DVD/DTS Poll Chris Squire - FISH OUT OF WATER [DTS DVD]

QuadraphonicQuad

Help Support QuadraphonicQuad:

Rate the DTS DVD of Chris Squire - FISH OUT OF WATER

  • 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 Content, Surround Mix, and Fidelity

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Total voters
    21

4-earredwonder

2K Club - QQ Super Nova
QQ Supporter
Joined
Jan 9, 2013
Messages
22,989
The ratio

posts about the mix : posts about shipping

is hilariously low.

Carry on, QQ. :LOL:

Your POST #6 on this exact thread portends the OPPOSITE and lest we forget, we're finally being 'treated' to a LOSSLESS BD~A and not LOSSY DTS 5.1

The news is good! (this is for the 5.1 mix )

1) this is the drum sound Bruford should have had on his boxed set (though the bass drum level is maybe a *bit* aggressive)
2) right away (Hold Out/You By My Side) you can tell that the 'top' on Squire's bass has been dialed back, and several of the mixes have him less prominent than before...disconcerting at first but you can still always hear him. Ditto with the vocals, which seem a bit back in the mix sometimes.
4) Silently Falling is a stone cold tour de force. Jakko nailed this one.
3) Lucky Seven is almost whole new tune, new parts flown in , it's now revealed as an amazing prog homage to string-driven Motown/Stax tunes of the same era (think 'Papa Was A rolling Stone' or 'Theme from Shaft'). The original mix left Squire highly exposed, highlighting the drum/bass interplay (consistently excellent) ; now he's a player in a much busier mix, and the whole thing grooves. Both mixes work.
4) Safe is a mixed bag, it's often slamming, and he works hard to make repetitious parts sound fresh, but the orchestra here and elsewhere sounds more 'fake' than on the original mix, due to Jakko adding more reverb. He also seems to favor horns over strings. And then there's the huge gap where a bass lead should be , near the end. But....Bruford's drums flying around in circles! How can that not be awesome?

In the booklet Jakko says that one of his aims was to highlight some 'hidden' parts, and for the most part it works well. There's one part where you can tell he was like , 'you have GOT to hear these insane backing vocals Squire is doing right here'. It's fun.

Overall a worthy alternate mix to a classic.

The 2.0 remaster (by Paschal Byrne) of the original mix, btw , sounds quite fresh too. DR10/11 according to that meter thing, so it's not been smashed . It has been boosted in the treble a bit, I think. What's remarkable is that some parts actually emerge that are rather hard to hear on the original mix, like the very low bass tone (organ) at the start of Hold Out Your Hand. So perhaps this is really a lower-generation source tape than my go-to version (the early 1990s Japanese CD)
 

musicmemorabiliashoppellc

2K Club - QQ Super Nova
Joined
Mar 24, 2018
Messages
2,970
Location
Ban
Your POST #6 on this exact thread portends the OPPOSITE and lest we forget, we're finally being 'treated' to a LOSSLESS BD~A and not LOSSY DTS 5.1

The news is good! (this is for the 5.1 mix )

1) this is the drum sound Bruford should have had on his boxed set (though the bass drum level is maybe a *bit* aggressive)
2) right away (Hold Out/You By My Side) you can tell that the 'top' on Squire's bass has been dialed back, and several of the mixes have him less prominent than before...disconcerting at first but you can still always hear him. Ditto with the vocals, which seem a bit back in the mix sometimes.
4) Silently Falling is a stone cold tour de force. Jakko nailed this one.
3) Lucky Seven is almost whole new tune, new parts flown in , it's now revealed as an amazing prog homage to string-driven Motown/Stax tunes of the same era (think 'Papa Was A rolling Stone' or 'Theme from Shaft'). The original mix left Squire highly exposed, highlighting the drum/bass interplay (consistently excellent) ; now he's a player in a much busier mix, and the whole thing grooves. Both mixes work.
4) Safe is a mixed bag, it's often slamming, and he works hard to make repetitious parts sound fresh, but the orchestra here and elsewhere sounds more 'fake' than on the original mix, due to Jakko adding more reverb. He also seems to favor horns over strings. And then there's the huge gap where a bass lead should be , near the end. But....Bruford's drums flying around in circles! How can that not be awesome?

In the booklet Jakko says that one of his aims was to highlight some 'hidden' parts, and for the most part it works well. There's one part where you can tell he was like , 'you have GOT to hear these insane backing vocals Squire is doing right here'. It's fun.

Overall a worthy alternate mix to a classic.

The 2.0 remaster (by Paschal Byrne) of the original mix, btw , sounds quite fresh too. DR10/11 according to that meter thing, so it's not been smashed . It has been boosted in the treble a bit, I think. What's remarkable is that some parts actually emerge that are rather hard to hear on the original mix, like the very low bass tone (organ) at the start of Hold Out Your Hand. So perhaps this is really a lower-generation source tape than my go-to version (the early 1990s Japanese CD)
So this is for the stand alone DVD right? Not the BR? :unsure:
 

4-earredwonder

2K Club - QQ Super Nova
QQ Supporter
Joined
Jan 9, 2013
Messages
22,989
So this is for the stand alone DVD right? Not the BR? :unsure:

There is NO poll yet, MM, for the newly released BD~A. And that DVD~V DTS 5.1 was not stand alone but part of the pricey Fish Out of Water box set.


ChrisSquire_3Dpackshot.jpg
 

sjcorne

Moderator
Staff member
Moderator
Joined
Jan 1, 2010
Messages
5,929
Location
Washington, D.C.
We're not expecting a different 5.1 mix on this BD-A release, right? Just maybe lossless audio of some sort?

I just got my copy and it looks like the same mix/mastering to me. The only difference I noticed is that the LFE channel hasn't been low-pass filtered on the new Blu-Ray.

"Hold Out Your Hand" (DTS DVD):
Fish 01 DTS.jpg


"Hold Out Your Hand" (LPCM Blu-Ray):
Fish 01 LPCM.png
 

ssully

2K Club - QQ Super Nova
QQ Supporter
Since 2002/2003
Joined
Jul 2, 2003
Messages
3,629
Location
in your face
The LFE bandwidth difference between DD and lossless here is a good reason to check the LPF (low pass filtering) for LFE setting of you AVR (if it has one..)

LFE content isn't 'supposed' to go beyond 120 Hz for good reasons: localization issues, possibly muddy bass. (Even 120 is arguably too high....see expert opinions here , scroll down to c)5. What is the LPF of LFE and what should it be set to?) . AVRs with the LPF setting allow you to limit the bandwidth of the LFE channel content being sent to the subwoofer. 120 is a typical setting but again that may be too high, 80 can work better (in which case the 80->120 content is still output, but is attenuated)
 

quicksrt

2K Club - QQ Super Nova
Since 2002/2003
Joined
Jul 5, 2002
Messages
3,611
Location
Surf City, CA
I actually managed to find a rather huge flaw in the mix without even listening to the whole album.

Queue up 'Safe' in the original mix (remastered) , in 2.0 remix and 5.0 remix versions, for comparison.

Skip to about 12:20 seconds in...where Squire's huge depth-charging bass lead comes in on top of the full orchestra. A mighty moment.

Or at least, it's supposed to be.

On the remixes, it's gone. The whole lead bass part that normally continues to the big final chord, is gone. (It's there on the remaster of course.)

JJ strikes again?

