HiRez Poll Chicago - QUADIO [BluRay Audio]

QuadraphonicQuad

Help Support QuadraphonicQuad:

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

Rate the BDA of Chicago - QUADIO

  • 6:

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • 5:

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • 4:

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • 3:

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • 2:

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • 1: Poor Fidelity, Poor Content, Poor Surround

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Total voters
    151
Hi, just found this board recently and got the Chicago Quadio box from Amazon. Thank you!

What a great package...I am enjoying it very much. These old quad mixes sound teriffic!

I am also grabbing the re-mastered stereo tracks and noticed that wile the first two albums are 192 / 24-Bit, the rest are 192 / 16-Bit. No big deal but I thought that was kinda strange.

In any case, comparing the stereo track mastering of V between the 2003 DVD-A and this one, it’s no contest in my opinion even though the older one is 24-Bit. The 2003 DVD-A is mastered a bit too loud and is thin/brittle sounding at times where this one is just right dynamically with nice warm/full sound.

Very nice!
 
Hi, just found this board recently and got the Chicago Quadio box from Amazon. Thank you!

What a great package...I am enjoying it very much. These old quad mixes sound teriffic!

I am also grabbing the re-mastered stereo tracks and noticed that wile the first two albums are 192 / 24-Bit, the rest are 192 / 16-Bit. No big deal but I thought that was kinda strange.

In any case, comparing the stereo track mastering of V between the 2003 DVD-A and this one, it’s no contest in my opinion even though the older one is 24-Bit. The 2003 DVD-A is mastered a bit too loud and is thin/brittle sounding at times where this one is just right dynamically with nice warm/full sound.

Very nice!

It is an amazing box. And, welcome to the forum.
 
Hi, just found this board recently and got the Chicago Quadio box from Amazon. Thank you!

What a great package...I am enjoying it very much. These old quad mixes sound teriffic!

I am also grabbing the re-mastered stereo tracks and noticed that wile the first two albums are 192 / 24-Bit, the rest are 192 / 16-Bit. No big deal but I thought that was kinda strange.

In any case, comparing the stereo track mastering of V between the 2003 DVD-A and this one, it’s no contest in my opinion even though the older one is 24-Bit. The 2003 DVD-A is mastered a bit too loud and is thin/brittle sounding at times where this one is just right dynamically with nice warm/full sound.

Very nice!

This is a poll thread so we try to restrict the comments to the actual title...but it would be nice if you could come Here and let the members say hello
 
Dang. Chicago XI was never mixed in quad? That would have covered the entire Kath years... :cry:

Yeah it's a shame, but it was about 6 months too late - the last Columbia quad releases were in April '77 and XI came out in September. Despite the fact that the band was kind of falling apart at the time and the album sessions were apparently tense, I actually think XI overall is a better album than X, and it would've worked really well in quad, especially the orchestral overdubs on Baby What a Big Surprise and Little One.
 
Yeah it's a shame, but it was about 6 months too late - the last Columbia quad releases were in April '77 and XI came out in September. Despite the fact that the band was kind of falling apart at the time and the album sessions were apparently tense, I actually think XI overall is a better album than X, and it would've worked really well in quad, especially the orchestral overdubs on Baby What a Big Surprise and Little One.

Do you have any theories or insight as to why the At Carnegie Hall live album was never released in quad? I noticed it appears on Mark Anderson's unreleased page with a catalog # (CQX-30865). I suspect CBS would've actually gone for a full-on discrete mix to satisfy SQ requirements rather than the old "band in the front, audience in the back" live mix.
 
Do you have any theories or insight as to why the At Carnegie Hall live album was never released in quad? I noticed it appears on Mark Anderson's unreleased page with a catalog # (CQX-30865). I suspect CBS would've actually gone for a full-on discrete mix to satisfy SQ requirements rather than the old "band in the front, audience in the back" live mix.

The short answer is they probably didn't think they could make any money off of it.

The longer answer is that a 4-LP box set for a reasonable price isn't (or wasn't) a profitable endeavour, especially with all the ephemera (two large posters, a smaller poster, a 20-page 12"x12" booklet, and a voter registration card), to the point that the band had to agree to a reduction in royalties just to get Columbia to agree to put out a 4-LP set and not a 2-LP set.

On top of that, the sound quality wasn't great - Carnegie Hall wasn't designed for amplified music reproduction, and the horns really suffer as a result. The trombone in particular sounds like a kazoo at times, and that's buried in a stereo mix, I can only imagine a quad mix would have made things worse. The performances aren't the best either, the band often sounds either stoned, or nervous, or both. Quad sales in 1975 were already on the decline compared to a few years earlier, so I doubt Columbia wanted to take the chance on a 4-LP quad live set.

The real opportunity for a Chicago live album in quad would've been the Live in Japan album from 1972, but unfortunately CBS/Sony Japan didn't start doing those single-inventory quad live albums (like Santana's Lotus, the Andy Williams 2LP Live album, etc.) until 1973. It's actually a double shame because Chicago's 1973 Japan tour had an amazing setlist - they opened up with a banging cover of Magical Mystery Tour and played embryonic versions of some of the fusion stuff that they'd end up recording on Chicago VII (almost a year later) and ended their shows with a really good Feelin' Stronger Everyday -> Jumpin' Jack Flash -> 25 or 6 to 4 medley that I never heard them do anywhere else. As good as the 1972 Live in Japan album is (and it is very good, much better than Carnegie Hall) a quad live album from the 1973 tour would've been even more of a treasure.
 
I don't think I was aware of a Live in Japan set... I bought the Carnegie Hall set for not much on vinyl on the back of getting the Quadio set. I quite enjoyed it but I've only played it once so far at home, and heard some in the shop before I bought it, so I'm not massively familiar with it.
 
Live in Japan was a Japan-only LP release, so it wasn't easy to come by unless you were the kind of diehard who was willing to import it. When the band regained control of their back catalog in the mid-90s they reissued it on their own short-lived Chicago Records label (CRD-3030) and then again in 2012 when they moved their catalog to Rhino. I don't have the Rhino version, but if you're trying to hunt one down I'd probably favour the 1996 Chicago Records version because all the other Chicago CD reissues on Rhino are severely dynamically compressed.
 
Yeah it's a shame, but it was about 6 months too late - the last Columbia quad releases were in April '77 and XI came out in September. Despite the fact that the band was kind of falling apart at the time and the album sessions were apparently tense, I actually think XI overall is a better album than X, and it would've worked really well in quad, especially the orchestral overdubs on Baby What a Big Surprise and Little One.

XI in Quad would've been amazing!! "Take Me Back to Chicago" is one of my all-time favourite tracks by anyone - ever! i must try running it thru the Surround Master and see what it does! :rocks
(sorry, just thinking out loud as usual! take us back to Chicago Quadio! 🤭
 
Main reasons are that the musical content isn't always super strong and that I enjoy the DVD-A mixes slightly more.

Well after listening to this set much more and adjusting surrounds down a few dbs during playback im raising my vote from 9 to a TEN
Its excellent ...very well done rhino

Now where is that Doobies Quadio???
 
Back
Top