The band's management sent me an email today indicating that the SACD is stereo only.
Hmm... indicating is a pretty vague answer, I still hold a slight hope.
The band's management sent me an email today indicating that the SACD is stereo only.
Damn these labels and artists.. when are they going to get with the programme..!? SACD can do MultiChannel, include it in your SACD releases or you are wasting the capacity and capability of the format and losing sales because of the lack of inclusion of MultiCh on your SACD product. Grr..!!
While I can fault the band for not taking 5.1 seriously (they have never embraced it despite having connections with Steve Wilson and other industry professionals with surround proclivity), they did allude very early on in the Pledge Music Campaign that the 5.1 mix would be an exclusive to supporting the pre-order campaign. Originally, the mix was to be exclusive to uber expensive "Ultimate BoxSet". They then found pity on their small band of 5.1 fans who couldn't commit to the uber set by deciding to include it on the median level "Special Edition".
I would speculate that since Pledge Music cannot quite help with distribution to retail outlets, the band decided to work with earMusic to distribute the new album at retail levels. I suppose in an attempt to find something exclusive for earMusic to promote, the idea of a SACD at retail was hatched. A long standing request from some of the band's fanbase was for the music to be made available in highrez formats. So maybe the SACD was a stab at satisfying two goals.
While it might sound like common sense to us that a SACD should include a 5.1 mix if available, I truly believe that:
1: Marillion had little intention of going any farther back on their word regarding the exclusive nature of the 5.1 mix to the Pledge Music Campaign. Communication from the band's manager support that.
2: The band has not shown much support of the highrez or 5.1 formats in the past. To some degree the band has felt the demand for highrez and 5.1 doesn't warrant the expense and there is little support of the merits of 5.1 by the band. It likely would have been overlooked that the SACD format has seen a marriage of highrez & 5.1 capacity on one disc.
This looks like a label screw up to me and if there indeed is a multichannel mix on the SACD it is done without the full knowledge of the band.
But as I have said before regardless of the lack of 5.1, this a magical band that has flown under the radar of misconceived critical perceptions for decades! You owe it to yourself to give them a chance. Their catalog is full of albums that grow on you over time and leads to lasting. As Simon pointed out, the price point is not that bad, give the album a chance at the stereo level!
2: The band has not shown much support of the highrez or 5.1 formats in the past. To some degree the band has felt the demand for highrez and 5.1 doesn't warrant the expense and there is little support of the merits of 5.1 by the band. It likely would have been overlooked that the SACD format has seen a marriage of highrez & 5.1 capacity on one disc.
This looks like a label screw up to me and if there indeed is a multichannel mix on the SACD it is done without the full knowledge of the band.
UGH - regardless whether it is 5.0 or 5.1 or 2.0....your comments sound alarming. I stand by my cancelling order What a mess.
Hmm.. well I'll be re-ordering it in the morning, I think, after all its what I wanted, a standalone surround release of their new album..
(too bleary-eyed to do it at the mo-mo, I'll only order a stack of stuff I really shouldn't if i do it right now.. :beer2 ..ahem.. yes )
My cross post from marillion.com forum:
I'm listening to the 5.1 right now at a decent volume. It sounds pleasant enough but there is something off about it if you ask me. There is not much discrete sounds in the rears other than the odd thing, mostly seem to be reverb and keys. Centre channel is overused. There are vocals and bass in there, which is usually pretty standard and some guitar leads in places which again is pretty standard. However, the drums are in there too and for me it's throwing everything off. When I can hear hi-hat and ride cymbals coming more from the centre than either the L or R it sounds wrong. The sense of a wide sound field is not there as the drums don't spread well.
It does sound like a cross post! What does the stereo layer of the sacd sound like? As its hi-res uncompressed, presumably it should sound pretty good, so all is not lost with this disc, even if the surround mix doesn't amount to much.
I've re-pre-ordered after this latest news! I do wonder if the band's management are trying to keep the contents of the sacd as secret as they can, for fear of anger from people who have paid for the expensive sets in order to get the surround version.
I'm a big fan of the band and do buy all of their albums anyway, surround or just stereo. I was holding off buying F.E.A.R. as I was waiting for people's reports on the surround mix, to decide if it was worth the expense of the bigger sets or not. I do have their surround versions of Sounds and Radiation. I will admit that the mixes aren't anywhere near Steven Wilson's Hand Cannot Erase quality, but they are much better than the disappointing Steve Hackett Wolflight 5.1 mix, in that they do have valid things coming out of the rear speakers at times. I did revisit Sounds and Radiation again recently, and the mixes were better than I'd remembered them to be. I do really like both of these albums, and these surround mixes I would say are the best sounding versions that I have of them, so weren't a complete waste of time and money.
ps I agree, Marbles in surround would be wonderful, its near the top of my surround wishlist.
yes - true
Enter your email address to join: