HiRez Poll Deep Purple - MACHINE HEAD [DVD-A]/[SACD-JAPAN]

[steelydave]

Is it just the rears that are swapped on the SACD compared to the SQ LP, or are the entire right and left sides swapped? I looked at this in my DAW after Owen's comments and there aren't obvious clues that the rears are 'twisted' in relation to the fronts (ie no swirly pans) but there's also nothing that would be screwed up by swapping them. Is there a hard-panned front left/front right instrument on the SQ LP that I could check to verify the fronts are correct, or if someone just knows (@sjcorne ?) maybe they could say?

While I was investigating the channel assignments, I had a look at the levels, and while for the most part they seem perfectly balanced, I did notice one song (Lazy) where the front right needed to be raised by +4dB - all the front-center panned info (lead vocals, bass guitar, drum mix) leans pretty hard to the left otherwise, and that seems to perfectly balance it like the other tracks. There are a couple of other songs where I think the current rear-left needs to go up by 1-2dB but it's just a minor tweak. I'll post a full rundown once I get everything figured out.

 

[Owen Smith]

I don't recall anything conclusive like a swirly pan, and the exercise I was involved in was some years ago. But certainly listening to the entire UK SACD album with the rears swapped showed what I felt was a more cohesive sounding mix. And there is nothing to indicate that the fronts might be swapped as well.

We basically started from the premise that the SQ LP likely had the channel positions correct, since the people making it would know what was what at the time. It's much easier to make mistakes like that years later when pulling archive material out and trying to make sense of the documentation that may or may not be with it.

 

[MoB1]

...
@Owen Smith is correct that the UK SACD's rear channels are reversed in comparison to the SQ Quadraphonic LP. I'm inclined to believe that the SQ LP has the proper channel layout, since the instrument pans mirror that of the original stereo mix. Some examples below:

• "Smoke On The Water" - opening riff:
  • Original Stereo Mix - left
  • SQ Quadraphonic LP - left rear
  • UK SACD - right rear
• "Space Truckin'" - opening riff:
  • Original Stereo Mix - right
  • SQ Quadraphonic LP - right rear
  • UK SACD - left rear

Differences between UK Quad and US Quad.

I always thought it was mainly that UK Fronts are US Rears and UK Rears are US Fronts

I tested. Results:

UK Fronts: Bass / Drums
UK Rears: Guitar left, Organ right.

US Fronts: Guitar left, Organ right.
US Rears: Bass / Drums

On Smoke On the Water...

UK Fronts: Bass / Drums AND guitar at low volume
UK Rears: Guitar left, Organ right. Guitar solo

US Fronts: Guitar left, Organ right.
US Rears: Bass / Drums Guitar solo

PS
When Made in Japan was remixed Organ left, guitar right.
Yet no 5.1 mix made by Steven Wilson has been released...

 

[MoB1]

Several weeks ago, I had the opportunity to interview John Kellogg, who created this 5.1 mix and several others (Chicago, Foreigner, Deep Purple, etc) for WMG during the early-2000s SACD/DVD-A era. I had no idea he was such a strong proponent of surround music, going all the way back to the mid-80's! He shared some interesting stories about working on the Brain Salad Surgery 5.1 remix:
https://immersiveaudioalbum.com/202...-producer-engineer-musician-and-technologist/

Posted on HiRez Poll - Emerson Lake & Palmer - BRAIN SALAD SURGERY [DVD-A][2000 WB]

Kellogg says:
On Deep Purple’s Machine Head, we found entire drum breaks that were recorded on separate tracks then mixed and spliced into the 2-track master reel. It was fascinating and a little mind-bending at times to make it work in 5.1. We also found an entire song, “When A Blind Man Cries,” that had never been mixed or released. So we mixed it, and it was included on the DVD-Audio release.

Ok, when Roger Glover remixed Machine Head in 1997, he also remixed this B-side, but removed the guitar opening.
Kellogg did the same. Is it missing?

The 1972 release. Including two guitars in the opening.


Roger Glover's 1997 remix. Similar to Kellogg's mix.

 

[ssully]

Despite whatever similarities appear in those waveform pictures, I can assure you that the US quad is a completely different mix--it's not just the UK version with a swapped channel. There are obvious differences in the way the instruments are spread throughout the four speakers, like the intro riff to "Smoke On The Water" coming from the front channels (US) rather than the rears (UK), and the vocals in "Space Truckin'" coming from the rear speakers (US) instead of the fronts (UK). The US quad also has a much wider mix of the drum kit, with the overhead mics panned to the rear speakers. The UK quad has the kit mixed in stereo across the front speakers, with very little drum sound in the rears.

Not to mention, the presence or absence of part of Blackmore's guitar solo on "Lazy" distinguishes the two mixes!

In fact, as you note the two old quad mixes sound very different overall...no one could mistake one for the other. (I hope!)

 

[ssully]

This DVD-AUDIO ... 2001 mix is almost the same as the SACD 2011

There are 3 strange "mistakes" in this mix.
1. The Bass solo from Pictures of Home....
2. The Drum intro for Never Before. (Fixed on the SACD 2011)
3. The Bass comes in too late on Smoke on the Water.

//


Can you describe these mistakes in more detail ?

 

[ssully]

What I've grown to dislike about the 5.1 mix is that it's significantly 'wetter' (more reverb) than the original stereo mix. So i don't listen to it much any more. The UK quad has the same sound as the original mix, but it's missing a bit of guitar on Lazy, I hate that. The US quad isn't so great, sound-wise and mix wise. So there's really no 'great' surround version of this , for me.