Someone please verify what I'm hearing.
Maybe it could have been extracted from the original stereo mix and then flown into the 5.1? It may be cheating but if it is missing from the multitracks then you do what you have to do.
 

quicksrt

2K Club - QQ Super Nova
Since 2002/2003
Joined
Jul 5, 2002
Messages
3,611
Location
Surf City, CA
I bought the Fish Out of Water big box set because I had high expectations. D/V were running late on their quad SACD releases schedule and I got tired of waiting for new rock surround. So I spent like $70 plus tax and shipping on the Squire box. Then a day or two later D/V announces a nice batch of SACDs coming. And I had tapped out my budget for the month at least. And I did not fall in love with the Squire album. Luckily I was able to sell the box and get all my money out of it just before the new single disc reissue. I need to make another big D/V order soon.
 

quicksrt

2K Club - QQ Super Nova
Since 2002/2003
Joined
Jul 5, 2002
Messages
3,611
Location
Surf City, CA
I just got my copy and it looks like the same mix/mastering to me. The only difference I noticed is that the LFE channel hasn't been low-pass filtered on the new Blu-Ray.

"Hold Out Your Hand" (DTS DVD):
View attachment 58898

"Hold Out Your Hand" (LPCM Blu-Ray):
View attachment 58897
The LFE bandwidth difference between DD and lossless here is a good reason to check the LPF (low pass filtering) for LFE setting of you AVR (if it has one..)

LFE content isn't 'supposed' to go beyond 120 Hz for good reasons: localization issues, possibly muddy bass. (Even 120 is arguably too high....see expert opinions here , scroll down to c)5. What is the LPF of LFE and what should it be set to?) . AVRs with the LPF setting allow you to limit the bandwidth of the LFE channel content being sent to the subwoofer. 120 is a typical setting but again that may be too high, 80 can work better (in which case the 80->120 content is still output, but is attenuated)
Yes, but that LEF track really looks rather limp on the DTS version no? In fact, it looks shockingly low. Should it be that low on a Bass player's solo album?
 

ssully

2K Club - QQ Super Nova
QQ Supporter
Since 2002/2003
Joined
Jul 2, 2003
Messages
3,629
Location
in your face
The BluRay looks fatter because...it includes more frequencies. Most of which you won't hear, because your AVR and subwoofer are filtering them out.

The lossy .1 is not shockingly low...it's normal. All DTS and AC3 .1 channels are already lowpass filtered 'on the disc' @~125 Hz -- for good reason , as I noted in the quote above. More importantly, it *sounds* normal.
 

Simplepast Presentperfect

Well-known Member
Joined
Aug 27, 2020
Messages
104
Location
Germany
The BluRay looks fatter because...it includes more frequencies. Most of which you won't hear, because your AVR and subwoofer are filtering them out.

The lossy .1 is not shockingly low...it's normal. All DTS and AC3 .1 channels are already lowpass filtered 'on the disc' @~125 Hz -- for good reason , as I noted in the quote above. More importantly, it *sounds* normal.
We had this discussion before, and while I understand the technical aspects of not sending to the subwoofer anything above 125 Hz, I took the effort to look into and track surround mixes featuring full bandwith LFE (my list is quite long and growing to call it just an oversight)... and nobody is complaining about localization issues or muddy bass. Grateful Dead's American Beauty and Workingman's Dead, both very highly rated in this forum for instance have full bandwidth LFE. I was surprised to find that there is at least one SACD featuring that: Bat out of Hell. At a low volume, but you can clearly hear Kasim Sulton's bass totally isolated. As a musician it is a nice "Easter egg", and extra source of enjoyment. So please keep it coming that way ! I am adding Fish out of water to my shopping basket now, thanks for the info !
 

jimfisheye

2K Club - QQ Super Nova
Joined
Jan 8, 2010
Messages
2,610
I'm a little surprised at the number of Lfe track errors that have slipped out as well!

However...

Most subs have a passive crossover for protection if nothing else.
Depending on the crossover frequency that could let a little schmutz through and alter the mix. Mostly this would go unheard from mixing desk to consumer system.

Next, small top system with speaker management redirecting all bass from the 5 mains to add to the Lfe channel.
Same deal with the sub. Same as above.

Next, big fronts no sub system with speaker management redirecting the Lfe content to the front mains.
OK, now we have a big problem! That full range content tagging along in the Lfe that's not supposed to be in the mix is now in your front mains. The mix will be WILDLY altered!

