HiRez Poll Yes - CLOSE TO THE EDGE [DVD-AUDIO/BLU-RAY]

[jaypfunk]

Is it me or do some of the transitions from parts in the songs sound out of sync like? I don't know if it's just the ambience of the 5.1 but it does sound weird sometimes.

The more I listen to this the more I prefer the original stereo mix.

It seems as SW has taken a lot of liberties in the surround mix. Just listen to the end and fade out Siberian Khatru. It's a fucking mess.

 

[jaypfunk]

Just listened to the flat original master mix. WOW. Killer.

It seems as if all the dynamics are gone in the 5.1 mix

 

[uffeolby]

Just listened to the flat original master mix. WOW. Killer.

It seems as if all the dynamics are gone in the 5.1 mix

My experience is quite the opposite... Do you usually enjoy 5.1-mixes? and do you have any good example for a 5.1-mix you find more dynamic than the stereo version? Just curious...

 

[jaypfunk]

My experience is quite the opposite... Do you usually enjoy 5.1-mixes? and do you have any good example for a 5.1-mix you find more dynamic than the stereo version? Just curious...

oh yeah i love all of the 5.1 and QUAD stuff that I have. The King Crimson ones especially. This one just sounds odd to me for some reason

 

[Ranasakawa]

My experience is quite the opposite... Do you usually enjoy 5.1-mixes? and do you have any good example for a 5.1-mix you find more dynamic than the stereo version? Just curious...

I also noticed the stereo flat master was superior as well, glad I'm not the only one.

 

[jaypfunk]

troof!! the stereo flat master has a lot of balls and is wayyyyyyyy dynamic. and as someone else also mentioned eariler in the thread the drums aren't as tough sounding and in your face in the 5.1 mix.

 

[jefe1]

I just got my copy and only had a chance to listen to the 5.1 mix once, but first impression is I agree it sounds weak. Haven't listened to the stereo cd yet but I do have the Rhino remaster of a few years ago and I remember liking all of the ones I got. I agree the 5.1 is very clear, great great vocals, and a nice spread out mix but I didn't feel the ooomph! Obviously I have to listen more. I did not notice a difference when I switched between the two hirez streams and I am using an oppo95.

 

[wavelength]

Just my opinion...but the surround mix is beautiful. Every time I play it I love it more.

 

[jaypfunk]

earlier someone asked for a comparison. take a listen to King Crimson Larks' Tongues (or any of the KC 5.1 mixes). that thing will blow your nuts off. CTTE like said previously just doesn't have any ooommmph in 5.1. it sounds great and it's not a bad mix it just doesn't punch you in the face like it should.

 

[leevitalone1]

earlier someone asked for a comparison. take a listen to King Crimson Larks' Tongues (or any of the KC 5.1 mixes). that thing will blow your nuts off. CTTE like said previously just doesn't have any ooommmph in 5.1. it sounds great and it's not a bad mix it just doesn't punch you in the face like it should.

agree, but it is a very old recording, that was done on inferior equipment back in the day. I feel for the issues involved it's not too shabby actually.

 

[jaypfunk]

agree, but it is a very old recording, that was done on inferior equipment back in the day. I feel for the issues involved it's not too shabby actually.

inferior equipment? they were recording in a top notch studio. Plus America was recorded at around the same time and it's 5.1 mix sounds great. you can't blame the sound of the CTTE 5.1 mix on the original recording.

 

[keenly]

I just got my copy and only had a chance to listen to the 5.1 mix once, but first impression is I agree it sounds weak. Haven't listened to the stereo cd yet but I do have the Rhino remaster of a few years ago and I remember liking all of the ones I got. I agree the 5.1 is very clear, great great vocals, and a nice spread out mix but I didn't feel the ooomph! Obviously I have to listen more. I did not notice a difference when I switched between the two hirez streams and I am using an oppo95.

Yes it lacks bottom end to give it that slam! You can hardly hear the bass.

 

[leevitalone1]

inferior equipment? they were recording in a top notch studio. Plus America was recorded at around the same time and it's 5.1 mix sounds great. you can't blame the sound of the CTTE 5.1 mix on the original recording.

To clarify my comment about inferior equipment, it may have been a top studio yet they all had one serious issue-analog tape, and production values. Recording equipment was at best old and had many faults not discernible in vinyl playback, with the amps that were available, and unless you had playback equipment that was expensive, ( a good system in the 70's cost as much as a new car) you never knew they existed. Most people had inferior LP playback set ups anyway.
I still feel or such an old recording it is much better than Tarkus, that seriously lacks any balls.

