DSOTM SACD - ICE Interview with Guthrie

QuadraphonicQuad

Help Support QuadraphonicQuad:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
He mentions Chris Thomas as supervising the 1973 mix, and no mention of Alan Parsons? Uncool.
 
From the interview "So I had to be very careful to use the original stereo mix as a model, to make sure we retained the original emotional impact"


UGH! Don't toss your Q8 DTS CD conversions yet! :|
 
Why didn't they use the Quad mix as a standard and keep the stereo -stereo... Where's Alan Parsons ... When we need him!Maybe a dvd-a will be made .. And Alan Parsons can do it RIGHT! LET's Start a petition .... to have Alan Parsons do it !
NOW I'm Worried that this will be like the Roger Waters discs !:rolleyes: :mad: :x <img src=http://www.ezboard.com/intl/aenglish/images/emoticons/embarassed.gif ALT=":eek:"> :|
Rob<img src=http://www.ezboard.com/intl/aenglish/images/emoticons/ohwell.gif ALT=":\">
 
Nobody gives a flying fig about us lowly quadheads. Sounds like we're going to get a watered-down version of the surround mix. Use the stereo mix as a model, indeed! This album was conceived for surround sound!

Oh well, the more things change, the more they stay the same...
 
We get no respect, yet the 2 new formats will fail or succeed with the 5.1 track and the 5.1 track alone.

I have said it before, Joe "MP3" Public could care less about high resolution sound. If he can impress his neighbors with surround sound (like he does with his DVD-V player), he will invest. To hear a higher bit rate or more defined sound, his wife would never buy into that! :D

These discs will sit with our CD-4 and SQ LPs unless Joe Public gets into surround sound.

No brag, just fact!

:-jon
 
Did we ever get clarity on the release date? Are we looking Tuesday or the first. The other thread was ambiguous and I still see the 25th listed around????'

-Doug
 
I don't believe the 3/25/03 date and the 4/01/03 is next.

As for using the stereo version as the model, that is a load of (pardon me) CRAP.

The stereo crowd is properly served by the hi-rez 2.0 version already. It's not as if they had to create one compromise mix to cater to BOTH crowds, right?

My expectation level is really diminished now. All I can think to do is yell loud enough so the stereo wisenheimers over at Steve Hoffman's Stereo Perfection Tofu Shack will sit down and shut the bleep up. [emoticon not req'd]
 
:rollin:

Muhahahaha! Oh my god! THANK YOU TIM!

"Steve Hoffman's Stereo Perfection Tofu Shack", oh, that is just too rich! I haven't busted a gut like that in a long, long time! Man, you NAILED it!

:lol:

 
Has anyone actually HEARD the new mix yet? Or are we just speculating that it's going to suck because Parsons wasn't involved and because Guthrie said he tried to retain the feel of the stereo mix? Quite frankly, I'm GLAD they made an effort to do so. My biggest gripe with newer multichannel mixes is that a lot of them lose the feel and punch of the original mixes. The mixers get it in their head to try and be "creative" with things, and they pretty much ruin it for me. They'll change drum sounds, add in all sorts of instruments that weren't there in the first place ("Rumours," anyone?), and mess with the overall sound. There's only been a few instances that I can think of where the surround mixes sound just as good as the originals, while still taking advantage of the open soundstage (the Police mixes come to mind as a personal favorite of mine).

It doesn't sound like Guthrie basically just "faked" a surround mix from the stereo mix. It sounds like, from his description anyway, that it's still a rather "agressive" mix, with stuff flying all over the place (as was the case with the stereo mix - I've never heard the original quad mix, so I can't compare). Of course he does mention adding some previously-buried guitar lines here and there, which I generally disdain. But hopefully it was tastefully done. And I'm thrilled that they went back to the original pre-bounced multitrack tapes and synched them up. Hopefully this is what EMI will (eventually) do with any future Beatles surround mixes as well. (They did do it for the "Yellow Submarine" remixes, which is a good sign.)

