DVD/DTS Poll Chicago - Chicago Transit Authority [DTS 96/24 DVD]

QuadraphonicQuad

Help Support QuadraphonicQuad:

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

Rate the DTS DVD of Chicago - CHICAGO TRANSIT AUTHORITY


  • Total voters
    102
I commented on the DVD earlier but didnt give a rating. I really love this disc and give it a 9. The songs on CTA are classic. I love Beginnings and the rest...
 
This deserves a 10 for the whole package.
The quadradisc sleeve is a great touch, even tho it was SQ originally ;).
I won't comment on content, since I'm 60 and this got played a lot in my college yrs :D The album is a true classic!
Sonically, even tho it's not lossless, I don't know how it could have been done better. The bite of the brass, edge of the guitar, & I'll say even bass was all there. In Introduction, I thought it was a little bass shy, but then I remembered I had my AVR's EQ calibration, phase & standing wave controls On for using sub with full range mains. When I turned the phase control & standing wave filters off, all the bass came through, tight & accurate. The quad mix is perfect, no need for messing with it to get 5.1; IMO, a .1 track could have upset the balance of the mix.

Isn't there a comment place on Rhino's site? I think they need to read how much we like this one & encourage them to do many more.
Hopefully, CTA is "only the beginning" ;)

ss9001
Steve
 
Mixed bag:
Good;
-the fact that it was released , albeit in DTS96/24 (thank goodness it wasn't its "eunuched" younger brother, 48/24)
-the packaging
Bad
-horrible flat transfer. the people couldn't even be bothereed to "spice" it in a "transparent way", maybe a bit of Harmomic Exciter , a bit of lo freq boost, etc, but not make it sound different , only a bit more modern, ; instead it looks as though they got the tapes, tranferred them to 96/24 and sent it to be pressed, the masterin engineer was asleep.
-No f*cking lyrics slideshow...but wait, you get ....A MOVING LOGO that changes sides on differerent songs ...WOOOOWWW!!! thrilling!!!...NOT!!!....
I'm sorry , I could have made this release a much better one with my PRESENT GEAR!!!
If this is how it is going to be, I will start pondering (pinky) whether to get the next ones., and do my own tranfers that sound way better than this flat transfer...with no extras.... :p
an 8 from me if only because it was released...if I took into account the negative factors, it would go down to a 4...
 
Bad
-horrible flat transfer. the people couldn't even be bothereed to "spice" it in a "transparent way", maybe a bit of Harmomic Exciter , a bit of lo freq boost, etc, but not make it sound different , only a bit more modern, ; instead it looks as though they got the tapes, tranferred them to 96/24 and sent it to be pressed, the masterin engineer was asleep.
Why in God's name would we want this done? Unless you're James William Guercio, and it's still 1968, leave it the hell alone!
 
Why in God's name would we want this done? Unless you're James William Guercio, and it's still 1968, leave it the hell alone!

Well, my dear quad fellow ;
because tape degrades with time and what was once stored in there has deteriorated quite a bit by 2009,
and I am positive that the flat transfer that is on the DVD (if it IS in fact a flat transfer- sure sounds like one) is NOT what that master tape sounded like when it was mixed down in 1974 from six year old tapes.
I'm not saying EQ the hell out of it, but maybe a a little transparent blush and some neutral color lipstick will have done nicely.
 
As a nostalgia item for quad lovers, I'd say you all got a very nice package here and should be doing backflips. I can understand those who want a very high-rez mix wanting more, but that's the breaks, I guess. I am way too young for the quad era, but can imagine that this is exactly what it sounded like when you played the LP.

As a surround fan who doesn't have that sort of attachment, what do I think? I wasn't expecting to think all that much of this, actually, and wound up pleasantly surprised. I'm the first to complain about "flat" mixes, but didn't find this overly so (I disagree with Jon's comments in the other thread, FWIW. You give me the mix the way you expect me to hear it.) I think the low end/LFE issue is a valid one, as it did definitely seem to be missing some degree of oomph. As far as quad mixes go, this is certainly one of the better ones I've heard, with a fuller soundfield and good separation. As a surround fan, I'd give it an 8 out of 10.
 
As a nostalgia item for quad lovers, I'd say you all got a very nice package here and should be doing backflips. I can understand those who want a very high-rez mix wanting more, but that's the breaks, I guess. I am way too young for the quad era, but can imagine that this is exactly what it sounded like when you played the LP.
As someone whose only Chicago vinyl is the quad ones, I can say that it is NOT "exactly what it sounded like when you played the LP". It is much, much better.
 

Attachments

  • 2010-04-05 18.47.05&.jpg
    2010-04-05 18.47.05&.jpg
    190.6 KB · Views: 319
  • 2010-04-05 18.46.35&.jpg
    2010-04-05 18.46.35&.jpg
    190.3 KB · Views: 323
  • 2010-04-05 18.52.05&.jpg
    2010-04-05 18.52.05&.jpg
    145.5 KB · Views: 320
  • 2010-04-05 18.45.25&.jpg
    2010-04-05 18.45.25&.jpg
    197.5 KB · Views: 309
^^
Larry, are you a Chicago fan? :D

When Chicago 1st hit the scene, I bought the stereo LP, then II in SQ II, & stopped. I do have the DVD-A's of II and V, tho. And I agree, these digital discrete versions take a matrix LP to the cleaners. Even with a Fosgate-Tate, there's no way an SQ record is going to have the same separation & clarity (lack of noise). That someone calls CTA "flat" is surprising to me. It's clear, vocals aren't congested or too buried in the mix, horns are bright but not harsh, bass is there & recorded like it would have been for its era, recording wasn't compressed & boosted to near-distortion on loudness. Instruments are well localized and there's some depth to the front soundstage (at least with my speakers) So what's not to like?

