using the pc less and less. I'm surfing, downloading a movie, and making this post, all just through the iPad, and while listening to music and don't have to worry about batteries running out within a couple of hours. That's nice thing to have on a cool, rainy night.
It's convenient for you, but why foist it on us?
We are the audience - if you treat us like shit by throwing up a crappy photo when you could take a little longer, make an effort, and post a good photo, then you lose our respect.
How convenient is that?
Regards,
Geoff
The pic was fine. We all know what an SACD and JSACD look like in real life, why do you need a nice photo of it when the only real purpose is just to show which versions are in his collection. This isn't a photography forum, it's an sacd forum.
-------------
We must be the change we wish to see in the world. -Gandhi
Agreed. While I certainly noticed the graininess I didn't think anything about. It didn't interfere with the message of the post.
Robert C. Lang
I really don't want to have to get it, but if it sounds that much better than my domestic mch.
-------------
We must be the change we wish to see in the world. -Gandhi
But the rule of the game is you should have to buy it to find out for yourself why....
What is really needed is a serious mono reissue of this album. It was recorded multi-track for mono mixdown and it really sounds best in the original mono version. A lot of the early jazz stereo recordings also sound good in mono.
I agree that many early stereo jazz recordings sound absolutely superb in mono. In fact, many of them, when played in stereo almost shout out "please play me in mono". But "Time Out" does not seem to be one of those. I think it *really* sounds good in stereo, so much so that multi-channel may be a disservice. Although the stereo releases certainly have that tell tell "hard left", center, "hard right", biases. Ha! I may have just made your argument for a mono release!
Robert C. Lang
Time Out is NOT one of those records with horrible, fake, stereo effects, and I do like the stereo mix. However, to me, the stereo mix creates problems with the sound of the drums. The mono lp, played with a mono cartridge shows up the difference. I would prefer a reissue that had various mixes, with the mono mix being part of the mix.
I have heard various CD, lp and early SACD reissues of this record, and I like the original 6-eye Columbia release the most (for both stereo and mono). It could be because the master tape was still new and pristine, or it could just be mastering differences, but a bit of liveliness is gone from the reissues I heard (not really that big of a difference, but, I prefer the originals). I have not heard the recent reissues (I really don't need another copy of this warhorse); a lot of the reissues from companies like Analogue Productions do sound great so there is hope for a superior reissue.
By the time Time Out was recorded in '59, it wasn't much of a problem. Certainly not with the Columbia engineers.
-------------
We must be the change we wish to see in the world. -Gandhi
Time out (two channel) is superbly engineered; not exactly seamless as a modern recording. But it gets so much right to render any imperfections a non issue.
Robert C. Lang
...at how phony it sounded. It sounds to me as if each instrument lived in its own telefone-booth-sized acoustical space, and the hard-right piano sounds simply in the WRONG place.
I just received my Analogue Productions SACD, and altho nowhere on the disc or the jacket does it contain the M-ch symbol, it has 5 channels of output. A QUICK listen to 'Take Five' late last nite told me the piano is no longer hard right (more right-center), so I think and hope this one will sound better overall.
More later.
----------
Tin-eared audiofool, former fotografer, and terrible competitive-pistol shootist.
"Everything that can be counted does not necessarily count; everything that counts cannot necessarily be counted." Albert Einstein.
I don't believe I have ever hear a mono mix of "Time Out". I look forward to your further comments, especially on how the new mixes (stereo and MC) compare with a good mono.
Robert C. Lang
Don't forget the brilliant k2hd disc released earlier this year, so far my favourite until I check out the AP version.
Just received the AP Time Out, I hope that they consider a follow up with Time Further Out.
Vahe
That would be great, but in the mean time how does the AP of TO sound?
-------------
We must be the change we wish to see in the world. -Gandhi
Edits: 07/14/12
...he is mighty impressed with this new version. I am listening to APO's Tea for the Tillerman and they have done a fantastic job!!
and my favorite Cat Stevens will definitely be following, Teaser and the Firecat.
-------------
We must be the change we wish to see in the world. -Gandhi
I will definitely pick up the new multichannel/hybrid APO because the 2000 multi-channel version does not cut mustard. I have the original two channel single layer. (I also have two or three vinyl versions as well). The 2000 multi-channel version was loaned to me but I found it to be inferior to the (1999) two channel version. It simply has less body. Somebody erred in the mastering (or something). The two-channel is simply better. And maybe it will remain the best because while the original "Time Out" was recorded in 3 channels clearly rear ambiance must be simulated.... not good in most cases unless minimally applied.
Robert C. Lang
"rear ambiance must be simulated.... not good in most cases unless minimally applied"
good advice ANY time rear channels are to be utilized.
...regards...tr
The European hybrid multi-channel SACD version (with HDCD-encoded CD layer)
?
...regards...tr
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: