HiRez Poll Emerson Lake & Palmer - BRAIN SALAD SURGERY [SACD]

Advertise with us
Find deals on ebay
Amazon
QuadraphonicQuad

Help Support QuadraphonicQuad:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.

Please rate the SACD of Emerson, Lake and Palmer - BRAIN SALAD SURGERY

  • 10: Great Fidelity, Great Surround Mix, Great Content

    Votes: 11 25.6%

  • 9:

    Votes: 20 46.5%

  • 8:

    Votes: 8 18.6%

  • 7:

    Votes: 3 7.0%

  • 6:

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • 5:

    Votes: 1 2.3%

  • 4:

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • 3:

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • 2:

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • 1: Poor Fidelity, Poor Surround Mix, Poor Content

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Total voters
    43
Gave it a '9' a while ago, and having had the chance to listen to it again before we get the Jakko 5.1 mix in November, my vote remains the same.
Most of the mix is very good, but a couple of times it falls short, mostly notably in "Toccata". Weird balances and placement during the track. Also in some of the other tracks the vocal takes are different than the stereo mix. Inconsistent mixing in 5.1 is common for some of these very early 5.1 mixes so it will be interesting to hear what Jakko does and if it's better, the same, or worse than this mix.
All the same, "Trilogy" cannot come soon enough! :)
 
Finally got the SACD (not exactly cheap either). I've had the DVD-A for quite a while and consider the DVD-A reference.

I don't know if it's just me or my SACD system but this mix sounds different than the DVD-A. I think the SACD is just brighter and I'm hearing a lot of the higher frequencies that I wasn't hearing on the DVD-A but there are definitely some parts where I'm like "I don't remember the DVD-A sounding anything like that".

Jerusalem sounds the same

Toccata sounds different in some parts

Still...You Turn Me On sounds the same

Benny the Bouncer is definitely "clearer"

Karn Evil 9: 1st Impression, Pt. 1 definitely has some parts that seem more discrete and mixed differently (mostly the panning of percussions).

Karn Evil 9 3rd Impression sounds like a completely different mix. I'm hearing stuff I never heard on the DVD-A, or I'm just hearing it in a very different way. :mad:@: Much clearer, I can finally hear the words. The last 10 seconds are COMPLETELY different than any mix I've heard.

Like said, since the DVD-A includes the fabulous fantastic Lucky Man that is still the reference but I'm really falling in love with this SACD so for me I'm glad to have both.

I consider it one of my better purchases recently.

I give it a 9 because it's missing Lucky Man but well worth seeking out even if you own the DVD-A.

R.I.P - H. R. Giger and Keith Emerson
 
Last edited:
Pretty sure it's exactly the same.

Maybe there's a rip out there, someone could compare them objectively. Comparison from memory like this is notoriously faulty.
 
That someone is me.

I loaded 'Toccata' ripped from the DVD-A and from the SACD into Audacity (to have an overall look) and the into Audition (to forensically examine a channel -- I chose the left front). I see no evidence of different mixing. However, there has certainly been some curious remastering from DVD-A to SACD that could explain what people are hearing. I'm going to post a series of images to show similarity and difference.

1) First, here's the DVDA (upper 6) and the SACD (lower 6) in Audacity. If you can spot any differences in the mixes, let me know, because I don't see (or hear) any.

Toccata1.png
 
Last edited:
Toccata DVDA (top) -vs SACD (bottom)
2) Waveforms of the left front channel only. Eagle eyes will notice that the SACD looks slightly lower in level than the DVDA. They would be correct. The average RMS level of the SACD is about a 1 decibel lower (quieter) than the DVDA. The SACD is shifted 'left' by about about second -- meaning, there's a second more of silence at the start, and a second less of it at the end, than the DVD-A. Forget about invert/mixpasting unless you edit first (and match sample rates)

Toccata2.png
 
Last edited:
Toccata DVDA (top) -vs SACD (bottom), left front channel
3) There are some clipped peaks in the DVD-A. Not a whole lot, less than 10. Here's the first and biggest one, which occurs just before the full band returns at the end of Palmer's blooping and bleeping drum solo. The clipping is reduced in the SACD. You don't get this 'restoration' from just converting 96Khz to 88 (I tried) . You don't get it from just reducing the level.


Toccata3.png
 
Toccata DVDA (top) -vs SACD (bottom), left front channel
4) Yow! This is a spectral view. Remember, a 96/24 file (the DVDA) can have content up to 48 kHz; an 88.2/24 file (the SACD) , up to just a little less, 44 kHz. Something radical has been done to the SACD here. Musically, it tops out at about 23 kHz. Not absolutely a 'brickwall' but it quickly fades to total silence, then DSD noise starts to appear above that.