Most people mixing and a lot of listeners will have 1:1 speaker arrays. Case #1.
Next in popularity is the small top, redirect all bass to the sub array. Case #2.
Case #3 is going to be further down the list. But if this is you, you will have to quick remaster and correct these albums or you will be hearing a very altered and unintentional version of the mix!

So, while I'm a little surprised at this level of sloppiness I can also see how it slips through the cracks!

This isn't anyone around here but...
The crude stuff: Speakers in all the wrong spots. Sports broadcast surround mixes. Suck buttons engaged on home AVRs.
You wouldn't even be able to explain what this error was let alone point it out on their system.

So maybe I'm not surprised at all?

Back to the beginning...
I also believe that there's a workflow where it's just always assumed a sub will have a crossover to restrict high frequencies. The Lfe is used in the mix to extend low bass. You send the full range from that channel/bus/wherever to the Lfe knowing only the sub bass content is heard.
I really think this is what's going on. It's being blown off intentionally because it "shouldn't matter".

I think it's sloppy at best and case #3 illustrates that.
 

Simplepast Presentperfect

Well-known Member
Joined
Aug 27, 2020
Messages
104
Location
Germany
I think it's sloppy at best and case #3 illustrates that.
I can relate to what you are explaining, but it seems to me that #3 is waaay further down the list and apparently affecting no one as I haven't seen any thread started by people bothered by that... I suspect the reason being that the levels are normally really low anyway, so sending that full bandwidth signal to the fronts doesn't make really a difference, and if any is a positive one. The level at Hold your hand out is actually exceptionally high, but in this track the bass is meant to be heard loud and clear !
Regarding the "crude stuff scenario": the sloppiness is actually at the other end and you'd have bigger problems than that.
I don't have statistics to support even guesses, but it seems to me that what I'd rather call feature than oversight is more prevalent in bluray audio releases, and there it is quite frequent. So it cannot be just a mistake.
Anyway, here's to sloppiness šŸøšŸ¾:cool:
 

Scott M4

600 Club - QQ All-Star
QQ Supporter
Joined
Jan 3, 2010
Messages
676
Location
Toronto, Canada
Hmmmm I'd fall into #3 with JBL 4311s as my front L+R. They have 12" woofers, so I've always had my receiver set to fold the Sub into the front speakers. I never thought about mixes with full-range subs destroying mixes. I would have just assumed that it was a lousy unbalanced mix.
 

ssully

2K Club - QQ Super Nova
QQ Supporter
Since 2002/2003
Joined
Jul 2, 2003
Messages
3,629
Location
in your face
We had this discussion before, and while I understand the technical aspects of not sending to the subwoofer anything above 125 Hz, I took the effort to look into and track surround mixes featuring full bandwith LFE (my list is quite long and growing to call it just an oversight)... and nobody is complaining about localization issues or muddy bass. Grateful Dead's American Beauty and Workingman's Dead, both very highly rated in this forum for instance have full bandwidth LFE. I was surprised to find that there is at least one SACD featuring that: Bat out of Hell. At a low volume, but you can clearly hear Kasim Sulton's bass totally isolated. As a musician it is a nice "Easter egg", and extra source of enjoyment. So please keep it coming that way ! I am adding Fish out of water to my shopping basket now, thanks for the info !


There will be an LPF in the chain somewhere, typically set at 125Hz or less. You won't get 'full bandwidth' output from a subwoofer, ever, any more than you could get it from a tweeter. If you get a significant output above 80Hz -- significant in level as well as bandwidth -- then it will be increasingly audible and localizable as level and bandwidth increase.

That's simply psychoacoustic fact.

