The Collection: An Adventure In Sound - Audio Fidelity 4.0 Multichannel SACD (May 2016)

QuadraphonicQuad

Help Support QuadraphonicQuad:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Here's what "grazing in the grass' looks like.

Just an observation:
That weak-looking FL track contains bass and drums, and little else to my ears.

what a weird mix.. no idea exactly what they were going for with it but this is what I'm hearing on the SACD;

FL = bass, drums
FR = lead vocals, backing vocals, congas, tambourine, strings.
SL = lead vocals, backing vocals, strings, reverb of congas.
SR = lead vocals, backing vocals, strings, bass (lower in mix), rhythm guitar, reverb of congas, fuzz guitar solo.

Fixed it for you, fred. ;)
Good catch on the bass element in RR, I had missed that.

Thanks for the thoughtful analysis, gents.
:worthy

If I might direct your attention to the instrumental break after “Can you dig it, baby…” from 1:30 - 1:45:
To me that is a legitimate mix that doesn’t sound like a mistake.

[Edit: meant to attach this slice of sully's audio grab]

Screen Shot 2017-10-16 at 3.40.56 PM.png


I mean, be fair. This tune was recorded in Hollywood in 1968.
No idea when it was mixed for surround, by whom, or what kind of multi-tracks they had to work with.
Possibly the FL was mixed to one track on the fly, as this couldn’t possibly have been intended for surround release at the time.

Very close to the time period of Sgt Pepper.
Folks slag off Giles Martin for not getting adventurous enough with the 2017 surround.
Well, here you go then. Creativity in vintage quad.
Not fair to apply today’s standards to fifty-year old recordings.

For a bit of perspective, I humbly suggest listening to some 60s soul in stereo, then switching directly to this track.
Without listening to a Wilson prog mix or any of the newer Collection tracks along the way.

The orchestra and vocals FR are certainly hot to my ears, perhaps a bit, what, overdriven, compressed?
But again, Pop recorded in the 60s for mono jukeboxes and car radios, not audiophiles.

Kindly note the mastering for SACD was by Steve Hoffman.

If one doesn't appreciate discrete bass / drum in a front channel, hot voc. / orch. opposite front, so be it, but to me it doesn’t sound broken, just different.

If one can manage to stand up from his chair in the sweet spot and walk a step or two toward the FL, turn and face the RR, that is another interesting way to hear the vocals spread out before you with the rhythm section at your back.
Do I recall correctly that this "diamond" speaker arrangement [ L, R, Frt Ctr, Rear Ctr] was an early quad experiment, rotated 90 degrees from the standard "square" speakers on the corners configuration that became standard?

[Edit: deleted repeating myself]


From Wiki:

The Friends of Distinction recorded a vocal cover version of the tune in 1969 on RCA Victor, which was also a Top Ten pop and R&B hit, reaching no. 3 on the former and no. 5 on the latter.
One of the group's members, Harry Elston, wrote lyrics for the song and sang lead on the Friends Of Distinction's version of it.

The Friends of Distinction - vocals
Max Bennett - electric bass
Johnny Guthrie - drums
Al Casey and Arthur Wright - guitars
Gene Cipriano - piccolo flute
John Audino, Anthony Terran, Bud Childers, Dalton Smith - trumpets
King Errisson - congas
Douglas Davis - cello
Jim Horn - tenor saxophone,
Garry Nuttycombe - viola
Harry Bluestone, Jimmy Getzoff - violins
Jack Arnold - percussion
Larry Knechtel - piano
 
Last edited:
Just an observation:
That weak-looking FL track contains bass and drums, and little else to my ears.



Fixed it for you, fred. ;)
Good catch on the bass element in RR, I had missed that.

Thanks for the thoughtful analysis, gents.
:worthy

If I might direct your attention to the instrumental break after “Can you dig it, baby…” from 1:30 - 1:45:
To me that is a legitimate mix that doesn’t sound like a mistake.


View attachment 30856

I mean, be fair. This tune was recorded in Hollywood in 1968.
No idea when it was mixed for surround, by whom, or what kind of multi-tracks they had to work with.
Possibly the FL was mixed to one track on the fly, as this couldn’t possibly have been intended for surround release at the time.

Very close to the time period of Sgt Pepper.
Folks slag off Giles Martin for not getting adventurous enough with the 2017 surround.
Well, here you go then. Creativity in vintage quad.
Not fair to apply today’s standards to fifty-year old recordings.

For a bit of perspective, I humbly suggest listening to some 60s soul in stereo, then switching directly to this track.
Without listening to a Wilson prog mix or any of the newer Collection tracks along the way.

The orchestra and vocals FR are certainly hot to my ears, perhaps a bit, what, overdriven, compressed?
But again, Pop recorded in the 60s for mono jukeboxes and car radios, not audiophiles.

Kindly note the mastering for SACD was by Steve Hoffman.

If one doesn't appreciate discrete bass / drum in a front channel, hot voc. / orch. opposite front, so be it, but to me it doesn’t sound broken, just different.

If one can manage to stand up from his chair in the sweet spot and walk a step or two toward the FL, turn and face the RR, that is another interesting way to hear the vocals spread out before you with the rhythm section at your back.
Do I recall correctly that this "diamond" speaker arrangement [ L, R, Frt Ctr, Rear Ctr] was an early quad experiment, rotated 90 degrees from the standard "square" speakers on the corners configuration that became standard?

I humbly suggest listening to some 60s soul in stereo then switching directly to this track in surround without listening to contemporary Steven Wilson prog mixes along the way might re-calibrate one’s perspective a bit.


From Wiki:

thanks for all the info Dave, especially regarding the diamond Quad speaker arrangement, it could well be what this mix is all about as its kinda weird no matter which way you flip about the different channels in the 4 speakers and for the perspective on the potential limitations inherent in the original multitrack recording, tbh I wasn't aware the track was from "way back" in 1968 and thought it was some early Quad 1971 job! :)

good to know they're congas and not bongos or whatever i thought they were!
please crank up the FL on your system and you'll pick up on all the other stuff, its just at a really low level compared to the same elements also present in the other channels. ain't that peculiar! oops, wrong slice of soul :p
 
so i'm speculating like wild! ... but maybe the tracks are, if its a diamond Quad arrangement, 1 = Centre Rear, 2 = Front Left, 3 = Centre Front, 4 = Front Right (as vocals are lowest in Trk 1 and most prominent in Trk 3) or something like that.. or maybe the loudest channel (2) is Centre Front and the quietest is Centre Rear (1) and the other two tracks are the L & R (either way 3 & 4)..?
oh I think I'll go back to Billy Paul, he's just as funky as the FoD and he's in all the "right" channels, I mean correct not right, the Friends of D are all in the Right channels, just not the usual ones.. bah you know what I mean... I hope! :ugham:
 
Back
Top