• QuadraphonicQuad welcomes you and encourages your participation! Treat all members with respect. Please keep all discussions civil, even when you have a strong opinion on a particular topic.

    Do not offer for free, offer for sale, offer for trade, or request copies or files of copyrighted material - no matter how rare or unavailable to the public they might be. We do not condone the illegal sharing of music. There are many places on the internet where you can participate in such transactions, but QuadraphonicQuad is not one of them. We are here to encourage and support new multichannel releases from those companies that still provide them and as such the distribution of illegal copies of recordings is counter-productive to that effort. Any posts of this sort will be deleted without notification.

    Please try to avoid discussions that pit one format against another. Hint for new users: make liberal use of the search facilities here at QuadraphonicQuad. Our message base is an incredibly rich resource of detailed information on virtually all topics pertaining to surround-sound. You will be surprised at what you can find with a little digging!

HiRez Poll Dire Straits - BROTHERS IN ARMS [SACD/DVD-A DualDisc]

Help Support QuadraphonicQuad:

Rate the SACD/DVD-A of Dire Straits - BROTHERS IN ARMS


  • Total voters
    259

JediJoker

900 Club - QQ All-Star
Joined
Jul 13, 2015
Messages
912
Location
Portland, OR, USA
If your criteria is based on being more dynamic than this one, for choosing what multichannel mixes you listen to, your list must be very short. DR of 12 is a tough hurdle for a popular recording. I would doubt the DR dynamic range for Psurroundabout is any better than 12.
The TT/MAAT DR Meter was never designed for multichannel audio. It doesn't give accurate readings for more than two channels. I haven't even referenced the DR readings for these; just using my ears and phonographic memory.
The original CD has a higher DR than the MFSL according to the database.
True, but while they are important, dynamics aren't everything. I prefer the tonality of both the MFSL and the '90s Bob Ludwig remaster to the original WB US CD (other pressings may have had different masterings), which I find to be cold, sterile, and lifeless. Both of those stereo remasters are also plenty dynamic (the original is extreme).
For what it's worth, I also think the dynamics are not very good on this mix/mastering. The front channels are squashed.
That makes two engineers with the same findings. I'm guessing it's down to Ludwig's mastering. He also did the stereo mastering on this 20th Anniversary edition, and it's the loudest mastering available (and nothing like his great '90s remaster).
 

himey

1K Club - QQ Shooting Star
Joined
Nov 11, 2013
Messages
1,446
For what it's worth, I also think the dynamics are not very good on this mix/mastering. The front channels are squashed.
So you prefer two channel on this? I certainly can live with this squashed recording. Everything is relative obviously. Poor dynamics don't stand out on this to most according to the polls and posts.

Do you consider the stereo mix a major dynamic improvement or is this recording a victim of first generation digital which has limitations compared to modern digital and analog which was ahead of digital at that point?
 

Plan9

500 Club - QQ All-Star
Joined
Jul 27, 2012
Messages
565
Location
Toulouse, France
So you prefer two channel on this? I certainly can live with this squashed recording. Everything is relative obviously. Poor dynamics don't stand out on this to most according to the polls and posts.

Do you consider the stereo mix a major dynamic improvement or is this recording a victim of first generation digital which has limitations compared to modern digital and analog which was ahead of digital at that point?
I don't really "prefer" the stereo mix, to me they are two different things, I just regret that the surround mix is mastered like it is.

If you are talking about the mastering of the original stereo mix on these editions, it is probably the "less good" version of this album on digital, it is seriously compressed.

It would be hard to judge the limitations, if any, of this recording as it has become so iconic. BTW this was recorded digital, but mixed analog, and then printed back to digital for the final mix. So it's not a pure digital recording from start to finish. It certainly sounds of its time, and the unmolested stereo mix is veeery dynamic.
 

JediJoker

900 Club - QQ All-Star
Joined
Jul 13, 2015
Messages
912
Location
Portland, OR, USA
BTW this was recorded digital, but mixed analog, and then printed back to digital for the final mix.
Engineer Neil Dorfsman:
"As the band had to fly back to London to rehearse for their 200-date tour, the Brothers In Arms mix took place over the course of six days on an SSL in Studio Two at the AIR facility on Oxford Street. There, about 20 Neve modules were inserted between the console and the tape machine in order to add a little warmth to the sound.