 

[jaypfunk]

analog tape is NOT a serious issue.

 

[leevitalone1]

analog tape is NOT a serious issue.

Hiss? poor production? not serious?
If CTTE was done on good quality recording equipment it would be as good as the America recording? plus again, you needed a few $ to achieve quality playback, even then hiss was ever present. My 1st cd's you could hear the tape start before the song began. ( when cd's were new)

 

[ssully]

Is it me or do some of the transitions from parts in the songs sound out of sync like? I don't know if it's just the ambience of the 5.1 but it does sound weird sometimes.

The more I listen to this the more I prefer the original stereo mix.

It seems as SW has taken a lot of liberties in the surround mix. Just listen to the end and fade out Siberian Khatru. It's a fucking mess.

Whereas to me, SK is the one that works best in surround. The only thing noticeably different about the coda is that the guitar has been brought up a little in the mix. I was really pleased with SK, less so with the other two tracks. It's also the one track where the remixed drums have a wholly satisfying snap to them (I know this album *extremely* well, which is kind of a curse when confronted with a remix)

I'm not having any bass issues. I do have an issue with the balance of the backing vox on 'Solid Time of Change' -- way too loud for my tastes. I may try lowering the Ls and Rs next time I listen (they are currently equal in level to the other channels at my listening spot, to within 1 db). Also, the reverbs just don't sound 'right', which is an issue I note with a lot of modern remixes -- digital 'verb just doesn't sound the same as the old analog plate technology. Comparison to the UK vinyl and the flat 2ch master transfer (which both sound fine to me) also indicates there's something weak about the beginning of the climactic Moog moment at the end of I Get Up -- like a doubletracked low bass part is missing or something.

Those are things I could get used to in time, balanced by the good things in those mixes. The real unsalvageable mess to me is, unfortunately, America. Not as bad as the horror show that's on the DVD-A years ago, but still 'not right'. Way too much reverb, keyboards way too high in the mix, and the juggling of intensities between the different parts of the guitar rave-up has been botched. The orignial mix builds from section to section to the final slam at ~8:22. Here it's almost an anticlimax. Guess I'll stick with the 'Yesterdays' 2-channel mix included on this set (which is wetter than the original New Age of Atlantic mix, that seems to have gone missing).


As we learn more an more from these comparisons, what his contribution to the sound of those old records was, Eddie Offord really does need to be recognized as the '6th member of Yes',

 

[ssully]

agree, but it is a very old recording, that was done on inferior equipment back in the day. I feel for the issues involved it's not too shabby actually.

Can we stop this nonsense about 'inferior equipment"? Close to the Edge was recorded at Advision Studios, which among other goodies sported a 20-channel Neve mixing console, cutting edge technology back then. The board was installed in 1971, so it was less than two years old when Yes was recording. If something about the recording sounds 'inferior' to you, it's down to choices made by the engineer, producer and Yes.

 

[ssully]

I sit between the rear speakers as well based on a suggestion by Wendy Carlos. I hear no difference between the PCM and the DTS MA on this disc.
http://www.wendycarlos.com/surround/surround.html#names7.2

That's to be expected, as there shouldn't be any audible difference between the two lossless streams.

 

[ssully]

Just got mine last nite. The mixes are great. The 5.1 DTS is amazingly awesome but the 5.1 LPCM is BAD! It just sounds dull no matter what Pro-Logic setting I have tried. The menu reallllllly stinks too. Very confusing and sometimes it doesn't (total mass) retain the receiver audio settings when switching from different screens. Very weird.

I gave it 9 and not a 10 only for the menu issue.

You shouldn't need to be using Pro Logic with the 5.1 tracks. And the DTS-HD and LPCM shouldn't sound different.

 

[ssully]

To clarify my comment about inferior equipment, it may have been a top studio yet they all had one serious issue-analog tape, and production values. Recording equipment was at best old and had many faults not discernible in vinyl playback, with the amps that were available, and unless you had playback equipment that was expensive, ( a good system in the 70's cost as much as a new car) you never knew they existed. Most people had inferior LP playback set ups anyway.
I still feel or such an old recording it is much better than Tarkus, that seriously lacks any balls.

*Wilson's* mixes of Tarkus lack them. The original mixes have plenty.