The reason they may cancel it is if they don't carry it. It may be exclusively offered through Acoustic Sounds, at least for the initial run.
Roger Waters Amused to Death in 5.1?
- Thread starter Neil Palfreyman
- Start date
Help Support QuadraphonicQuad:
The reason they may cancel it is if they don't carry it. It may be exclusively offered through Acoustic Sounds, at least for the initial run.
Lute
2K Club - QQ Super Nova
It's fascinating to hear everyone's different take on Floyd's music and surround mixes. I guess we're not all just bricks in the wall after all. As for me, I've played the heck out of all of them...enjoying them all equally (well almost equally). 
For the past few months, Endless River has been on at home and in the car endlessly (pun intended). I thought it was great to hear Parson's mix of DSOTM in the Immersion box set. I hadn't heard it since the 70s. I enjoyed it, but at times it does sound like gimmicky 70s Quad. I am not against "gimmicky" effects in surround mixes. Actually, I love them. But, Parson's mix left me with a slightly rough and unpolished impression. So, I'll have to agree with the band. I usually play Gutherie's mix. And I can't wait to listen to Amused to Death.
I'd be one very happy camper if Gutherie remixed all of Floyd's albums into 4.0 or 5.1. :51banana:
For the past few months, Endless River has been on at home and in the car endlessly (pun intended). I thought it was great to hear Parson's mix of DSOTM in the Immersion box set. I hadn't heard it since the 70s. I enjoyed it, but at times it does sound like gimmicky 70s Quad. I am not against "gimmicky" effects in surround mixes. Actually, I love them. But, Parson's mix left me with a slightly rough and unpolished impression. So, I'll have to agree with the band. I usually play Gutherie's mix. And I can't wait to listen to Amused to Death.I'd be one very happy camper if Gutherie remixed all of Floyd's albums into 4.0 or 5.1. :51banana:
That would be creepy. I wouldn't support that. If I can't at least get it from Elusive instead, I'll go with the Blu-ray.
Jpc.de has the various configuration on pre-order as well.
César
2K Club - QQ Super Nova
Amazon.de and uk are taking preorders of the sacd as well. I think we must wait and see what happens with .com preorders. Mine is still alive, even though the link to the sacd inside the preorder is dead. I take it as a good sign, amazon does not hesitate to cancel the preorders when there's a reason
I ordered from http://www.northendhaarlem.nl/a-28339812/wordt-verwacht/roger-waters-amused-to-death-sacd/ , see what that brings
.
splinter7
1K Club - QQ Shooting Star
I have nothing to back this up but I think I feel bad for Acoustic Sounds -
Sony did not seem interested in directly releasing any high def/5.1 version of this back in early 2014. Somehow Waters & Acoustic Sounds worked out an agreement - presumably the rights are worked out with Sony and lo and behold on April 6th, I placed my order for Amused to Death SACD.
Shortly thereafter a good # of releases (Quadrophenia, Legend...) with high def audio via blu-ray start showing up in the market and start to create a small buzz. High Def music on a format that is already being accepted by the masses. A label must be thinking "Fantastic" one last way to mine back catalog and get $25 + a pop. Nice little niche to go along with the slight up swell in vinyl.
Then Gilmour & compnay release not 1 but 2 titles with high def content to enthusiastic sales. So does Sony think this and decide - forget Acoustic Sounds, let's release this ourselves.
The downside for AS is that there will be people like me that can't or don't really want to buy 2 different formats for relatively the same thing. There is little chance that they will sell the same # of SACDs now that there is a Blu-ray option.
I am not a purist - I can't really detect the frequency improvements between the formats. I just want a good sounding, discrete mix on a future friendly format at a competitive price. So I am leaning to Blu-Ray. Still I feel a little bad - AS was the first at the table with this and now it appears that I am bailing on them.
This is an excellent point. Acoustic Sounds has invested in SACD, picking up where Sony dumped it off. Along with Audio Fidelity and other specialty labels, the format survives. Now here comes Sony, again, basically ripping the carpet out from under AS.
Nothing new here. AS makes the investment, Sony sneaks in and takes the reward. I think I may just order the SACD now to support AS.
I can't even express how much distaste I have for Sony..from the format wars to their proprietary accessories..someone on here asked me why I never bought another DVD-A after my first purchase until a decade later...because when I saw them trot out a $5,000 SACD player when DVD-A was just getting traction in the marketplace all I could think about was the Beta machine I bought that they botched and DVD controlled the marketplace...when you get in bed with Sony it's like putting lipstick on a pig...it might look better at first but at the end of the day it's still a pig..
there aren't anything to feel sorrow about AS. AS and AF does have their steady fanatical consumer base
and without much of sweating do make for bread and even butter.
i hate Sony but Sony has something, i'm interested in and way more abilities to offer MANY MORE SURROUND
releases, than AS and AF combined. neither AS or AF can comply anything, without begging the big 3 for sources
and rights and so far wasn't much have been concerned about surround sound issues.
so let's do not idolize boutique labels, they not much better in their approach to consumers than other big three.
and without much of sweating do make for bread and even butter.
i hate Sony but Sony has something, i'm interested in and way more abilities to offer MANY MORE SURROUND
releases, than AS and AF combined. neither AS or AF can comply anything, without begging the big 3 for sources
and rights and so far wasn't much have been concerned about surround sound issues.
so let's do not idolize boutique labels, they not much better in their approach to consumers than other big three.
