Rick Wakeman - Six Wives and Arthur

QuadraphonicQuad

Help Support QuadraphonicQuad:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
An interesting thought crossed my mind today:

AFAIK, these Rick Wakeman releases are actually the very first DVD-A/V releases to feature classic Quad mixes instead of newer 5.1 mixes.
That means that it took a label 15 years (since DVD-A/V releases began around 2000) to release a classic Quad mix on DVD-A/V.
Unbelievable, right?
Even Blu-Ray (being the newest high-res format) has been utilized more for Quad than DVD-A/V. ("Quadio", "Aqualung", "Give Me Strength", and the Pink Floyd Immersion sets are the 5 Blu-Ray releases that feature Quad mixes.)
Now obviously I had to specify DVD-A/V in this post because there have been many DVD-V releases that include Quad mixes, but those releases aren't lossless.

Now there's your fun fact for the day! :)
 
A deluxe edition of "No Earthly Connection" is being released in November: https://www.amazon.co.uk/No-Earthly-Connection-Rick-Wakeman/dp/B01KUHNG0I/

(BTW, before anyone asks, no, the current information [or lack thereof] says absolutely nothing about surround sound being included in this set.)

MusicTAP has now confirmed that the 2nd disc in the upcoming "No Earthly Connection" deluxe edition is a CD containing a 1976 BBC live performance from the Hammersmith Odeon.
 
MusicTAP has now confirmed that the 2nd disc in the upcoming "No Earthly Connection" deluxe edition is a CD containing a 1976 BBC live performance from the Hammersmith Odeon.

I'd guess it's the same show as disc 1 in the Wakeman at the BBC 2CD set. (17th June 1976)
 
Yes, it does. However, the 4.0 is not sourced from the master tapes. It is taken from a Q8. All things considered, it sounds better than I thought it would given the source.

With you on that :)

..I said it before to that chap (who popped up, caused a load of stink over the Dutton V SACDs and then promptly buggered off again!) that in the right hands a Q8 can sound very good indeed.. but then some people (no names mentioned!) won't pay heed to advice, especially not if they've got their fingers in their ears.. and will always believe all 8-tracks sound shitty..! :D
 
I posted a mini-rant in the King Arthur thread. The same applies here.

I gave it an eight because:

I don't have thousands of dollars in analog quad machinery and I've no desire to hear more scratchy LP records. Did that from 1969 to 1989, thank you very little, so...

Me personally, I am very happy and grateful this was released so I can enjoy this classic work in quad. If the source tapes can't be found, do you know what that means? Yep. The source tapes can't be found. So this is the only option.


No, it's not. AoQ used his Q8 and CD4 copies in his demo. They both sounded more discrete than the DVDA. (As well as , of course, less loudness-boosted).

Universal could have used a Q8 or a CD4 LP as source, too , rather than use a (suboptimal at that) decode of an SQ encoded LP.

Universal's claim that Q8 quality is 'unacceptable' is bosh, as AoQ's excerpts demonstrate, and by the fact that they subsequently used a Q8 as source for Journey to the Center of the Earth.

The fact that the CD4 LP is rare is also no excuse, it just points to lackluster source research on Universal's part.
 
No, it's not. AoQ used his Q8 and CD4 copies in his demo. They both sounded more discrete than the DVDA. (As well as , of course, less loudness-boosted).

Universal could have used a Q8 or a CD4 LP as source, too , rather than use a (suboptimal at that) decode of an SQ encoded LP.

Universal's claim that Q8 quality is 'unacceptable' is bosh, as AoQ's excerpts demonstrate, and by the fact that they subsequently used a Q8 as source for Journey to the Center of the Earth.

The fact that the CD4 LP is rare is also no excuse, it just points to lackluster source research on Universal's part.

As I've stated before in previous posts, when one compares the Stereo DVD~A of ALL three Wakeman remasters, they are superior, IMO, to the CD~4, Q8 and SQ QUADS hands down as they are 'presumably' from the original Stereo analogue masters.

Having said that, on MY system, I prefer the CD~4 of Arthur to Six Wives and Journey and the Q8 of Journey to the SQ of 6 Wives. Having been an Open Reel fanatic for years (and QUAD Open Reel w/ dolby b), I never liked 3 3/4ips tape which Q8 utilized for the Journey DVD~A QUAD remaster.

