According to Matt at MusicTap, we can expect a domestic issue SACD disc from EMI of Roxy Music's most popular album, Avalon.
I welcome this and will purchase the day it comes out!
I welcome this and will purchase the day it comes out!
Roxy Music - Avalon: Domestic Release
- Thread starter timbre4
- Start date
Help Support QuadraphonicQuad:
timbre4 said:
That would be nice. In the meantime, the Avalon Hybrid Multichannel SACD is available from Amazon.Fr and other outlets in Europe. It's a winner. Definitely recommended.
I hear that it is great but I think I will wait until it is available as a NA Release for $20
bmoura said:
Scottmoose
500 Club - QQ All-Star
Guy Robinson said:
Pity it was taken from 3rd generation DAT tapes. The original masters were on a faulty batch of tape and the glue gave up the ghost. The mix isn't bad though.
Scott
Scottmoose said:
Scott
What is the source for the third generation claim? Are you just talking about the stereo master? Multitracks would not be on DAT and DAT isn't a format which should suffer generational loss, being lossless digital?
Patrick
Scottmoose
500 Club - QQ All-Star
Patrick Cleasby said:
Multitracks not on DAT? Precisely. See below for the delightful news. Lossless digital? Depends upon what you call 'lossless' I fear. Again, see below. I was wrong btw -they're second generation, not third. Not that that improves the situation much. Anyway, my apologies, but I've got the information in front of me now.
The source? That'll be Rhett Davies, the producer of the album. The music on the SACD has apparantly come from 16 bit 48KHz PCM tapes, a much lower resolution than analogue or the new formats' capabilities. Check out David Price's editiorial in last month's Hifi World & Computer Audio (he was at the launch of the SACD & was told this by Rhett). Apparantly this is what happened: the original masters had been recorded onto a faulty batch of Ampex 560, which was then stored incorrectly, with the sadly inevitable result that their rotten adhesive started shedding oxide left, right, centre and every which way you care to imagine. So, what to do if your task is to release it on SACD? The engineers noticed that they'd archived their masters to DAT before they passed the point of total death, so the stereo SACD mix has been taken from these very tapes, and the surround mix derived from them. Not good. Kept that one quiet, didn't they.
(As an aside, David, who's a real fan of multi channel, & even advocates vinyl & CD-lovers to buy quad gear and matrix surround from stereo using it, or DPLII; listened to the surround mix on £50,000 worth of monitoring equipment. His comment, which Davies seems to agree with was that it sounded 'deeply mediocre')
Oh dear. Not so good news for the new 'masters', on SACD & DVD-A is it, if this is what goes on behind the scenes.
Scott
Scottmoose said:
If this M/C mix is derived from stereo, which I highly doubt (it just sounds to discrete), then it is by far the best "unwrapping" job I have heard to date. This is truly one of my favorite SACDs.
Bob Romano said:
There is absolutely no way this is an unwrap job. I have spoken to Phil Manzanera about this and he says that Rhett spent months trying to search out the multis for India before they were forced to go for the stereo pan option on that track.
It's a fantastic surround mix - I have barely listened to the stereo.
Scott, is there an online version of that article?
Patrick Cleasby said:
Well, I have now read the article, will post if if I'm allowed to and it does raise some concerns, but also some questions which I am now trying to resolve.
My answer to its author was as follows:
"I have to say that I would have been as concerned as you if I had heard the story before the disc, but I think the surround mix is fantastic.
If we were in an ideal world I would cane anybody who compromised fidelity in producing a rerelease, but the Ampex tape nightmare means that many legacy projects are highly compromised in this way. If you don't know the behind the scenes machinations, (as Joe Public generally doesn't), the proof of the pudding is what the end-product sounds like post-mix and mastering, and this one is a vast improvement on either of the two prior CDs at the very least."
That's my two pen'orth.
Scottmoose said:
Diquieting, to say the least. Does this refer solely to "Avalon", or are other Roxy tapes affected? I would hate to hear that there's no chance of thier earlier catalogue being remastered for M/C.
bizmopeen said:
Oops, meant to write "disquieting". Sumtimz I kant spel...
Scottmoose
500 Club - QQ All-Star
bizmopeen said:
Not sure, but I don't believe so. I haven't heard the SACD myself, as to be honest, I prefered Roxy Music's early stuff (esp. with Brian Eno). I was still going to buy it though.
There again, my remark, and passing on of the information were less about the album itself, like it or the group or not, than if this is the sort of thing that goes on behind closed doors with SACD & DVD-A mixing. If it is, we're in trouble. I've no reason to doubt David Price & Hifi World -they've established themselves as being the only vaguely realistic Hifi magazine on the UK market, and I seriously doubt he'd print a deliberate falsehood. I might well call them at some point for clarification -they're that sort of mag. On a more positive note, I don't doubt that it sounds better than the frankly abysmal CD releases, and as my own vinyl copy is getting slightly dodgy to put it mildly, I'll probably give it a whirl. Sorry I took a while to get back -my ISP was down yesterday (snarl, growl etc)
Scott
Last edited:
I had been looking forward to getting this disc for a couple of reasons. First, I love all of Ferry's work, although you can't beat those first 5 albums by Roxy! I love Frantic in SACD too. Now I have owned Avalon in a typical US pressing in vinyl for several years. I seldom buy anything on redbook cd, if I can avoid it. That's another story, but I was hoping to do an A-B comparison between the sacd and the album. To really be fair, I should probably get en English import of the vinyl, but now it sounds like it might not be a fair fight, and the vinyl would have the advantage! Still, I will buy this title when I get the chance to support the sacd/surround format, and besides, alot of people have raved about it. Really got me wondering now!