Toccata4.jpg
 
Toccata DVDA vs SACD), left front channel
5) So how does this sound? Here's a difference plot of the SACD frequency plot (not shown) minus the DVDA frequency plot (not shown --the DVDA was converted to 88.2 to make the plot points the same for both). I'm only showing the audible range, on the X-axis (10 Hz to 20kHz). In the upper bass and midrange there's little difference, less than 1 dB (pay attention to the vertical axis...the whole spread shown is only 4 db plus or minus), In the bass and treble (from about 100Hz downward and about 6KHz upward) there's a few dB less energy in the SACD. Sort of 'frowny' EQ -- remember, this could also mean the DVDA had a 'smiley' EQ, compared to whatever the 'flat' 5.1 master mix is - the SACD might actually reflect that better. We can't know. The bass results have to be taken with a grain of salt, as the FFT resolution is much less there, making the measurements more approximate. But on earbuds as I did this, it did seem to me that the left channel of the SACD was less bassy than the DVDA's. The droop in the treble could be EQ, could partly be (but should not be) some poor filtering -- it is NOT a necessary or expected effect of lowering the sample rate from 96 to 88. If the DVDA sounds shrill and/or over-bassy to you, the SACD could sound better. If the DVDA sounds great to you, the SACD could sound worse. Either way, this SACD has been truly *remastered*, as demonstrated by the track timing shift, and the lowpass filtering, and the EQ difference in the audible range. I would NOT be surprised if listeners could tell these apart in a blind test.

Toccata5.png
 
Last edited:
ssully said:
Toccata DVDA vs SACD), left front channel
5) So how does this sound? Here's a difference plot of the SACD frequency plot (not shown) minus the DVDA frequency plot (not shown --the DVDA was converted to 88.2 to make the plot points the same for both). I'm only showing the audible range, on the X-axis (10 Hz to 20kHz). In the upper bass and midrange there's little difference, less than 1 dB (pay attention to the vertical axis...the whole spread shown is only 4 db plus or minus), In the bass and treble (from about 100Hz downward and about 6KHz upward) there's a few dB less energy in the SACD. Sort of 'frowny' EQ -- remember, this could also mean the DVDA had a 'smiley' EQ, compared to whatever the 'flat' 5.1 master mix is - the SACD might actually reflect that better. We can't know. The bass results have to be taken with a grain of salt, as the FFT resolution is much less there, making the measurements more approximate. But on earbuds as I did this, it did seem to me that the left channel of the SACD was less bassy than the DVDA's. The droop in the treble could be EQ, could partly be (but should not be) some poor filtering -- it is NOT a necessary or expected effect of lowering the sample rate from 96 to 88. If the DVDA sounds shrill and/or over-bassy to you, the SACD could sound better. If the DVDA sounds great to you, the SACD could sound worse. Either way, this SACD has been truly *remastered*, as demonstrated by the track timing shift, and the lowpass filtering, and the EQ difference in the audible range. I would NOT be surprised if listeners could tell these apart in a blind test.

View attachment 46020
Click to expand...
I might be reading the last graph wrong. It looks like the high frequencies start rolling off pretty dramatically at around 7k ?
 
Had the SACD and have had the DVD-A forever. Sold the SACD after a few listens. I've seen all the graphs but I just prefer the DVD-A. Must me me.
 
Aren’t us old farts only supposed to be able to hear up to about 12-16 kHz anyway. On the other hand maybe all that ultra- high DSD noise is not heard, but still perceived as a vague tiring barrage.
 
DSD and HD PCM (24 bit 96k) are equally capable containers to preserve full quality audio to the extreme. When you hear one sounding different than the other when the program is the same original mix, you're critiquing the mastering work that was done between them.

This comment isn't going to change anyone's mind that's already made up of course! You can always investigate this yourself if interested. It does get tech involved to verify that you have reference points and are not inadvertently altering things yourself. If you're hearing high frequency noise from DSD, something's up with your DSD converters or you have a receiver that's actually converting to PCM on the fly and you're listening to artifacts from a not so great job at doing that.

This comes from a period of early DVDA 5.1 mixes that often paid no respect to original mix finesse. There are even some cases where there was an original surround mix in quad that is left off the disc. And again, nothing from the original is respected or preserved.
With that said, this is probably one of the better ones I've heard from this period. Not perfect. A bit hyped. The alternate takes as mentioned. But a good mix and effort. The unfinished Jakko mix with the awkward errors is unlistenable.
 
