DVD/DTS Poll Jethro Tull - Minstrel In The Gallery 40th Anniversary (Original Quad Mix) [DTS DVD]

QuadraphonicQuad

Help Support QuadraphonicQuad:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.

Rate the Audio-DVD of Jethro Tull - MINSTREL IN THE GALLERY [1975 Mix]

  • 10: Great Surround, Great Fidelity, Great Content

    Votes: 8 40.0%
  • 9

    Votes: 2 10.0%
  • 8

    Votes: 6 30.0%
  • 7

    Votes: 4 20.0%
  • 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 Surround, Poor Fidelity, Poor Content

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Total voters
    20

Bob Romano

Administrator
Staff member
Admin
Moderator
Since 2002/2003
Joined
Apr 26, 2002
Messages
5,730
Location
Viva Las Vegas
Please post your thoughts and comments on this DVD release containing a DTS flat transfer of the previously unreleased quadraphonic mix. (n)(y)

Quad version only please
 

Attachments

  • minstrel.jpg
    minstrel.jpg
    118.5 KB · Views: 540
Well this is quad as it should be.Robin Black did an excellent job with this quad version.

Musically this may not be as great as BENEFIT or AQUALUNG, but it is a return to the music that made Jethro Tull legend.

I gave this album a hard NINE.

If you like Tull you should be pleased with this Quad version, mixed 40 years ago and only NOW being made available.
There is ample use of the rear channels throughout this release.Classic Tull Classic Quad! A collector's dream come true.

I hope there's more QUAD to come.
 
This gets a 10 from me. KILLER QUAD mix. I prefer it to the 5.1 mix. I gave the 5.1 an 8.
 
Last edited:
I'm not even going to vote on this particular mix as to me, it's no contest. The 5.1 mix is significantly better from both a mix and fidelity standpoint in a way that this Quad simply cannot equal.
I know some might think this mix is more discrete and prefer it that way, but to me there's a point where the mix starts to become too unglued the more you pull things apart, and to my ears, Wilson's surround mix is still very discrete, but yet everything holds together a little better than the Quad does.
Your mileage may vary of course, but the good news is that you get both in the same package, so the choice of which one to listen to is totally up to you! :)
 
I'm enjoying this as much as the 5.1. If I had to choose between the two, I might have to pick the quad because of my appreciation for vintage quad. ALL GOOD! 10+!
 
Last edited:
I'm not even going to vote on this particular mix as to me, it's no contest. The 5.1 mix is significantly better from both a mix and fidelity standpoint in a way that this Quad simply cannot equal.
I know some might think this mix is more discrete and prefer it that way, but to me there's a point where the mix starts to become too unglued the more you pull things apart, and to my ears, Wilson's surround mix is still very discrete, but yet everything holds together a little better than the Quad does.
Your mileage may vary of course, but the good news is that you get both in the same package, so the choice of which one to listen to is totally up to you! :)

Glad you posted this as I read all the accolades and spun the quad mix last night and was underwhelmed. I thought maybe it was my system/set-up or my perception is just off. But I agree with your assessment. Part of it may be that I missed out on quad and have heard very few quad mixes so I'm used to 5.1. I believe in a lot of flexibility in sound placement, but for me it sounds strange to hear lead vocals coming from RR (as opposed to harmony/backing vocals). I love the 5.1 mix, but I won't even vote on the quad mix as I don't feel qualified and last night's audition may be the only time I listen to the quad. I have only listened to Aqualung's quad mix once also. That being said, I'd still love to hear the quad's for Floyd's WYWH and DSotM. And don't get me wrong, the quad is enjoyable on both Aqualung and Minstrel, but I much prefer the 5.1. I also enjoy AJ's Division Bell mix which is basically quad, but seems to me more like a 5.1 mix that doesn't use the cc rather than an authentic quad mix.
 
I'm not even going to vote on this particular mix as to me, it's no contest. The 5.1 mix is significantly better from both a mix and fidelity standpoint in a way that this Quad simply cannot equal.
I know some might think this mix is more discrete and prefer it that way, but to me there's a point where the mix starts to become too unglued the more you pull things apart, and to my ears, Wilson's surround mix is still very discrete, but yet everything holds together a little better than the Quad does.
Your mileage may vary of course, but the good news is that you get both in the same package, so the choice of which one to listen to is totally up to you! :)

Great observations. I'll listen to the 5.1 again and maybe i change my mind. LOL
 
The Quad mix is very good, much better than many others I can think of. Now that I've heard both, I would have to say that I like the 5.1 better for mix and fidelity. However I can't help but think how much I would have loved to have heard the Quad mix back in 1975. Too cool that they have included it in this 40th Anniversary edition of Minstrel. I give the Quad tracks an 8.
 
This is a pretty solid mix but I definitely prefer the 5.1 which, besides the better fidelity, is more cohesive and musical IMO. The sound is good but at times a bit muffled - particularly the drums. But I do like the bass sound. It would appear to be just a direct feed and has a much clearer attack than in the other mixes. “Valhalla” uses an alternate guitar track in the middle which makes for an interesting variation. The B-side “Summerday Sands” was also mixed to quad and is included here. I give it an 8.
 
I have been liking the quad mix...I plan to step it up to the 5.1 mix sometime this weekend.
 
Back
Top