ELP Emerson Lake & Palmer Cataloge in 5.1 Surround

QuadraphonicQuad

Help Support QuadraphonicQuad:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
I believe it is a market necessity. Many purchasers want to feel that they have a special product that fully uses the resources of their 5.1 systems. I don't think anyone considers 5.1 mixes audiophile products. They could be, of course.

I wonder if the bass issue in the KE9 III is bad programming of the LFE channel, the 10 dB issue.

That has nothing to do with it. You can still create the illusion that the vocal is exclusively in the center channel when in reality, it is actually in some of the other channels as well. It all comes down to how loud the vocal is in these other channels.

Also, the LFE has nothing to do with the bass issue in Karn Evil 9 III as there really isn't much LFE content in this particular mix (which is the way it should be)
 
THIS is a great point you bring up as most mixing engineers do not keep the lead vocal strictly in the center channel.

Exactly. This is one of the issues that I posted about earlier. I feel the mix lacks cohesion as a result.

I'm researching this quite extensively right now for my Master's Final Project. More on that later…

I'm sure there are many folks here, including me, who will be quite interested in your results. Best of luck.
 
I don't think anyone considers 5.1 mixes audiophile products. They could be, of course.

You're posting on a board where aspects of surround mixes are dissected and analyzed (heavy on the anal) endlessly, where marketing a lossy-compressed Dolby or (to a lesser extent) DTS surround mix is a mark of shame, and individual polls are maintained to rate every surround title anyone's aware of. Perhaps you meant to say that too many audiophiles aren't aware of the superiority of hi-res 5.1 mixes. I think virtually everyone that seeks them out considers 5.1 mixes to be 'audiophile products'. Most are on formats that greatly exceed the specs of conventional red-book CDs, are remixed from original multitracks rather than being mere 'remasters', and target an audience that willingly pays extra both in terms of equipment and source material in search of a more satisfying listening experience.

Maybe that audiophile word doesn't mean what you think it means. Or you're spending too much time on that other forum.

I'm sitting out the whole current mismanaged BSS rerelease, I'm fine with my original audiophile DVDa. <-- Token on-topic remark.
 
Some feedback from the man who mixed Brain Salad Surgery


Message to JakkoJ via Twitter
My original message:
@JakkoJ What do you think of the ELP B.S.S fiasco ? Sorry but I cancelled the 3 disc box, no 5.1 included. Why did they do that Jakko ?


His reply:

I didn't know. I mix em & suggest stuff. But the decisions?? Not mine I'm afraid
 
Or you're spending too much time on that other forum.
Nope, I got kicked out.

I haven't done any checking on this, but I bet you that you won't find many posts here that include the usual audiophile buzzwords, say "soundstaging". You will find much more multichannel keywords, like "busy rears/surrounds" and the such.

Of course nothing (except market considerations) prevents mixing mch albums having audiophiles in mind (say, ambiance mixes), but the excitement of the mch/quad mixes is much more important for us than any other qualities. Among other things, we love to hear things that get masked in two channels but that are put into the surrounds to make them distinctly noticeable. We love to hear music in a different perspective to what's "natural" or "real-world".
 
Last edited:
Hmm, why haven't we been talking bout the BSS SACD 5.1? It has the same mix as the 2000 DVD-A. The SACD is a nice option for those who haven't heard BSS in 5.1.
:phones


P.S. Looks like we have some cranky people today. :yikes Perhaps we all need to order Quadrophenia in 5.1 and we will feel a little bit better, yes?

I have spent over an hour reading the last portion of this thread (quite a few pages!) and I wanted so many times to respond but decided to read on. Now that the SACD got mentioned, I feel I have to speak up.
I have the Super Deluxe Edition containing the SACD (I paid about £50 for it 2 years ago) and am so much satisfied with it that I was not even prompted to pre-order the new 2CD+DVD release let alone the Super Expensive box set with the LP. I simply put off the decision to buy the 3-disc version until I hear the reviews regarding the Jakko surround mix. Now that the 3-disc release is surroundless, I am not interested at all. Today I played the SACD and it is all I need. Never even listened to the stereo DSD, I always opt for surround when available. The BSS story ends here for me.
 
What's the deal with the FLAC files, fredblue? Have you checked those out yet?

Super Sonic FLAC on a Mac...

