HiRez Poll Beck, Jeff - BLOW BY BLOW [SACD]

[fredblue]

The rears were not out of phase with each other. It would certainly affect rear image 'diffusion' if they were. They were out of phase with the fronts. Restoring phase coherence of front and rear mainly restores bass content, because that's the main thing shared between front and rear.

i'll check it all again but i recall the original disc's Rears being more diffuse than the AP

 

[par4ken]

1.) Room Centre.
If the same sound is mixed to all 4 channels at equal volume, it will cancel out. To get around this, CBS engineers would use diagonal pans to create a sensation of Room Centre placement.

Not used that often but it has been used. Kris Kristofferson "Border Lord" and one of the early Johnny Mathis albums (I forget which one off the top of my head) come to mind. They would have used the encoders "Internal" mode, which helps to randomize or decorrelate the front/rear phase to prevent cancellation. Referred to as "centre top" on the CBS/Audionics test record.

2.) Rear Centre.
This is more of a Stereo/Mono compatibility issue than a Quad/Surround playback problem, in so much as the point directly behind the listener is out of phase in Stereo playback, causing Rear Centre information to cancel out in Mono.

Not often used, reportedly a prohibited position but it has been used in some mixes. The importance of complete mono compatibility was really overblown IMHO. Santana "Lotus" has a rear channel hole in the mix because of that mixing decision, the applause would sound better if it was panned equally across the rear instead of left and right pockets. It would be of no consequence if a bit of applause cancelled out in mono either!

 

[fredblue]

Not used that often but it has been used. Kris Kristofferson "Border Lord" and one of the early Johnny Mathis albums (I forget which one off the top of my head) come to mind. They would have used the encoders "Internal" mode, which helps to randomize or decorrelate the front/rear phase to prevent cancellation. Referred to as "centre top" on the CBS/Audionics test record.


Not often used, reportedly a prohibited position but it has been used in some mixes. The importance of complete mono compatibility was really overblown IMHO. Santana "Lotus" has a rear channel hole in the mix because of that mixing decision, the applause would sound better if it was panned equally across the rear instead of left and right pockets. It would be of no consequence if a bit of applause cancelled out in mono either!

ok! cool! still, we're talking about only 1 or 2 rare exceptions from, like, '71/72, right?

tbh i'm not sure the Quad mix of "Border Lord" was even engineered to adhere to any SQ mixing guidelines in the first place, after all it first appeared on another label altogether on Q8 as i recall and the SQ LP came later, so perhaps SQ compatibility wouldn't have been a consideration.. with Blow By Blow we're talking about a Quad on Epic from slap bang in '75, sticking all that Centre Back stuff in the mix was really not the done thing when they knew it would end up on SQ!

(i think maybe Garfunkel's "Angel Clare" is one that has some Centre Back shenanigans? )

oops i just realised all this blather is in a Poll..!! sorry!! i'll crawl back under my stone and get back to me Atmos

 

[Malhomme]

This is the first SACD I opened and played on my system. I was, pun intended, blown away.
The level of details I found staggering. It feels like you are given a microscope to examine JB fuzz box texture, and that microscope really works. Some mix choices may seem strange (like, the cellos center front and altos rear left in the end of Scatterbrain), but that's ok to me. The sound is massive, and as often I find with multichannel, it tends to open an overproduced can and make instrument around feel more 'natural' if it means anything on electric instruments.
That is 11 for me

 

[quicksrt]

I just listened to the Sony SACD even owning the AP of this album. I wanted to see if the Sony was still a serious option with all the claims of a botched mastering phase wise.

Still sounds killer to me. And since I tend to move around the room doing things while listening - I didn't have any problems with this or Wired having lead guitars that come out of the rear speakers. I have a desk positioned on the wall between FR and RR speakers so I am sometimes (or often) listening with a skewed channel placement anyway. This album in quad sounds fine no matter how you sit in the room. Lots going on most of the time. Another one I have no intention of even hearing in stereo again.

It’s true, an 11 rating here!

 

[par4ken]

tbh i'm not sure the Quad mix of "Border Lord" was even engineered to adhere to any SQ mixing guidelines in the first place, after all it first appeared on another label altogether on Q8 as i recall and the SQ LP came later, so perhaps SQ compatibility wouldn't have been a consideration.. with Blow By Blow we're talking about a Quad on Epic from slap bang in '75, sticking all that Centre Back stuff in the mix was really not the done thing when they knew it would end up on SQ!

(i think maybe Garfunkel's "Angel Clare" is one that has some Centre Back shenanigans? )

The SQ "rule" was more just a guideline to preserve full mono compatibility (who cares). The encoders Internal position was intended for the encoding of centre "top" (full centre) signals. Most if not all test records include an encode of centre back. The Audionics also has centre top and left and right side signals as well. I think that it's great that that silly rule was not always followed. QS has the same problem via mono playback.

 

[Matt Wilson]

10

I was going to vote 9, but damn, who am I kidding? I love Jeff Beck and this, Wired, and Truth are my faves. I was over a friend's house the other night and he was blasting this (among other surround discs), and I told myself I'd order it pronto.

I'm listening to the Japanese SACD.