The presence of an LPF in X.1 (or .2 or .3...) systems is a *good thing*. It prevents wide bandwidth LFE from messing the sound up. Which will happen if wide bandwidth LFE is rechannelled to mains in a X.0 system without any filtering.
 

ssully

2K Club - QQ Super Nova
QQ Supporter
Since 2002/2003
Joined
Jul 2, 2003
Messages
3,629
Location
in your face
Here's a real world example of vast objective difference between LFE in the same track, in different formats. In this case, the LFE of 'Grey Seal' from the DVDA of Goodbye Yellow Brick Road. It offered MLP (lossless) and Dolby Digital (AC3 lossy) versions. Note: everything you see here regarding the MLP version applies to the lossless BluRay and the SACD versions too -- they are the same as the MLP.

Here are the waveforms and spectrum plots, courtesy of Audacity. MLP on top, Dolby (decoded) on bottom in both
GreySeal_LFE.png


The MLP (and BluRay, SACD) LFE is simply the isolated bass + drums, full range, including cymbals. You could literally learn the bass and drum parts directly from this LFE, by 'soloing' it on headphones or loudspeakers. (But note, from 'soloing' the front channels it's obvious the same content is there, too!)

The Dolby/AC3 LFE in contrast is just the usual 'thumps' one expects from LFE. Whether that content is present in other channels, I haven't determined.

Here are Audacity spectrum plots of the first 190 seconds of each.
GreySeal_LFE_MLP_plot.png
GreySeal_LFE_AC3_plot.png


These Audacity histograms show (I think?) the average level of samples at a given frequency. Dolby behaves as expected for bandwidth-limited LFE mastering/Dolby spec: a steep dropoff in level after 125Hz (the secondary curve from ~150Hz ending at 450Hz is curious but already at a very low level). The highest level, at -32dB , is for samples at ~121 Hz. By 200Hz the level is about -72dB (a drop of 40dB, huge in terms of audibility of those higher frequencies). By contrast, the MLP curve is simply the curve of the full-frequency bass and drums, naturally having substantial content between 100 and 200Hz (the level at 200Hz is ~-40dB, a ~13dB drop from peak @~121hz).

Finally, here's the amplitude stats, courtesy of Audition. MLP(filtered) is the MLP LFE with a filter added to achieve a profile like the Dolby graph above (and when that's done, it sounds like 'thumps')


MLPDD(AC3)MLP (filtered)
Peak Amplitude:-0.50 dB-4.87 dB-4.03 dB
True Peak Amplitude:-0.26 dBTP-4.87 dBTP-4.03 dBTP
Maximum Sample Value:791943044807044833858
Minimum Sample Value:-7919420-4785939-5275256
Possibly Clipped Samples:000
Total RMS Amplitude:-18.11 dB-23.00 dB-22.28 dB
Maximum RMS Amplitude:-9.38 dB-12.29 dB-11.62 dB
Minimum RMS Amplitude:-96.95 dB-92.83 dB-93.46 dB
Average RMS Amplitude:-23.67 dB-30.21 dB-29.39 dB
DC Offset:0.00 %0.00 %0.00%
Measured Bit Depth:242432
Dynamic Range:87.57 dB80.53 dB81.84 dB
Dynamic Range Used:69.25 dB74.35 dB74.30 dB
Loudness (Legacy):-13.38 dB-16.09 dB-15.30 dB
Perceived Loudness (Legacy):-12.25 dB-16.04 dB-15.21 dB
ITU-R BS.1770-3 Loudness:-18.47 LUFS-25.06 LUFS-24.31 LUFS
0dB = FS Square Wave
Using RMS Window of 50.00 ms
Account for DC = true


Not surprisingly, all the Audition amplitude stats become much closer to the Dolby values when the MLP LFE is filtered like the Dolby is. Indicating that the differences are largely due to the extra bandwidth. I highlighted RMS average amplitude and ITU loudness stats.

How audible is it all?

"That depends." If your system filters and 'manages' the MLP LFE well, it could sound like...thumps indistinguishable from the Dolby LFE. But with lesser or no filtering these could be quite audible differences. Filtering, bass management, how high you've set your subwoofer output, placement of sub(s)....

One thing these differences would NOT be due to, is 'hi rez' versus 'lossy'. The extended bandwidth in the MLP LFE was a choice.
 
Last edited:
Top