Screen Shot 2014-06-05 at 15.21.33.jpg
 
I have been fascinated by the debate that has continued since the release of this '40th anniversary' version of BSS. And, just to clarify, I purchased the 'box set - full monty' edition - albeit that I nearly decided to cancel and purchase the '3-disc' cut down version instead. Fortunately, given a pure memory loss (it's my age....), I received the 'box set'! So, a good or bad thing?
Actually, a good thing! Whilst I have the 'Mr Kellogg' 5.1 version to hand for comparison, I am now able to experience the diverse principles of creating a surround mix. Nothing 'technical' here - jus a bloke with 'cloth ears'.
There are not many surround sound versions available of which two different versions exist. As such, comparisons are few and far between. Admittedly, we have the 'Kellogg' version v the 'Steve Wilson' mix of 'Lucky Man' and... then I run out proposals....! Soon, the '5.1 God' willing, we shall have a 5.1 version of the Yes album 'Fragile' for which the whole debate will recommence. Will we be disappointed (again) or embrace the new version with open arms?
From my own point of view in respect of the new BSS version, I am in two minds - there are sounds and effects available that I do not hear on the 'Kellogg' version as well as there are audible experiences that I do hear on the Jakko version - yes, the missing tubular bells near the start of 'Jerusalem' are a complete mystery (and I am not going to revisit the 'KE9 -Pt3- bass overload misgivings - that's been covered elsewhere) - but, nonetheless, it has its merits. For me 'Toccata' has never sounded so clear.....! Along with 'Benny...' and other observations already made.
So, where does this leave us all? In the hands of others of what we expect to be the promised land in terms of 5.1 presentations?
What are looking for/expecting in a 5.1 surround mix? A different slant on the original?/a new sonic experience that did not exist before/an upgrade from the 'compressed' stereo version (that we became so familiar with before 5.1?) or something 'off planet' that actually doesn't exist?
Inevitably, there are some excellent experiences out there in 'surround land' that can/should be regarded as definitive versions of their own production but, unless the same people are involved in each and all, shouldn't we just go with the flow?
Perhaps we can only receive 'nirvana' when we are told that the 'new/re-mixed' versions are to be undertaken by an ELP (or other band) fan is in charge and has lived with the music for so long that his/her blood flows with the subtle nuances.
Dunno really - what else I can add.....? I await your barbed comments!!!
 
Hi there 'timbre4'.
Thank you for your kind words but, to be honest, I find the whole debate on this ELP thing quite depressing!!! Inevitably, there are some technical issues that need to be resolved (if ever...dah de dah) but, inevitably, by others more experienced than us mere mortals - should, of course, they even be interested!
Despite that, I am fascinated by all attempts to offer us out here in '5.1' land an opportunity to experience the surround version of the musical compositions that have been so artistically created to be so. A number of new/old albums spring to mind - 'Steve Wilson/Porcupine Tree' (natch!) Anathema', 'Marillion', 'RPWL', etc,.
It will/needs to continue (and it will) but if it degenerates into a specialist market, then I fear it will disappear into a big hole in the ground!

PW
 
I have been fascinated by the debate that has continued since the release of this '40th anniversary' version of BSS. And, just to clarify, I purchased the 'box set - full monty' edition - albeit that I nearly decided to cancel and purchase the '3-disc' cut down version instead. Fortunately, given a pure memory loss (it's my age....), I received the 'box set'! So, a good or bad thing?
Actually, a good thing! Whilst I have the 'Mr Kellogg' 5.1 version to hand for comparison, I am now able to experience the diverse principles of creating a surround mix. Nothing 'technical' here - jus a bloke with 'cloth ears'.
There are not many surround sound versions available of which two different versions exist. As such, comparisons are few and far between. Admittedly, we have the 'Kellogg' version v the 'Steve Wilson' mix of 'Lucky Man' and... then I run out proposals....! Soon, the '5.1 God' willing, we shall have a 5.1 version of the Yes album 'Fragile' for which the whole debate will recommence. Will we be disappointed (again) or embrace the new version with open arms?
From my own point of view in respect of the new BSS version, I am in two minds - there are sounds and effects available that I do not hear on the 'Kellogg' version as well as there are audible experiences that I do hear on the Jakko version - yes, the missing tubular bells near the start of 'Jerusalem' are a complete mystery (and I am not going to revisit the 'KE9 -Pt3- bass overload misgivings - that's been covered elsewhere) - but, nonetheless, it has its merits. For me 'Toccata' has never sounded so clear.....! Along with 'Benny...' and other observations already made.
So, where does this leave us all? In the hands of others of what we expect to be the promised land in terms of 5.1 presentations?
What are looking for/expecting in a 5.1 surround mix? A different slant on the original?/a new sonic experience that did not exist before/an upgrade from the 'compressed' stereo version (that we became so familiar with before 5.1?) or something 'off planet' that actually doesn't exist?
Inevitably, there are some excellent experiences out there in 'surround land' that can/should be regarded as definitive versions of their own production but, unless the same people are involved in each and all, shouldn't we just go with the flow?
Perhaps we can only receive 'nirvana' when we are told that the 'new/re-mixed' versions are to be undertaken by an ELP (or other band) fan is in charge and has lived with the music for so long that his/her blood flows with the subtle nuances.
Dunno really - what else I can add.....? I await your barbed comments!!!

Nice post and welcome. I can't say anything about BSS, since I'm happy w/ my Kellogg's (it's GGGGGGrrrrreat!). ;) As soon as the 5.1 disappeared from the 3 disc set, I was out. But re: SW's re-mix of Fragile, whenever that comes out, I'd lay good money that we won't be disappointed. His track record speaks for itself, including the 2 Yes re-mixes so far.

