Bread and Grover Washington Multichannel SACDs - Official Audio Fidelity Announcement

QuadraphonicQuad

Help Support QuadraphonicQuad:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Hi Otto, no problem. I know it is not really a competition, but Andy Jackson has 4 surround mixes on his name, On an Island, The Division Bell, The Endless River and Signal to Noise.

Rob Reed has his solo album, the Kompendium album and 4 Magenta albums released in surround. Both not much but it looks like they are to stay in the surround camp.
i'm not familiar with Magenta and Rob Reed so could be you're right.
as for AJ, he has lone album mixed in 4.0
rest three he was only mixing engineer and that's doesn't count, because
as an engineer he doing only what he was hired to do.
that being said, this left us so far with not much. only 3 from new generation artists,
who discovered, understand and employs advantages of surround mixes.
 
This is a greatest hits album so that could have been a deciding factor. What I think would really sell would be a best of quad sacd. There are many hits to choose from. Could fill up at least half a dozen discs. Probably a nightmare to put together though. Can you just imagine the possibilities.
Phil
 
i'm not familiar with Magenta and Rob Reed so could be you're right.
as for AJ, he has lone album mixed in 4.0
rest three he was only mixing engineer and that's doesn't count, because
as an engineer he doing only what he was hired to do.
that being said, this left us so far with not much. only 3 from new generation artists,
who discovered, understand and employs advantages of surround mixes.

Sorry but I do not understand the difference between a mixer and a mixing engineer. As far as I know AJ mixed OAI, TDB and TER in surround and the mixes are excellent. Anyway, enjoy the music and mix, which I do a lot.
 
What I think would really sell would be a best of quad sacd. There are many hits to choose from. Could fill up at least half a dozen discs. Probably a nightmare to put together though. Can you just imagine the possibilities.
Phil

The problem with something like this is that they would be trying to please everyone. Normally, but not always, I tend to stay away from compilation discs. For instance, take the recent Audio Fidelity SACD releases of LEGENDS. There are artists on these that I do not like. I mean, not only do I not like Lynyrd Skynyrd (except for maybe a couple of their songs), I never liked (and never will) "Freebird". :)
 
I know we're getting a little OT here, but which of Rob Reeds's surround albums are DVD-A? I know "Sanctuary" and the Kompendium album are on DVD-A, but are all the Magenta albums DVD-V?

Hi Ryan, yes the Magenta albums are dvdv, with the latest, 27 Club in DTS 24/96. The others are DD, as far as I know. Do not have the discs nearby.

However, Neil Wilkes mentioned a while ago that he and Rob were looking into making the older albums available in hi res format. Download or dvda.
 
Hi Ryan, yes the Magenta albums are dvdv, with the latest, 27 Club in DTS 24/96. The others are DD, as far as I know. Do not have the discs nearby.

However, Neil Wilkes mentioned a while ago that he and Rob were looking into making the older albums available in hi res format. Download or dvda.

Thanks, Robert. I just rechecked the polls and it shows all Magenta discs as DD only (27 Club being the only exception).
I am glad that DVD-A or High Res downloads are still a possibility for these Magenta albums.
I am not opposed to possibly getting '27 Club' at some point as is though.
'Sanctuary' though is my highest priority since it is already DVD-A.
(But then again I'm still spending money on the newest AF Quad SACDs, Rick Wakeman DVD-As, and Simple Minds, so I might not have any money left!) ;)
 
Something for everybody. No harm in that. They should release as many Quad recordings they can locate and more 5.1 mixes. :)

Keep em' coming!!!:banana:


If they release the Bread compilation, I have no problem with that. I've always liked some of the soft-rock bands from the '70s, and they're one of them. They should just keep them coming in pairs, though, and make the other one the E. Scheiner 5.1 of Pretzel Logic. I also think they need to start getting some straight-ahead hard rock titles into the line-up as well.
 
thanks, i didn't know it. should check out.
i do have their previous, beginning i guess from 2006, but all DTS and really not greatest sounding stuff even for such kind of music.

DTS DVDs are still high-res, even though they're not lossless. The real distinction is that they're not advanced resolution. When you consider, for example, what Steven Wilson has done with the Jethro Tull releases, the quality has come a long way over the years.
 
DTS DVDs are still high-res, even though they're not lossless. The real distinction is that they're not advanced resolution. When you consider, for example, what Steven Wilson has done with the Jethro Tull releases, the quality has come a long way over the years.

That sounds like a new definition to me. I've always understood high-res to mean lossless. Not trying to be argumentative; just stating the facts as I know them.
 
....take the recent Audio Fidelity SACD releases of LEGENDS. There are artists on these that I do not like. I mean, not only do I not like Lynyrd Skynyrd (except for maybe a couple of their songs), I never liked (and never will) "Freebird". :)
Lucky for you they faded it out early then.
 
Lucky for me, I didn't purchase it. smiley_tongue.gif
 
Sorry but I do not understand the difference between a mixer and a mixing engineer. As far as I know AJ mixed OAI, TDB and TER in surround and the mixes are excellent. Anyway, enjoy the music and mix, which I do a lot.
as i mentioned above, the mixing engineer only does what he was asked to do and not makes his own decision should be his
mix surround or stereo.
as an artist, Andy decided to do his own work "Signal to Noise" into surround as well as stereo, thus he has freedom of choice.
my point is, final word on how mix will be executed, remains for artists/authors and if they are ignorant or just stupidly stubborn
or simply arrogant (which is very common) they will never give approval for surround mix with no difference who will gonna do the mix,
Steven, Elliot Scheiner, Greg Penny or Andy.
another important point, artist, who is open for surround, even during early stage sees his future work to be heard in surround and
musical arrangement takes to consideration and included this factor.
 
DTS DVDs are still high-res, even though they're not lossless. The real distinction is that they're not advanced resolution. When you consider, for example, what Steven Wilson has done with the Jethro Tull releases, the quality has come a long way over the years.
i know, plenty of people pretty happy with DTS, so everyone to their own but i can notice
sound fidelity difference between DTS and lossless, doesn't matter later one is surround or just stereo.
so this sort of hard to accept DTS as HiRez format.
 
That sounds like a new definition to me. I've always understood high-res to mean lossless. Not trying to be argumentative; just stating the facts as I know them.

Not trying to redefine anything. I'm thinking of it from the perspective of the whole timeline of the move away from standard CD audio. There was a time back in the beginning when the DTS DVDs were considered one of the forms of high resolution playback. Obviously the preferred ones were DVD-A and SACD, but I've never considered DTS (particularly 96/24) DVDs to be excluded from that general class - that's all.
 
i know, plenty of people pretty happy with DTS, so everyone to their own but i can notice
sound fidelity difference between DTS and lossless, doesn't matter later one is surround or just stereo.
so this sort of hard to accept DTS as HiRez format.

Sounds reasonable to me, Otto.
 
Commercial DTS is at least 24-bit/48k as a rule, which qualifies as hi-res in my book. Sounds pretty damn good however you categorize it. Lossless is preferable, but I'll take what I can get.
 
Lossy dts was acceptable to me back in the DVD days but I've moved on and don't buy lossy dts product anymore.
 
It is interesting that different people have different opinions about the term "high-res". Honestly, I always thought the term meant "lossless" but now I see that it ain't necessarily so. That is good to know. In the future I'll likely ask for clarification (is it dts, dvda,etc.?) or avoid the term altogether.
 
So, what are the specs on Dolby Digital? Maybe it's "high-res" too then?
 
Back
Top