DVD/DTS Poll Bruford - SEEMS LIKE A LIFETIME AGO [DD DVD]

[JohnA]

Can't imagine Jakko trying to flog such a mix to Fripp - he'll be wearing a guitar as a hat, one of a kind model
Other (ex) members are more understanding apparently. They fleece us punters though..

 

[RuudMans]

A negative review. The author does confuse some issues -- it's not the use of Dolby AC3, or hi rez vs standard, that makes this set such a dog, and the dynamic range is not at all compressed -- it's the actual mix that's terrible. This set is a massive disappointment and a sad lost opportunity.

https://audiophilereview.com/audiop...-album-disappoints-on-surround-sound-dvd.html

I think what the reviewer was trying to say with regards to compression, is not referring to dynamic compression (as in: brickwalling) but compression as a way of preserving space (like with mp3 and zip), by employing a lossy format like DD. But hey, what do I know.

I agree with you that the mixes themselves are problematic. And to not even have the original mixes presented in Hi-Res audio (like 24-48 LPCM, which is native to the DVD-Video format) is almost criminal.

 

[ssully]

The author first writes :

But when I opened the disc my heart sank: the surround disc was on a standard DVD which I knew immediately meant that it was going to be a compressed, lower resolution presentation of the music.

Which clearly refers to data compression (though he's wrong that it means 'lower resolution', and as you note, also wrong that DVD can't offer lossless)

But later writes:

Thus all this amazing music is offered here maxed out at about 48 kHz in a very compressed and squashed sounding surround mix. So squashed, its kind of hard to hear whether the actual surround mix itself is any good.

Which is really quite a muddle. Lossy compression doesn't audibly 'squash' anything. Dynamic range compression does that.

What's operating here are a couple of things,

1) the author's confused and misinformed prejudices about lossy compression
2) the extraordinarily bad mix that he is hearing

#1 leads him to conclude, wrongly, that something about the format is preventing him from hearing the glories of this new mix. The correct answer is #2.


I agree that to not even get a true remaster of the original mix , preferably from the original tapes (I'm willing to bet we have never yet heard a digital version from that source), was yet another mark against this release. I wouldn't care what format it was in.

 

[Stephen W Tayler]

Wish I had had a chance to do these!!

 

[JediJoker]

Wish I had had a chance to do these!!

So do we!

 

[Stephen W Tayler]

So do we!

I was disappointed I was only approached when it came to contributing to the liner notes for the re-issue. Having been the only recording and mixing engineer heavily involved in the making of the original albums - and indeed credited as Bill's Production Assistant of 'One Of A Kind' - I wish I had at least been consulted on the presentation of the audio, let alone the remixing.

 

[ssully]

I was disappointed I was only approached when it came to contributing to the liner notes for the re-issue. Having been the only recording and mixing engineer heavily involved in the making of the original albums - and indeed credited as Bill's Production Assistant of 'One Of A Kind' - I wish I had at least been consulted on the presentation of the audio, let alone the remixing.

Have you heard any of the remixes?

I am flabbergasted that they were approved by BB and released. The otherwise confused reviewer I linked to above got this right about the 5.1 mix: "it feels like a flabby multi-speaker version of Stereo"

 

[Stephen W Tayler]

Have you heard any of the remixes?

I am flabbergasted that they were approved by BB and released. The otherwise confused reviewer I linked to above got this right about the 5.1 mix: "it feels like a flabby multi-speaker version of Stereo"

yes - I have the box set - the thing that is most upsetting is the original album 'remastered' and in such a poor format - it just doesn't represent the original at all. As for the remixes - no comment - I would have just approached it differently and more in the spirit of the original.

 

[markhess1958]

I think what the reviewer was trying to say with regards to compression, is not referring to dynamic compression (as in: brickwalling) but compression as a way of preserving space (like with mp3 and zip), by employing a lossy format like DD. But hey, what do I know.

I agree with you that the mixes themselves are problematic. And to not even have the original mixes presented in Hi-Res audio (like 24-48 LPCM, which is native to the DVD-Video format) is almost criminal.

Agreed. DD is a terrible option. No uncompressed stereo is indeed criminal at this price.

 

[ssully]

[ ]

 

[Malhomme]

OUCH ! I just ordered the individual albums One of A kind and Feels Good To Me, 2 hours ago, and I should have read you all before committing to order. My heart sinks.