HiRez Poll Yes - CLOSE TO THE EDGE [DVD-AUDIO/BLU-RAY]

[ssully]

My Front L/R speakers have 2 8" woofers each, so they can handle bass just fine

It's a fair bet that

1) a good dedicated sub (or two) could produce more low bass output with less distortion than your towers

and

2) the towers are not in the acoustically optimal position in the room for best bass response

These are two good reasons why bass management -- i.e., setting loudpeakers to 'small' with an appropriate crossover -- is useful even when the front line are 'full range' speakers.

 

[jimfisheye]

This remix is just hands down fantastic!
I've had the MFSL vinyl for years. Always thought this album was extremely well done considering the level of ambition. I'm sure the 24/192 transfer of the stereo master sounds just that little bit better without the vinyl generation (well done as it was by MFSL) but I honestly haven't listened to it yet with this amazing 5.1 remix here. I'm usually not a fan of remixes in any way shape or form but Mr Steve Wilson is a big exception. Mr. Wilson, your perception is really amazing!

I always knew this music was over the top ambitious but now you can hear every last detail of that. All the individual layered keyboard parts... Little electric sitar parts I hadn't heard before... The orchestration is huge. This mix simply could not be done in stereo - way beyond the confines of 2 channels.

People are having trouble with the stand-alone hardware disc players? That does seem like a clumsy way to listen to media nowadays...
I ripped the blu-ray to flac files and hit play on Songbird. The overall balance and attention to sonic detail is just over the top good. This mix certainly requires the monitor system to be balanced with no shenanigans going on with wrong bass management settings, etc. which is often difficult/confusing/clumsy on the stand-alone players. I didn't preview it nor will I but I would expect to the lossy dts version to fail miserably.

Squire's bass sound was a bit woolie on the original mix and often obscured as a result and that was handled really well here. The mix retains the basic size and shape and hits the same as the original throughout with everything magically expanded and all detail right there to hear. Except a few liberties with the vocals... To put it another way - the vocal production is finished now.

The attention to detail... Listen to how he disguised tape hiss in parts as amp noise (for one example) in his noise reduction work.

 

[ssully]

This remix is just hands down fantastic!
I always knew this music was over the top ambitious but now you can hear every last detail of that. All the individual layered keyboard parts... Little electric sitar parts I hadn't heard before... The orchestration is huge. This mix simply could not be done in stereo - way beyond the confines of 2 channels.

FWIW, there are also parts missing. Perhaps they were unavailable

People are having trouble with the stand-alone hardware disc players? That does seem like a clumsy way to listen to media nowadays...
I ripped the blu-ray to flac files and hit play on Songbird. The overall balance and attention to sonic detail is just over the top good. This mix certainly requires the monitor system to be balanced with no shenanigans going on with wrong bass management settings, etc. which is often difficult/confusing/clumsy on the stand-alone players.

If the standalone has HDMI out, there is no need for confusion. But I agree that 1) there seem to be a lot of oddly configured systems out there, based on reports I read here, and 2) ripping the audio to a hard drive makes things easiest of all, if you have your software player configured right and also have HDMI out.

I didn't preview it nor will I but I would expect to the lossy dts version to fail miserably.

It doesn't, and there's no reason to expect it to, except 'audiophile' prejudice/expectation bias.

The attention to detail... Listen to how he disguised tape hiss in parts as amp noise (for one example) in his noise reduction work.

Huh?

 

[jimfisheye]

FWIW, there are also parts missing. Perhaps they were unavailable

So, my memory fails me and I should listen to the stereo mix again? What's missing?

What do you mean 'Huh?'. I caught some of that on the 3rd or 4th listen. Impressed I was. Very very picky work with something that is often handled crudely.

 

[ssully]

After hearing it the fifth time and comparing to old stereo mixes as well I give a 9 for the blu-ray.
There is as much content as for the XTC output, and most of the 5.1 mix is again perfect.

Nevertheless critics are that the main vocals in the first two parts The Solid Time Of Change and Total Mass Retain are still too loud for my taste, and the package is not so good as XTC's Nonsuch.

Agreed. The vocal balance seems off at times, especially on Solid Time of Change. Much too forward.

 

[ssully]

So, my memory fails me and I should listen to the stereo mix again? What's missing?

Compare the short instrumental bit in 'Solid Time of Change', at the end of first verse, right after the words 'taste the fruit of man recorded losing all against the hour', on the original mix versus SW's. (Stereo or 5.1, it doesn't matter). Notice anything different?

What do you mean 'Huh?'. I caught some of that on the 3rd or 4th listen. Impressed I was. Very very picky work with something that is often handled crudely.

What makes you think SW used any noise reduction at all?

 

[Q-Eight]

My copy finally arrived in the mail yesterday. Had a good listen to it moments after getting home. I've got to say, Prog-Rock really isn't my bag. I figure not really being a product of the 70's, I just don't "get it" so to speak. Which is strange, because I DO like the group Focus.

Having said that, the mix is really good. Steven Wilson MUST be a Quad guy as he knows how to mix like vintage Quad. Front and rear are seperate sound stages and all four corners are utilized for discrete placement. I really enjoyed some of the vocals with back vocals split hard in the rears and the lead up the middle.
Discrete placement like that and tight harmonies make for some good Quad. I wonder.... if this really were mixed back in the day and left unreleased, did Steven Wilson get access to it possibly for a reference?

 

[DennisMoore Jr.]

My copy finally arrived in the mail yesterday. Had a good listen to it moments after getting home. I've got to say, Prog-Rock really isn't my bag. I figure not really being a product of the 70's, I just don't "get it" so to speak. Which is strange, because I DO like the group Focus.

Having said that, the mix is really good. Steven Wilson MUST be a Quad guy as he knows how to mix like vintage Quad. Front and rear are seperate sound stages and all four corners are utilized for discrete placement. I really enjoyed some of the vocals with back vocals split hard in the rears and the lead up the middle.
Discrete placement like that and tight harmonies make for some good Quad. I wonder.... if this really were mixed back in the day and left unreleased, did Steven Wilson get access to it possibly for a reference?

Hi Q-Eight,

Glad to have you onboard! Prog isn't for everybody, but as long as you like Hockey we will get alomng just fine.

One thing about YES & prog in general. The whole idea of prog was to "progress" past basic radio rock and to evolve into a more accomplished for of music, striving for more of a classical side than 1-4-5 blues based(of most rock). Good prog is really hard "to get" on the first few listens because the intent is to pack in as much as possible. Kinda like really really concentrated laundry soap! With prog, the payoff is with repeated listens as it becomes more fascinating with each listen and more and more nuances come to light.

Anyway, glad to hear you checked out CTTE!

 

[IMachine]

My copy finally arrived in the mail yesterday. Had a good listen to it moments after getting home. I've got to say, Prog-Rock really isn't my bag. I figure not really being a product of the 70's, I just don't "get it" so to speak. Which is strange, because I DO like the group Focus.

Having said that, the mix is really good. Steven Wilson MUST be a Quad guy as he knows how to mix like vintage Quad. Front and rear are seperate sound stages and all four corners are utilized for discrete placement. I really enjoyed some of the vocals with back vocals split hard in the rears and the lead up the middle.
Discrete placement like that and tight harmonies make for some good Quad. I wonder.... if this really were mixed back in the day and left unreleased, did Steven Wilson get access to it possibly for a reference?

But beware! Dennis is an american. He only gives 10 points to everything.

 

[holland123]

Excellent work on this DVD-A. The surround field is enveloping without heavy center channel use (not a center fan). However, I gave the disc an 8 due to the Sonics. It is lacking the extended range such as that found on fragile. but Don't get me wrong I would purchase discs like this all day long.

 

[DennisMoore Jr.]

But beware! Dennis is an american. He only gives 10 points to everything.

Oh dear, oh my,

My German friend here couldn't be more wrong. :yikes

I am not an American, I am a 19th century English lupin thief, who likes to drink good German beer!

In addition, my sworn position is to mandate from all that any YES 5.1 release receive all 10 votes(YES being the world's greatest band and YES in 5.1 would by definition be the world's greatest music, therfore worthy of a 10 rating. - Its all very logical)

I simply do not rate all 5.1 mixes as a 10. When Justin Bieber releases his next album in 5.1, rest assured I will give it a "2". @:

Cheers!

 

[DennisMoore Jr.]

Oh, I am w/ the program. I have a ps3 for blu-ray. I prefer dvd-a b/c, in general (w/ some exceptions), you can just load a dvd-a and get it to play the hi-rez 5.1 material w/o needing to turn on your monitor. I generally prefer to listen to music in the dark and I don't like turning my big-screen on and off any more than I have to. So I chose dvd-a over BR. Saving a few bucks doesn't hurt either.

Now if we're talking concerts, I'll take a BR over a dvd anyday, but of course that's a whole different story- better pic and sound. But given the same sound quality, I will continue to choose dvd-a. Not to mention, someday I hope to have a mch system in my car, where currently dvd-a RULES over BR. Of course, by the time I can get that system, there might be mobile BR. How about an Oppo universal head-unit?

Stealing your kid's playstation is hardly "getting with the program". (Unless of course you have an older unit with the correct BIOS to read DSD... ahhem....)

Yeah, the need to turn on a TV is a big flaw of both DVD-A & BluRay. For my 2002 ELP - BSSS DVD-Audio I need to turn on the TV since I don't recall if it defaults to playing the 5.1 tracks. I think there is an intermediate screen.

I chose to invest in a good receiver and use the D/A in that so that makes bluray easier, I use my Oppo for DVD-A set to LPCM out so I am pure digital all the way, so it really doesn't matter....

The nice thing about BluRay audio is that nowadays most $90.00 players can decode DTS-Master audio. DVD-Audio players are still more expensive. DVD-A was my first 5.1 experience so I will always have a soft spot for DVDA.

 

[IMachine]

Oh dear, oh my,

My German friend here couldn't be more wrong. :yikes

I am not an American, I am a 19th century English lupin thief, who likes to drink good German beer!

In addition, my sworn position is to mandate from all that any YES 5.1 release receive all 10 votes(YES being the world's greatest band and YES in 5.1 would by definition be the world's greatest music, therfore worthy of a 10 rating. - Its all very logical)

I simply do not rate all 5.1 mixes as a 10. When Justin Bieber releases his next album in 5.1, rest assured I will give it a "2". @:

Cheers!

View attachment 12664

Now you are completely wrong, because Yes is only the second.

The best is: GENESIS!

 

[IMachine]

Oh dear, oh my,

My German friend here couldn't be more wrong. :yikes

I am not an American, I am a 19th century English lupin thief, who likes to drink good German beer!

Ok, only for you, because it is almost five o'clock:

 

[colsky]

Ok, only for you, because it is almost five o'clock:
View attachment 12665

That reminds me, its tea time here in England :sun. Who is Justin Bieber?

 

[elshagon]

This is the best this album has sounded. I'm impressed and enjoying multiple listens. And I agree, sounds great in the car!

 

[davie]

This is one of the best surround mixes I have heard. For one thing there is so much more to hear than on the original master. Not only is this terrific for the surround mix but this is really an audiophile's treat. Good dynamics, plenty of headroom, easy on the ears EQ. I have read complaints about the bass (too much, too little) but I just don't see it. It sounds just right to me for this 1972 outing. If someone expects to be shaken out of their seat, then this is not the disc. But if you are a fan of this material, it is a wonderful surround experience with top notch sonics. It compares well with the King Crimson remixes and is similarly priced, both pluses.

 

[IMachine]

This is one of the best surround mixes I have heard. For one thing there is so much more to heard

You don't know Steely Dan's Gaucho, do you?

 

[leevitalone1]

You don't know Steely Dan's Gaucho, do you?

or kamakiriad

 

[ssully]

Btw, the difference isn't really absence-presence....it's more that the keyboards 'sweep' has been reduced to bare audibility. There also seems to be something missing, or radically altered, EQ-wise, about the start of Wakeman's big moment on the moog at the end of "I Get Up/I Get Down" (starting at 13:56 on the remixed 2channel version,probably thereabouts on the surround mix too). Compare it to the flat transfer or UK vinyl (or any other version on CD)....it's like a tracking part on bass synth is missing for a bar or so. Robs it of some power for me. Also SW lengthened the start of first flourish...it's something like 5 or 6 beats now, instead of 4-5. That kind of stuff, along with the aggressive rebalancing of parts in 'Solid Time of Change', is really bugging me when I listen to his mix, because I know this tune like the back of my hand. And overall I think some dynamics have been lost (not due to compression, but to mixing choices) -- the songs don't 'flow' from section to section as I prefer them to. I've docked it a couple of points on my poll entry as a result...would've docked it lower still, except for the very nice addition of 'alternate album' content and flat transfers.

(Also, I think the polls range really should just be 1-- 5 not 1--10 --- especially since most of the releases here get >5)

Btw, I'm having no issues at all with bass levels generally for these remixes, so I can't understanding why there are so many conflicting reports ("too thin" vs "too much bass") except to put it down to different rooms, different loudspeakers, different bass management/EQ setups.