Well, I'm sure it's tempting for the major labels to figure why let the reissue guys make money from their catalog when the majors can do it directly. The flip side of that situation is that these days, the major labels often make more $ from their catalog licensing one song for a movie or for TV use than if they release it themselves. So they are very comfortable licensing titles these days, licensing is the core of how some companies (like Dolby and DTS for example) make their money. The major labels are clearly heading that way.
As for Acoustic Sounds, they will sell some Multichannel SACDs, DSD Downloads and Vinyl LPs of Amused to Death. They have a strong following that won't abandon them just because Sony Music (or another major label) is releasing a title AS is reissuing. That is the reward for consistently releasing excellent quality reissues as they have done and will continue to do.
What about all those poor folk who spent huge dollars on the original Sony SACD players that did not do surround, or those first and second generation BluRay players that were rushed out with inadequate or missing features just to torpedo HD-DVD from getting a foothold in the HD disc marketplace. They were never going to accept a Beta-type failure again, no matter what the cost. What the cost.
Well, the initial SACD introduction included an announcement that Multichannel would be added to the format - along with a compatible Hybrid layer with CD compatibility at a later date. So fans who attended the demonstrations and read the articles on the format knew that.
I know because I attended the West Coast debut of both DVD Audio and SACD in San Francisco at the AES Convention. This is where Sony and Philips showed off the first SACD player (from Sony) and played us Multichannel DSD files by Tom Jung (DMP Records) and Philips (Music of Jerry Goldsmith) that later were issued as Hybrid Layer SACDs (with CD layer) and Multichannel SACDs as promised. Along with DVD Audio demos from the DVD Audio licensees and patent holders.
But sometimes, the availability of a new format also includes a rush by some to get the very first players. In the consumer electronics industry these fans are known as "early adopters" or for those who absolutely have to be the first on the block with a new format and product - "heat seekers".
There are millions and millions of dollars in licensing royalties to be made when a format succeeds. So we can beat up or "hate" Sony and Philips for CD, DVD, SACD and Blu Ray, or Panasonic for the Elcaset, or Panasonic, Dolby, Meridian and Toshiba for DVD Video (minus Meridian), DVD Audio and HD-DVD or Berkeley Audio Labs for HDCD, but without them these formats would not have been developed and given a chance to succeed.
I'm not in the hate zone, but for those who are into hating, there are plenty of companies out there to distribute your hate for when it comes to competing formats that have, or have not succeeded over the years.
Let the hating continue.....
I know because I attended the West Coast debut of both DVD Audio and SACD in San Francisco at the AES Convention. This is where Sony and Philips showed off the first SACD player (from Sony) and played us Multichannel DSD files by Tom Jung (DMP Records) and Philips (Music of Jerry Goldsmith) that later were issued as Hybrid Layer SACDs (with CD layer) and Multichannel SACDs as promised. Along with DVD Audio demos from the DVD Audio licensees and patent holders.
But sometimes, the availability of a new format also includes a rush by some to get the very first players. In the consumer electronics industry these fans are known as "early adopters" or for those who absolutely have to be the first on the block with a new format and product - "heat seekers".
I call them "beta testers"..because the rush isn't just with consumers...the electronics companies rush those "mostly" untested machines out there with the hope that they can just fix the issues with some software technique...hence the infamous "firmware" update was born...
Last edited:
hey Jon, are you sure they poor? :lookaround
if i hate Sony, i hate them for doing too much mess and inconstancy in almost all their moves.I'm not in the hate zone, but for those who are into hating, there are plenty of companies out there to distribute your hate for when it comes to competing formats that have, or have not succeeded over the years.
Let the hating continue.....
(sadly reality is that they laid their hands on lots of musical material and now all of us in quite a dependency on their mercy).
pretty much same i can say about all those "renaissance" of SACD, DSD... which is nothing else but attempt to drag into today
the remnants from the past formats war and make money on sales of snake oil.
Depends on your audio system, music, etc. Over the years, many people have asked me "are there really people who can't hear the improvement that DSD and SACD bring over conventional PCM"? It is unbelievable to them.
And I tell them, it really does happen.
Depends on your audio system, music, etc. Over the years, many people have asked me "are there really people who can't hear the improvement that DSD and SACD bring over conventional PCM"? It is unbelievable to them.
And I tell them, it really does happen.
i guess... if i could to have "Rolex" perhaps i'll be pretty much convinced it shows me time more precise than my present, about 20 y.o. mechanical "Seiko"
Similar threads