But when all is said and done, Universal at least didn't gouge us on the prices for all three and I'm just thankful we did get superior DVD~A stereo remasters of ALL three.......still cheaper, IMO, than HDTrack Stereo downloads [w/o the QUADs]!
 
As I've stated before in previous posts, when one compares the Stereo DVD~A of ALL three Wakeman remasters, they are superior, IMO, to the CD~4, Q8 and SQ QUADS hands down as they are 'presumably' from the original Stereo analogue masters.

No one is talking about 2 channel versus multichannel, which is an apples to oranges comparison. And not everyone would agree with you in any case. For a *multichannel* mix, I clearly prefer a more discrete presentation to the SQ versions I've heard.

But when all is said and done, Universal at least didn't gouge us on the prices for all three and I'm just thankful we did get superior DVD~A stereo remasters of ALL three.......still cheaper, IMO, than HDTrack Stereo downloads [w/o the QUADs]!

Six Wives has been released and re-released at least a few times on CD. Whether the DVDA 2ch is 'superior' to all that came before is entirely a judgment call, when all is said and done. If one goes by dr meter reading, for example, other might be rated 'superior':

http://dr.loudness-war.info/album/list?artist=wakeman&album=wives


(fyi no Wakeman albums are available on HDtracks, and that too would not be a guarantee of 'superiority' if they were)
 
No one is talking about 2 channel versus multichannel, which is an apples to oranges comparison. And not everyone would agree with you in any case. For a *multichannel* mix, I clearly prefer a more discrete presentation to the SQ versions I've heard.



Six Wives has been released and re-released at least a few times on CD. Whether the DVDA 2ch is 'superior' to all that came before is entirely a judgment call, when all is said and done. If one goes by dr meter reading, for example, other might be rated 'superior':

http://dr.loudness-war.info/album/list?artist=wakeman&album=wives


(fyi no Wakeman albums are available on HDtracks, and that too would not be a guarantee of 'superiority' if they were)

I'm JUST reporting what I hear on MY system. I have an exceptional DVD~A player so I feel I can make that claim. Still happy to have them than to NOT have them (QUAD/STEREO)
 
Having done QC for this release, and for some insane reason, not stating ANYWHERE that it's a DVD-A, I can attest to the fact that it was NOT an SQ decode.

First of all, you can not get that kind of separation even with the best of scripts (just listen to the perfect separation of the drums on the left rear, no way josé that it's a decode.)

Second, I saw a note written by an engineer who did a transfer from the MASTER of one of Yes' LANDMARK albums a YEAR after it was recorded and he found all kinds of imperfections; "surface noise", clicks, etc.
Guys, remember , analog tape is great but it's not perfect!
And this was a 40 year old tape!!! (and not even the 1st gen master!)

I was quite amused to listen to it and having it sound better than what I remember listening before it was released.

Yes, the cover is VERY sloppy; no info on who did what and the typos that remind me of the ELP BSS SACD (STS anyone??)... LPCDM??? DTX???? oh well..we got it and, as opposed to the "King Arthur" one which is a DISASTER, this one is quite enjoyable...I'll give it a healthy 8.
 
Having done QC for this release, and for some insane reason, not stating ANYWHERE that it's a DVD-A, I can attest to the fact that it was NOT an SQ decode.

First of all, you can not get that kind of separation even with the best of scripts (just listen to the perfect separation of the drums on the left rear, no way josé that it's a decode.)

Second, I saw a note written by an engineer who did a transfer from the MASTER of one of Yes' LANDMARK albums a YEAR after it was recorded and he found all kinds of imperfections; "surface noise", clicks, etc.
Guys, remember , analog tape is great but it's not perfect!
And this was a 40 year old tape!!! (and not even the 1st gen master!)

I was quite amused to listen to it and having it sound better than what I remember listening before it was released.

Yes, the cover is VERY sloppy; no info on who did what and the typos that remind me of the ELP BSS SACD (STS anyone??)... LPCDM??? DTX???? oh well..we got it and, as opposed to the "King Arthur" one which is a DISASTER, this one is quite enjoyable...I'll give it a healthy 8.

If that's true, then you got a different disc then what was released.
 
Back
Top