At any rate, I'm pretty stoked to hear this mix, and I'm not going to dismiss it until I actually do.
 
I think most of us are complaining about the <span style="text-decoration:underline">prospect</span> of the NEW surround mix, not solely because it is based on the stereo mix, but because we've already heard the ORIGINAL surround mix and feel it is exceptional! I mean, until you've heard the original mix, you don't know what you are missing. It is incredible, and I really don't think they're going to be able to improve upon it. I feel this especially true given the fact that the surround mix is "based on the stereo mix". To me, this seems a clue that the surround mix will be "less surround" than the original surround mix.

However, I am withholding final judgement until I actually hear the new surround mix. I hope that I am pleasantly surprised. I might even like it better than the original! But like I said, the original surround mix is just so bloody fantastic, I really don't think this will be the case.

 
Only industry insiders have heard the new 5.1 surround mix to date. Now that Circuit City is starting to ship out copies of the DSOTM SACD today and the disc will be on store shelves on Tuesday, we'll all be able to judge in the days ahead.

As to comparisons, the folks who I've talked to who have heard the new 5.1 mix say it smokes the '70s Quad Mix. We'll see.


 
<blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr>"Steve Hoffman's Stereo Perfection Tofu Shack", oh, that is just too rich! I haven't busted a gut like that in a long, long time! Man, you NAILED it![/quote]

I don't think this helps.

Regards,
Metralla
 
It's obvious the major labels are ALL ABOUT marketing the same album to consumers multiple times. Upgrade your vinyl to CD, but wait...here's a 20-bit remaster, but oops, we just found the original multi-track masters so here's the REAL definitive version now with unreleased bonus tracks. All of a sudden, it's the 25th anniversary, so here's a 24-bit remaster in a digipack. And if you're REALLY a fan, you better pick up the German import, because it's a completely different mix for the European market. And we just realized that every previous release was mastered 1 ips too fast - here's the correct version. And, now, c'mon - you really want to hear it in surround, don't you? Just your luck, it's the 30th anniversary!

Now - I'm not specifically talking about Pink Floyd (this goes for the Stones, the Who, Elton and just how many times has Bowie reissued his albums?? hee hee). I think the bottom line is the music industry relies on us listeners to be obsessive-compulsive with our fave artists and I'm pretty damn sure March 25th is not the final release of DSTOM. There's still the 35th, 40th, 69th anniversaries to go.

What needs to happen is the right set of circumstances - i.e. multi-channel explodes and infects the masses, stereo becomes what mono became (a form appreciated by purists and afficianados, let us not forget Billy Corgan actually remixed a Pumpkins album in mono for vinyl release), and finally the buying public demands multi-channel mixes. Nothing against mono, I've heard mono that moves air, and nothing against stereo for that matter - multi-channel, as wonderful as it is, does not invalidate 1 or 2 channel recording. It's a beautiful thing all unto itself.

My point (I swear I'm getting to it!!!) is that if we finally achieve surround-kismet, there will be future DSOTM releases, more than likely one of them will be the time-respected and rare original surround mix. Until then, frankly, I'll eat whatever they're serving up on the surround-buffet.
 
Your right it does leave open the option for them to re-release the album as the original stereo quad and new 5.1 mix on the next anniversary. follow that up a few years later with a brand new mix on the next multichannel format incorporating all previous mixes a few years after that !!

:rollin:
:rollin:
Where will it end ?:evil:
 
It'll have to end with the centennial edition, which will be a 24-track virtual mixing board chip that produces holograms of each member performing their bits. Of course, there will be message boards with people trolling and flaming each other over the competing format = the controversial "Matrix Pill", where you swallow a tablet and you actually become Alan Parsons (giving new meaning to "audiophile junkie").

Or it could be the bicentennial edition, a 9-foot prism (designed by the cryogenically-preserved Hipgnosis gang) that you stand inside and you are time-travelled to Abbey Road 1972.

four more days........
 
Back
Top