As for barbed comments, you're in the wrong forum; you should visit Stevehoffman.tv if that's what you're looking for. :howl Now if you want twisted, we've got plenty of that here to go along w/ tons of good info. :mad:@: I'll plead guilty to that charge, but top honors in that category would have to go to our resident lupin thief; I'm sure you'll make his acquaintance soon.

There's tons of knowledgeable people here, but we also know how to keep it light. Thanks for sharing and keep comin' back!
 
Soon, the '5.1 God' willing, we shall have a 5.1 version of the Yes album 'Fragile' for which the whole debate will recommence. Will we be disappointed (again) or embrace the new version with open arms?

I can say that I will more than likely embrace Steven Wilson's remixes of "Fragile" with open arms, because based on his other remixes, I think his remix will be a HUGE improvement over the 2002 mix (which I have never really liked). He stays very faithful to the original mix in terms of balance, EQ, compression, panning, etc, so his remixes should make logical sense and be sweet music to our ears.

(And welcome!) :)
 
I have been fascinated by the debate that has continued since the release of this '40th anniversary' version of BSS. And, just to clarify, I purchased the 'box set - full monty' edition - albeit that I nearly decided to cancel and purchase the '3-disc' cut down version instead. Fortunately, given a pure memory loss (it's my age....), I received the 'box set'! So, a good or bad thing?
Actually, a good thing! Whilst I have the 'Mr Kellogg' 5.1 version to hand for comparison, I am now able to experience the diverse principles of creating a surround mix. Nothing 'technical' here - jus a bloke with 'cloth ears'.
There are not many surround sound versions available of which two different versions exist. As such, comparisons are few and far between. Admittedly, we have the 'Kellogg' version v the 'Steve Wilson' mix of 'Lucky Man' and... then I run out proposals....! Soon, the '5.1 God' willing, we shall have a 5.1 version of the Yes album 'Fragile' for which the whole debate will recommence. Will we be disappointed (again) or embrace the new version with open arms?
From my own point of view in respect of the new BSS version, I am in two minds - there are sounds and effects available that I do not hear on the 'Kellogg' version as well as there are audible experiences that I do hear on the Jakko version - yes, the missing tubular bells near the start of 'Jerusalem' are a complete mystery (and I am not going to revisit the 'KE9 -Pt3- bass overload misgivings - that's been covered elsewhere) - but, nonetheless, it has its merits. For me 'Toccata' has never sounded so clear.....! Along with 'Benny...' and other observations already made.
So, where does this leave us all? In the hands of others of what we expect to be the promised land in terms of 5.1 presentations?
What are looking for/expecting in a 5.1 surround mix? A different slant on the original?/a new sonic experience that did not exist before/an upgrade from the 'compressed' stereo version (that we became so familiar with before 5.1?) or something 'off planet' that actually doesn't exist?
Inevitably, there are some excellent experiences out there in 'surround land' that can/should be regarded as definitive versions of their own production but, unless the same people are involved in each and all, shouldn't we just go with the flow?
Perhaps we can only receive 'nirvana' when we are told that the 'new/re-mixed' versions are to be undertaken by an ELP (or other band) fan is in charge and has lived with the music for so long that his/her blood flows with the subtle nuances.
Dunno really - what else I can add.....? I await your barbed comments!!!


Heavens to Murgatroyd, my dear fellow.

A more eloquent post I've not heard from within these ever echoing walls of this fine establishment. (y)
You are certainly a well spoken gentleman. We must have met, I am sure, perhaps at a gala of my good friend Oscar Wild?
Nonetheless, some of our finest have already chimed in, and have informed you that this is indeed a place of good tidings, libations and sheer lunacy courtesy of yours truly. For further questions please go here my good man:

[video=youtube;KbtVaTWs6II]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KbtVaTWs6II[/video]

Regarding the recent box set of ELP which I bought, FWIW. I must subtract significant points from your post when you dodged the issue of KE9 3rd entirely. You must let it all hang out here. We all do(to the abject horror of a small few), but honesty is indeed the best policy. Mostly so we can all be on the record so we may be ridiculed at any given moment:cool:, back to KE9: The three parts make up the suite and a failing in 1,2 or 3 is what my neighbor refers to as a "biggie bo bo". (You need to hear him say it for full effect...):mad:@:

You'll find that most of us here invest major $$$ in our music and just don't pirate the stuff like a bunch of college kids from the Gore or Bush families. ;) So I'd think an occasional strong opinion or expression of disappointment is warranted, one bonus point about the ELP box set:

Most of us find ourselves "collecting" again so after getting the 1st two ELP recordings in perfect 5.1 AND in a wonderful 3CD case, BSS, without the 5.1 ruined the set and really screws up our ELP collections. Clearly the new 5.1 mix is controversial to say the least.

I'm very glad you are enjoying the new ELP box set. I am such a die hard I will keep it for Benny the Bouncer, alone. Yes, all of here move on after any let down and we eagerly await the next release.

Welcome to the group and please feel free to post exactly what you think(though be warned the XTC crowd here have a bit of a glass jaw so go easy on them. ;)
 
Back
Top