DVD/DTS Poll Opeth - Ghost Reveries [DTS/DD DVD+HDCD]

QuadraphonicQuad

Help Support QuadraphonicQuad:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.

Rate the Audio-DVD of Opeth - GHOST REVERIES


  • Total voters
    19

Bob Romano

Administrator
Staff member
Admin
Moderator
Since 2002/2003
Joined
Apr 26, 2002
Messages
5,743
Location
Viva Las Vegas
Please post your comments on Opeth - Ghost Reveries (Dolby DTS 5.1 DVD)(n)(y)
 

Attachments

  • opeth.jpg
    opeth.jpg
    104.5 KB · Views: 543
Last edited:
Wow, a blast from the past (2006). This was the album I discovered Opeth by. I felt a little betrayed when just after I bought the CD they announced a surround DVD. Anyway, the surround mix was somewhat disappointing. Forget the center channel or the sub/LFE, But even as a 4.0 mix it did not do much except from giving the guitars a chance to get next to you.
The content (within the Opeth spectrum) still rates high, the surround mix could have been a lot more interesting. And later surround releases like Watershed or Still Life prove it.
 
4 out of 10 from me. "Big stereo" type of mix which added nothing to the experience of listening to the album itself.
 
Voted 8. I feel the "big stereo" label is a bit unfair. There is quite a bit of discrete music here.
The "problem" is that the music coming from the front is incredibly dense most of the time.
Still, turn off your L&R and you got an alternate, very weird album.
It helped that I boosted my surrounds 1.5 db a piece.
Surroundy stuff emerges quite well from track 4 onward, when the band gets proggier.
If you like duh peth, get diss.
 
Voted 8. I feel the "big stereo" label is a bit unfair. There is quite a bit of discrete music here.
The "problem" is that the music coming from the front is incredibly dense most of the time.
Still, turn off your L&R and you got an alternate, very weird album.
It helped that I boosted my surrounds 1.5 db a piece.
Surroundy stuff emerges quite well from track 4 onward, when the band gets proggier.
If you like duh peth, get diss.

I have checked out the individual channels on Audacity; the big stereo label is accurate because that's what it is, literally 90% of the time. Real shame.
 
You checked every song? Because I heard more discreteness as the album went, as it got proggier.

Yes, there is a definite improvement on the last couple of tracks I agree. Such a great album deserved better, SW could of made this sound sublime.
 
Yeah, the first 3 tracks are pretty "wall of sound."
Is there a good tutorial for how to analyze surround tracks? I'd like to learn to do that.

Just DL Audacity; right click on file; open with Audacity.
 
I happened to pick this up very recently from my local used cd shop. It's the dvd - cd combo.. Although I own two other Opeth cds, this is the first with all theweird growling. I am certainly not into death metal and this growling stuff. Otherthan the growling, the music is okay. Not really mytaste but it's okay.. So, I am asking, why would a band with a good lead singer do this growling crap.. What's the point.. Where does it come from and who would it appeal to besides psychos. I imagine I am insulting a few people here who like this stuff, lol.. Don't take it personally. I just don't get the growling.
 
The growly thing is just a direction music took. The rock and metal genres are constantly being pushed beyond existing limits, in one way or another. And perhaps growling taps in to something primal. Perhaps man kind could grunt like that before learning more articulate speech and singing.
Anyway, every generation experiences a lack of connection, at some point, with later music. It just "is what it is." There are so many factors that play in to what music one is drawn to and accepts.
A big part of it is what one's friends or potential mates/lovers are listening to and excited about. It's a common language and interest that can draw you together and give you connection.
Anyway, that's my take on why some accept growlies. While I do not prefer them, in the vast majority of cases, I do find them tolerable sometimes and appropriate to the music.
On the other hand, if I thought about it, I could cite singers that others think sound beautiful and very pleasant, but I think they just sound gutless, spineless and saccharine.
No accounting for taste, right?

P.s. what is your view of the "caveman" sections of various Mike Oldfield recordings (in particular the TB series)? Isn't that fun and interesting?
 
Not a fan of Growling, although I've come to accept it with my discovery/love of Opeth (I also really enjoy Avenge Sevenfold's first album which is full of growls). That being said, there are moments on some Opeth songs where a well-placed long, low, guttural growl will get my inner-caveman growling right along!
 
Back
Top