 

[sjcorne]

What I've grown to dislike about the 5.1 mix is that it's significantly 'wetter' (more reverb) than the original stereo mix.

It's the compressed dynamic range and diminished channel separation that bother me on the 5.1 mix. When the drums enter in "Space Truckin'" on the U.K. quad, you actually feel something. That doesn't really happen on the 5.1 mix, it's like the overall volume barely changes. Same issue when the guitars come in on "Pictures Of Homes" after the drum intro, the dynamic 'slam' is gone.

 

[MoB1]

//


Can you describe these mistakes in more detail ?

https://www.quadraphonicquad.com/fo...achine-head-dvd-a-sacd-japan.4389/post-484638
If you read my next post:

2. The Drum intro for Never Before
This mistake is only on the Digital Dolby 5.1 low res version that you can play on a regular DVD-player.
Very strange. Also strange that I just found out yesterday, when I was just going to check out the videos... for the first time in years.
You need a DVD-Audio player to see the footage. Highway Star and Lazy (Edited to 4 minutes of each song...)

I added a mp3-file.

 

[ssully]

This DVD-AUDIO ... 2001 mix is almost the same as the SACD 2011

There are 3 strange "mistakes" in this mix.
1. The Bass solo from Pictures of Home....
2. The Drum intro for Never Before. (Fixed on the SACD 2011)
3. The Bass comes in too late on Smoke on the Water.

//

these mistakes?

https://www.quadraphonicquad.com/fo...achine-head-dvd-a-sacd-japan.4389/post-484638
If you read my next post:

2. The Drum intro for Never Before
This mistake is only on the Digital Dolby 5.1 low res version that you can play on a regular DVD-player.
Very strange. Also strange that I just found out yesterday, when I was just going to check out the videos... for the first time in years.
You need a DVD-Audio player to see the footage. Highway Star and Lazy (Edited to 4 minutes of each song...)

I added a mp3-file.

What is the issue with the bass solo in Pictures of Home?

And the bass comes in late on Smoke on the Water? I haven't seen anyone else report that...

 

[MoB1]

What is the issue with the bass solo in Pictures of Home?

And the bass comes in late on Smoke on the Water? I haven't seen anyone else report that...

" issue with the bass solo" : The sound. Sounds strange.
Smoke bass: Yes, strange.

 

[ssully]

er.....huh?

 

[Egghaus]

The WB Japan SACD was one of the first discs I bought when I finally got a player. I really like this album, but I find the some tracks are great and others not so much. Highway Star bothers me because it seems the vocals are hollow/distant sounding. On the other hand the instrumental intro for "Lazy" just sounds killer to me and makes the disc worth it. It is the most uneven sounding disc in my small collection, despite this I still give it an 8 for the sonics and content.

 

[stoopid]

Ended up with the Japan 2011 SACD 5.1 after asking and searching around for the consensus overall "best" (based mostly on my personal preference for a 'soundstage' mix versus a lot of discrete elements).

Surround certainly increased my enjoyment and engagement with the music, lots of very good jams (some songs even had two solo sections, something common to prog rock of which I'm a fan). Not a band or album I've listened to a lot, but I'm very aware of their impact and the importance of this album in particular on nearly all the bands I enjoy that came after. Musically this is a history lesson in early metal/hard rock executed at a very high level. Apart from that, there's been a couple bands and songs written in the past 52 years. I'm a bit biased towards a lot of those bands and songs as having taken what Deep Purple started and nudged it forward incrementally. The only thing that truly dated this album musically was its heavy reliance on blues songs between what I would have considered more original material. All the songs are good, but some are great. I find myself drawn more to the non-derivative blues material. Had I been alive in 1972 and dropped the needle on this, I would have been stoked when comparing it to releases up to that point in rock music.

The surround mix itself was, at times, more inventive / interesting than I expected. Guitars moving from back to front / front to back, keyboards moving around in the mix, moments of busier music with a slight swirling effect. I felt the moments of 'showboating' in the surround field were appropriate and not too gimmicky. When not showcasing what surround can do, there was a consistent placement of instruments in the room and there were very few times I thought anything was misplaced or missing in the mix.

The only thing pulling this down to a 9, besides the somewhat dated music, would be the lack of true crispness in the recording. An album like Black Sabbath's "Paranoid" sounds good ("dark"/foreboding) with slightly subdued sonics, but with a more straightforward and progressive leaning act that thin veil over the mix is a touch off-putting. It could simply be limitations of the studio (I've seen pictures where it looked more like a room in a church than a proper recording space) or deterioration of the masters with time. I've heard older recordings that sound much better, so I'm leaning toward "this is as good as we could get with what we had". I do wonder though with modern digital tools like Steven Wilson has used to polish recordings from the same era, if a bit more fidelity can be found in these tracks than is represented here in this now aging surround release. Maybe that's an area of improvement with the new set coming out in 2024. To clarify -- I'm arguing against giving it a 10, this is by no means a 'bad' sounding album.

For a very casual fan, $38 for a good version will certainly hold me over. I'm going to give this surround release and the stereo mix rip from the SACD some more spins, maybe I will grow to like more of the songs with some additional time (this approach has worked for me with Billy Joel's "52nd Street"). If I can find a deeper appreciation maybe I'll be open to a future purchase of an improved mix.