Maybe those weaned on SACD's & DVD-A's don't realize how much better they are compared to what we had in our day.
Even though this is only DTS, it's better than what my SQ LP of Chicago II sounds like & its still in pristine shape.
 
Hey Larry, what's that, a Quad boxset of Chicago's first 10 LPs in QUAD?
COOOOOLLLLL!!!!!
When did they sell this, how much was it?
It was a promo only item that Columbia put out in the late '70's--early '80's. The stereo Lps came in it. I got a copy from my friend's used record store, got him to break it up & sell me the box only for $10.00. I then filled it up with quad goodness.
 
I received my copy last week and have been listening to it during the easter holiday. I really like it and I wouldn't like any more if it was in 5.1 or
DVD-A. I think it is good as it is. I guess this is the way it was meant to be heard when the quad mix was done. Why bother to filter out the bass to a separate .1 channel and to make in 5.1. Would that have been any better? As the Stones say "you can't always get what you want" but this release is even more than I could ever have hoped for. Who did expect a true quad release in the year 2010? I didn't, and now we can only hope that Rhino will give us more releases. On the sleeve it says "Quadradisc series supervised by Bill Inglot", so I guess there are more to come. Otherwise they wouldn't have said series.....? One album does certainly not make a series...right?
Mats
 
I really like it and I wouldn't like any more if it was in 5.1 or DVD-A. I think it is good as it is. I guess this is the way it was meant to be heard when the quad mix was done. Why bother to filter out the bass to a separate .1 channel and to make in 5.1. Would that have been any better?

Yes, actually the blank .1 channel activates the bass management system in an older AVR allowing the listener to hear frequencies below 80 Hz in a sub/sat speaker system.
 
On the sleeve it says "Quadradisc series supervised by Bill Inglot", so I guess there are more to come. Otherwise they wouldn't have said series.....? One album does certainly not make a series...right?
Mats

Well, I certainly don't like to pretend to know something I don't, but a Google search for "Bill Inglot" points to websites that say he was laid off from Rhino in 2007. This leaves me with the impression that they are releasing stuff that was pretty much in the can a few years ago. That might explain the DVD-Audio labeling as well. They might be trying to recoup sunk costs.
 
Well, I certainly don't like to pretend to know something I don't, but a Google search for "Bill Inglot" points to websites that say he was laid off from Rhino in 2007. This leaves me with the impression that they are releasing stuff that was pretty much in the can a few years ago. That might explain the DVD-Audio labeling as well. They might be trying to recoup sunk costs.

I saw that notation, and got excited myself. Series?? Sweet! Bill Inglot?? Even better! He's the MAN when it comes to diving into the vaults and finding long lost stereo mixes or multitracks. But then I remembered hearing about it on the Both Sides Now stereo board that Bill DID get laid off a few years back when Rhino did their big purge and pretty much let everyone go. Maybe he's back? Maybe a few of these were finished a few years ago?

Regardless, I got mine today (hooray for cheap shipping!) and I'm pretty impressed. The sound is VERY nice - I can't understand anybody saying it's lacking in Bass. It sounds GREAT to me. All in all, I'm pleased. I'm even happy with the price.....Rhino got $27.47 cents out of me for this. That's with the Monkees code and cheap shipping.


Did anybody else catch the song title cockup?? It's labeled as "South Carolina Purples" on-screen but "South California Purples" in the gatefold and on the mini Obi.
 
well, again, I'm a quad guy - so a front center signal (especially in music) is without meaning - and - to be honest - the concept of a sub woofer is offensive to me (the thing I like about quad, and stereo for that matter) is a degree of directionality - hearing a thump-thump-thump from somewhere in the room (unless its a timpani spaning the rear channels) seem neither to be musically valid, nor in any way directional.
When Rhino came out with Chicago 5 (Dialogue being my favorite track) - I was quite disappointed. Everything good about the original quad
mix was gone. (Same thing happened when they <not rhino> re-issued Elvis Aloha from Hawaii on DVD - it had to have been mixed by some one who had not yet been born when the concert was broadcast - stick to the cd-4/reel),
All that being said (or written - as it were), I'm hoping there will be enough interest in this release to have rhino put out the full Chicago library in quad (using the original quad mix/tape masters). - Chicago 2 in quad had 2 extras instrumental tracks and alternate vocals in spots (always fun)
 
It could be I am just giddy because a surround title was actually released in 2010....but after my first run through on CTA, I'm really happy with it. Classic material, good sound quality, interesting mix, and nice packaging. I had been looking for a decent quad conversion and never found one. This should hold me. I give it a solid 9.
 
Fantastic. This old quad version never sounded better. Frequency range is all there as well as plenty of bass, both at home and in my car. And what about those drums. Sounds like I'm standing right in front of the drummer with the band all around changing positions with each solo. I give it a 10 .
I hope the WB masters held up as well as this one did. After all this master quad tape was made by Columbia.
Philip Spinner
 
Definitely up there in the "More cowbell" category! I gave it a well-deserved 9. I had this album back when it first came out and probably hadn't heard it in 25 years. It is worth the price for the first four songs alone.
 
On the sleeve it says "Quadradisc series supervised by Bill Inglot", so I guess there are more to come. Otherwise they wouldn't have said series.....? One album does certainly not make a series...right?
Mats
I am just guessing, but could "Quadradisc series supervised by Bill Inglot" be simply a reprint from the actual quad LP covers, since these dvd-video versions aren't called Quadradiscs?
 
Back
Top