Marc
Marc
Can someone provide a link to the article in question? I listened to Avalon again and I just can't believe that this is an unwrap job. It sounds amazing. If it is unwrapped... then maybe these guys shouls start their own Silverline type label. I still can't believe it though.
The reviews have been too keen to be an unwrap job; methinks someone's heresay has gone too far. The proof will be in the listening and only then.
timbre4 said:
And that proof will reveal an excellent surround mix (definitely not an unwrap job) to anyone who hasn't been prejudiced by hearing rumours of its origin. HFR's editor described his listening experience as having a stupid grin on his face for 45 minutes - mine was similar. 15 HFR contributors have voted it one of the top 6 surround mixes of the last year in very illustrious company.
I have corresponded with David, and whilst he is sure of his story regarding the stereo DSD, we are attempting to confirm the situation regarding the handling of the multitracks. I haven't got a confirmation from him that I can reproduce the editorial yet. It isn't online anywhere.
And I just pre-ordered Avalon, along with David Bowie - The Rise and Fall of Ziggy Stardust also SACD MC from CD Universe for $13.29 each; that's more like it...!
:51banana:
:51banana:
Patrick Cleasby said:
Speaking of that list, be sure to visit http://www.highfidelityreview.com/features/hfr_award.asp and vote for your favorite hi rez Surround disc of the year.
As you noted, the Avalon Surround SACD is indeed one of the 6 on that list of nominees.
Patrick Cleasby said:
Is it possible that David was told the story of "India" and misunderstood it to be that of the whole album? I haven't read the article, know nothing about it 'cept what I've read here, but if the whole album was an "unwrap" job then they deserve some kind of special award for doing such a spectacular job; they need to teach others how to do it, and I need to go change my vote at HFR. (Beck got my nod.)
- Joined
- Sep 1, 2003
- Messages
- 560
Aside from the India, track, known to be lacking a multitrack source, it would be very easy to determine the veracity of these claims that the surround mix isn't discrete by simply listening to the rear and/or center channels alone on the multichannel mix. If the mix is *not* truly discrete, the rears and/or center will contain at least *some* of the entire mix (not to be confused with reverb only returns from guitar or other parts etc.)
I'm expecting to get the domestic release and will try this test for myself. I have seen plenty of amatur listeners fooled before on this subject, taking the case of the SACD release of Peter Tosh's "Bush Doctor" as an example. A listen as I suggest above quickly and easily reveals this 'multichannel mix' as an unwrap job despite the numerous reviews extoling the virtues of the 'discrete' surround mix, one even going so far as to point out how Tosh's vocal comes completely from the center channel etc. Of course, these reviewers also seemed to miss the little detail that no engineer is credited for the surround mix on the record......
I think what the people who deemed this Tosh 'multichannel mix' good because it sounded 'organic' were liking was the very thing an unwrap job will give you, a significantly *less* discrete mix and elements of various intruments in *all* channels, which can't be avoided by this hack process. I suppose it's evident I'm decidedly *not* a fan of these (out of) phase based techniques, akin to playing stereo material through a dolby pro logic decoder etc.
Anyway, to summarize, if you know what you're doing with your surround playback equipment and have ears, deciphering a truly discrete mix from an unwrap job is child's play. For a recording engineer for instance, it's like hearing whether speakers are wired out of phase, it's an obvious thing once you know what to listen for etc.
--Don
I'm expecting to get the domestic release and will try this test for myself. I have seen plenty of amatur listeners fooled before on this subject, taking the case of the SACD release of Peter Tosh's "Bush Doctor" as an example. A listen as I suggest above quickly and easily reveals this 'multichannel mix' as an unwrap job despite the numerous reviews extoling the virtues of the 'discrete' surround mix, one even going so far as to point out how Tosh's vocal comes completely from the center channel etc. Of course, these reviewers also seemed to miss the little detail that no engineer is credited for the surround mix on the record......
I think what the people who deemed this Tosh 'multichannel mix' good because it sounded 'organic' were liking was the very thing an unwrap job will give you, a significantly *less* discrete mix and elements of various intruments in *all* channels, which can't be avoided by this hack process. I suppose it's evident I'm decidedly *not* a fan of these (out of) phase based techniques, akin to playing stereo material through a dolby pro logic decoder etc.
Anyway, to summarize, if you know what you're doing with your surround playback equipment and have ears, deciphering a truly discrete mix from an unwrap job is child's play. For a recording engineer for instance, it's like hearing whether speakers are wired out of phase, it's an obvious thing once you know what to listen for etc.
--Don
Similar threads
