[RHINO] Genesis Box 1976-1982 CD/DVD box set domestic press release
- Thread starter Rck60s
- Start date
Help Support QuadraphonicQuad:
Thanks for posting that. Wonder why Rhino did not bother with DVD-Audio to go with the DTS. Kinda sucks. (At least we get the SACDs - However, they lose a sale to me. I'm not buying the US version without HiRez)
DaneelOlivaw
300 Club - QQ All-Star
no sacd player here so I'll go for Abacab and Wind & Wuthering - shhh....
DaneelOlivaw
300 Club - QQ All-Star
Has anybody seen this release - the domestic one - for presale at any online or brick-n-mortar stores? I haven't. For example, I was at Wherehouse Music this past Friday & asked to see if they would be selling it (box or individual titles) and they couldn't find anything in their computer database. That kind of worries me because at least at that particular location, they usually have a quite good stock of obscure and "old" titles Best Buy never seems to stock in-store (like the David Crosby CD+dvd-audio package, the A Valid Path DualDisc, and a decent selection of classical & jazz sacds).
DaneelOlivaw
300 Club - QQ All-Star
I bought Abacab last Friday, and listened to the CD first via our stereo HT system consisting of vintage Pioneer CS-99A loudspeakers (pictured in my avatar). These speakers have a very mellow/laid back personality. When playing back the CD of this album I bought back around 1995 I guess*, I can really crank these speakers to loud volumes because of the recording's basically-neutral sound. :tu:
FYI: I've owned, and still listen to, Abacab since it debuted and also own it in vinyl form (two LPs actually, since one was severely scratched at college during some rambunctious-ness
).
But while playing the 2007 version of this album, it's like the speakers had been transformed into a pair of pseudo-Klipschs: not bad sounding mind you, but definitely a whole different animal.
And when played on my HT system with Boston Acoustic CR9s? At anything but conversational listening levels - ouch. Even on the $40 Altec-Lansings that are part of this computer's sound system this CD has an etched & bright quality.
The DTS96/24 surround mix sounds less aggressive but still maintains the stereo mix's in-your-face quality.
So.....................
* Both mixes are pretty bright but I can handle that, as I do with many other of my albums that are recorded that way.
* The amount of compression used on these mixes isn't that bad either, since it (and I guess the new mixes) helps bring out details I've never really heard before which is nice.
---> But for this guy who likes to turn things up, these two qualities together make for an unpleasant listening session at anything but "normal" listening levels. The resulting sound is much like listening to the music over the radio i.e. it has a rather tinny and dry quality that to me cheapens the listening experience.
(Surprising) sound comparison: my dvd-audio of Linkin Park's Reanimation, an album with much more aggressive music and mastered by Bob Ludwig, is much smoother/more natural sounding than this album and thus is easy & great fun to listen to at immature levels. So why music aimed at an older crowd was mastered the way this new Abacab album is is confusing, though I bet it was to make it sound better on sub-$500 5.1 sound systems and low bitrate MP3s listened to via cheap earbuds.
The surround mixes: the engineer did a good job of placing sounds in the rear channels when certain things were happening in the music i.e. good synchonization, but the end result was that most tracks were basically stereo......with occasional surround sound. Personally I like my surround mixes "on" all the time (unless that would interfere somehow with the intent of the music) so these mixes don't do anything for me.
Phil's voice came through rather prominently, with lots of detail but also with some harshness (and that "dry" effect). In the end I thought his vocal was too "up front" in the surround mix.
And sometimes the surround reverb effects sounded kind of like my receiver's "hall" DSP function (hint: I never use this particular soundfield choice because of its artificial feel).
And a major non-music irritant: to get this disc to play, I had to wait for the audio menu to appear then hit enter then wait for another menu to appear and choose another onscreen icon. Why oh why can't they author these dvd-video surround discs to automatically play when inserted so I don't have to screw with my TV??
I wish I had spent my $18 on another album.
* printed on the disc itself: ATLANTIC 82693-2
FYI: I've owned, and still listen to, Abacab since it debuted and also own it in vinyl form (two LPs actually, since one was severely scratched at college during some rambunctious-ness
).But while playing the 2007 version of this album, it's like the speakers had been transformed into a pair of pseudo-Klipschs: not bad sounding mind you, but definitely a whole different animal.
And when played on my HT system with Boston Acoustic CR9s? At anything but conversational listening levels - ouch. Even on the $40 Altec-Lansings that are part of this computer's sound system this CD has an etched & bright quality.
The DTS96/24 surround mix sounds less aggressive but still maintains the stereo mix's in-your-face quality.
So.....................