"I mixed to DAT with a very nice-sounding Prism converter and a pair of Auratones," recalls Dorfsman. "I had been wanting to mix on Yamaha NS10s, which were fairly new at the time, but we couldn't get them in London. So, I went with the Auratones—which should have been called Horrortones—and since I knew the record so well it wasn't that hard."
Despite being tracked all-digitally, and mixed down to DAT, there's a lot of analog sound in the original mix—20 daisy-chained console channel modules, to be exact! 😉
 

albertop

Senior Member
QQ Supporter
Joined
Jul 19, 2017
Messages
210
Location
Melbourne, Australia
True, but while they are important, dynamics aren't everything. I prefer the tonality of both the MFSL and the '90s Bob Ludwig remaster to the original WB US CD (other pressings may have had different masterings), which I find to be cold, sterile, and lifeless. Both of those stereo remasters are also plenty dynamic (the original is extreme).
Glad to read you like the tonality of both the 96 remaster and the MFSL SACD. A couple of years ago, I got almost killed on SH Forums for mentioning I like the 96 remaster ;)!! My favourite is the MFSL, but I grew up listening to the 96 remaster and - still nowadays - I prefer the more punchy (compressed) presentation of Money for Nothing. For the other songs, the MFSL is great.

I also agree with you guys on the mastering of the surround release. It's definitely a different beast, but it's a great listening experience nonetheless, and especially for the ballads the immersive presentation is nice. I would recommend it to anyone despite the non-perfect sonics, as it's cheap, easy to find and the music is great.
 

albertop

Senior Member
QQ Supporter
Joined
Jul 19, 2017
Messages
210
Location
Melbourne, Australia
I've never thought this 5.1 mix sounded anything less than totally amazing.
It's on many members' top 10 lists.
The mastering has never even crossed my mind.
I guess I rate it around a 9? Just cause it's not my musical cup o' tea, every second. Plenty of great tunes though.
7 or 8 is still great :)
I consider 6 as the threshold for poor surround mixes, but between 7 and 10 it's really a matter of small details and personal taste I think!
 

MarkyM

New member
Joined
Mar 2, 2019
Messages
7
Location
Northeast Ohio
I have the 20th anniversary edition SACD version (bought in 2005) and have been going through all of my surround music discs since some recent system improvements. This and Avalon are my top 2 overall. A solid 10 for me.
I know that the song Brothers In Arms is about war but it will always be associated with cops for me because of its use (in its entirety) during the end section of the Miami Vice episode “Out Where The Buses Don’t Run”. Back in the day, that show was one of the first to fully utilize the then new stereo TV broadcast system. I had just installed the TV stereo adaptor for my Zenith VHS Hi-Fi VCR (a hot running contraption that sat on top of the VCR) and the episode was one of the first things I watched in stereo. Just blew me away at the time, both the experience of TV in stereo and the song, and I ran out and bought the CD right away. How far we’ve come since then! 😁
 

JonUrban

Forum Curmudgeon
Staff member
Since 2002/2003
Joined
Mar 2, 2002
Messages
15,962
Location
Connecticut
I have the 20th anniversary edition SACD version (bought in 2005) and have been going through all of my surround music discs since some recent system improvements. This and Avalon are my top 2 overall. A solid 10 for me.
I know that the song Brothers In Arms is about war but it will always be associated with cops for me because of its use (in its entirety) during the end section of the Miami Vice episode “Out Where The Buses Don’t Run”. Back in the day, that show was one of the first to fully utilize the then new stereo TV broadcast system. I had just installed the TV stereo adaptor for my Zenith VHS Hi-Fi VCR (a hot running contraption that sat on top of the VCR) and the episode was one of the first things I watched in stereo. Just blew me away at the time, both the experience of TV in stereo and the song, and I ran out and bought the CD right away. How far we’ve come since then! 😁
Oh yeah. What a great episode. The "crazy cop", played by Bruce McGill (D-Day from Animal House, among other roles he's played), he should have gotten an Emmy for that role (maybe he did). That was a great use of of the song in a show, and it was integral to that episode.
 

MarkyM

New member
Joined
Mar 2, 2019
Messages
7
Location
Northeast Ohio
Oh yeah. What a great episode. The "crazy cop", played by Bruce McGill (D-Day from Animal House, among other roles he's played), he should have gotten an Emmy for that role (maybe he did). That was a great use of of the song in a show, and it was integral to that episode.
Agreed! A great performance there by Mr. McGill.

Indeed! These days producers will use snippets of songs but not the entire song integrated so well.
 

markshan

1K Club - QQ Shooting Star
Joined
Mar 3, 2009
Messages
1,239
Location
Pittsburgh PA
If your criteria is based on being more dynamic than this one, for choosing what multichannel mixes you listen to, your list must be very short. DR of 12 is a tough hurdle for a popular recording. I would doubt the DR dynamic range for Psurroundabout is any better than 12. The original CD has a higher DR than the MFSL according to the database.
That stupid DR database is one of the worst things to ever happen to this hobby. People have forgotten to listen with their ears. I don't care what anyone says, this is one of my top ten all time surround mixes. I regularly use it as a demo disc and have never had any reaction but stunned amazement.
 
Top