Beefalo said:
I might be reading the last graph wrong. It looks like the high frequencies start rolling off pretty dramatically at around 7k ?
Click to expand...


"pay attention to the vertical axis...the whole spread shown is only 4 db plus or minus "

" In the bass and treble (from about 100Hz downward and about 6KHz upward) there's a few dB less energy in the SACD. "
 
shokhead said:
Had the SACD and have had the DVD-A forever. Sold the SACD after a few listens. I've seen all the graphs but I just prefer the DVD-A. Must me me.
Click to expand...


I don't understand this reply. The evidence shows why it's entirely possible to prefer either one: they are, in fact, different enough for it to be audible. So of course it's you. There's no need to be defensive about such a preference. Unlike many audiophile preferences, it's based on something real.
 
Last edited:
jimfisheye said:
DSD and HD PCM (24 bit 96k) are equally capable containers to preserve full quality audio to the extreme. When you hear one sounding different than the other when the program is the same original mix, you're critiquing the mastering work that was done between them.
Click to expand...

Exactly.

This is not an example of SACD vs DVDA as formats. There are no inherent audible differences between those. The DVDA and SACD EQ easily could have been left identical in the audible range. But they aren't: there is a small but significant mastering difference. Someone made a choice.

Even apart from the EQ difference, the spectral view by itself shows that the SACD certainly is not a straight transcode from PCM to DSD. The 23kHz cutoff in the SACD seems unnecessary -- and peculiar. If the full-range signal was passed through a normal 48kHz sampling stage, the cutoff should be little higher: 24 kHz. I can model this approximately by downsampling the 96khz DVDA to 48khz, then upsampling to 88 or 96 (I don't have a DSD transcoder handy to re-create the DSD noise). Spectral content goes all the way up to 24 kHz; it doesn't stop at 23 kHz, the way the SACD does. I wonder what happened there?

(By itself it should make no audible difference of course. Unless one is a bat. In both the DVDA and SACD, the human-audible range frequencies are all there...just EQ'd differently.)
 
Last edited:
J. PUPSTER said:
Aren’t us old farts only supposed to be able to hear up to about 12-16 kHz anyway. On the other hand maybe all that ultra- high DSD noise is not heard, but still perceived as a vague tiring barrage.
Click to expand...


Hardware SACD players filter out everything above either 50 kHz or 100kHz as a final output step. And the only way ultrasonic noise can be 'heard' over a consumer system is if it is causing the system to distort in the audible (20-20k) range.
 
Remember: if I showed the graph with the SACD as the reference, you'd see a plot that looked like a dreaded *smiley face* for the DVDA. It's a matter of perspective. Without access to the actual master mix, we don't know which one is most like it.
 
tarkusnj said:
The truth is not one person on this Earth would be able to hear the difference in an A-B comparison.
Click to expand...


Psychoacoustics tells us: the truth is, some would. Depending on how carefully they listen, especially if the difference carries over to all front and rear channels (and the test would have to be blind, not just A/B). This isn't a case where the difference is <0.5 dB at 19 kHz. This is a trend that produces a ~2dB difference by 12kHz, within the range of even 'old farts'. ;>
 
ssully said:
I don't understand this reply. The evidence shows why it's entirely possible to prefer either one: they are, in fact, different enough for it to be audible. So of course it's you. There's no need to be defensive about such a preference. Unlike many audiophile preferences, it's based on something real.
Click to expand...
Nobody being defensive here. Kind of an odd thing to think imo.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

dabl
Ripping ELP - BRAIN SALAD SURGERY [DVD-A][2000 WB]
2
Replies
26
Views
2K
ssully
S
tarkusnj
ELP Welcome Back My Friends Brain Salad Surgery Live In surround
Replies
1
Views
1K
JohnN
JohnN
sjcorne
  • Poll
HiRez Poll Mancini, Henry - BEST OF VOL 1&2, CONCERT SOUND, SALUTES SOUSA [SACD]
Replies
0
Views
366
sjcorne
sjcorne
G
Large List Multichannel 5.1 for sale, Sacd, Blu Ray audio,Dvd Audio : Steven Wilson, Emerson Lake Palmer, Genesis, Jethro Tull and much more!
Replies
3
Views
4K
Godman
G
G
SOLD —- Emerson Lake & Palmer Self Titled with "Lucky Man" DVD-A and CDs
Replies
2
Views
1K
G E
G

Latest posts

Back
Top