* Both mixes are pretty bright but I can handle that, as I do with many other of my albums that are recorded that way.
* The amount of compression used on these mixes isn't that bad either, since it (and I guess the new mixes) helps bring out details I've never really heard before which is nice.
---> But for this guy who likes to turn things up, these two qualities together make for an unpleasant listening session at anything but "normal" listening levels. The resulting sound is much like listening to the music over the radio i.e. it has a rather tinny and dry quality that to me cheapens the listening experience.
(Surprising) sound comparison: my dvd-audio of Linkin Park's Reanimation, an album with much more aggressive music and mastered by Bob Ludwig, is much smoother/more natural sounding than this album and thus is easy & great fun to listen to at immature levels.
So why music aimed at an older crowd was mastered the way this new Abacab album is is confusing, though I bet it was to make it sound better on sub-$500 5.1 sound systems and low bitrate MP3s listened to via cheap earbuds.The surround mixes: the engineer did a good job of placing sounds in the rear channels when certain things were happening in the music i.e. good synchonization, but the end result was that most tracks were basically stereo......with occasional surround sound. Personally I like my surround mixes "on" all the time (unless that would interfere somehow with the intent of the music) so these mixes don't do anything for me.
Phil's voice came through rather prominently, with lots of detail but also with some harshness (and that "dry" effect). In the end I thought his vocal was too "up front" in the surround mix.
And sometimes the surround reverb effects sounded kind of like my receiver's "hall" DSP function (hint: I never use this particular soundfield choice because of its artificial feel).
And a major non-music irritant: to get this disc to play, I had to wait for the audio menu to appear then hit enter then wait for another menu to appear and choose another onscreen icon. Why oh why can't they author these dvd-video surround discs to automatically play when inserted so I don't have to screw with my TV??
I wish I had spent my $18 on another album.
* printed on the disc itself: ATLANTIC 82693-2
Last edited:
Historic music so important we just had to half-ass the American release. Besides the sudden shyness on DVD-A, it's distressing that a major retailer is asked about this pkg and cannot find any information in their system about it.
Frankly, the DTS 5.1 mixes would of course have really been a total gas were it not for the knowledge of the SACD versions' existence.
Frankly, the DTS 5.1 mixes would of course have really been a total gas were it not for the knowledge of the SACD versions' existence.
DaneelOlivaw
300 Club - QQ All-Star
If the DTS lossy version sounds this way, I'll bet the hi-res version (either format) would sound even worse because of its more revealing nature, and there is already way too much "revealing" going on already.
jarofclay73
Well-known Member
Okay so is this a "sale" or "no sale?" I've NEVER bought a Genesis album before but very familiar with Phil Collins solo stuff and most post-Abacab albums. I bought the Phil Collins Live in Australia DVD-Video (the forget the exact name of it).
Other groups I like: Rush, Yes, The Police.
I would have to burn the DTS discs to the DVD-A format to listen to in my car. Is it worth all that trouble?
By the way, the set is selling for $64 on Amazon.com. Would have never considered it if it wasn't so cheap.
Other groups I like: Rush, Yes, The Police.
I would have to burn the DTS discs to the DVD-A format to listen to in my car. Is it worth all that trouble?
By the way, the set is selling for $64 on Amazon.com. Would have never considered it if it wasn't so cheap.
Skip the box set and just buy "Trick of the Tail." That's the Phil Collins/Genesis album that most progressive rock fans enjoy. If you like that, then you can consider the box set. If you don't, then you probably won't enjoy any of the albums in the box set.
And of course (presuming that you've been reading all the threads on Hoffman's forums about this), try to find an earlier CD pressing of "TOTT" for your redbook audio enjoyment.
J. D.
That advise is contrary to a Phil Collins fan; he didn't say he was a prog fan.
Buy Abacab (recorded around the same time as Face Value) or better yet Duke to stick your toe in the Genesis water. Go to iTunes or similar and TRY them before you buy.
The SACD box is holy grail stuff for me but not necessarily for others.
Buy Abacab (recorded around the same time as Face Value) or better yet Duke to stick your toe in the Genesis water. Go to iTunes or similar and TRY them before you buy.
The SACD box is holy grail stuff for me but not necessarily for others.
If the DTS lossy version sounds this way, I'll bet the hi-res version (either format) would sound even worse because of its more revealing nature, and there is already way too much "revealing" going on already.
This is not so; the DTS 96/24 is very good and the SACD is even better IMHO. The basic recordings were well made and nothing to be ashamed of.
Initial opinion is that the SACD tonality is affected by the Sonoma system used which makes some people wince on the top end. By contrast the DTS seems to have more bottom but this may be to less prominent top end.
Similar threads
