Katatonia - The Fall of Hearts DTS 96/24 Mixed by Bruce Soord

QuadraphonicQuad

Help Support QuadraphonicQuad:

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

von kulper

500 Club - QQ All-Star
Joined
Mar 28, 2008
Messages
567
Location
Utah, United States
Just posted on their Facebook:

Harken up, sunset choir! The moment you've been waiting for... We hereby reveal the tracklist, a little audio teaser as well as the formats/bundles/pre-order details.
The Fall Of Hearts (2016)
1. Takeover [07:09]
2. Serein [04:46]
3. Old Heart Falls [04:22]
4. Decima [04:46]
5. Sanction [05:07]
6. Residual [06:54]
7. Serac [07:25]
8. Last Song Before The Fade [05:01]
9. Shifts [04:54]
10. The Night Subscriber [06:10]
11. Pale Flag [04:23]
12. Passer [06:25]

Bonus Tracks:
Vakaren [04:54] (CD/DVD & Deluxe Edition)
Sistere [04:11] (LP & Deluxe Edition)
Wide Awake In Quietus [04:59] (Digital & Deluxe Edition)

The Fall Of Hearts will be released on the following formats:
CD DIGIPAK featuring:
- The Fall Of Hearts 12 original album tracks with a total playing time of 67:32 minutes.
DOUBLE GATEFOLD 180g HEAVY WEIGHT LP featuring:
- The Fall Of Hearts 12 original album tracks plus bonus track ‘Sistere’ (with MP3 download code).
2 DISC CD & DVD MEDIABOOK featuring:
- CD The Fall Of Hearts 12 original album tracks plus bonus track ‘Vakaren’.
- DVD-V The Fall Of Hearts 12 original tracks and includes hi resolution stereo & 5.1 audio (DTS 96/24 5.1 & 96/24 Stereo LPCM) mixed by The Pineapple Thief & Katatonia collaborator Bruce Soord offering audiophiles an outstanding listening experience.
DELUXE 12” HARDBOOK featuring:
- 32 page artwork book, with alternative album artwork from Travis Smith.
- CD The Fall Of Hearts 12 original album tracks plus 2 bonus tracks ‘Sistere’ & ‘Vakaren’.
- DVD-V The Fall Of Hearts 12 original tracks hi resolution stereo & 5.1 audio (DTS 96/24 5.1 & 96/24 Stereo LPCM) mixed by Bruce Soord.
- Special Double 10" vinyl edition of The Fall Of Hearts 12 original tracks plus bonus track ‘Wide Awake In Quietus’ (with MP3 download code) featuring guest guitarist Paradise Lost’s Gregor Mackintosh.
DIGITAL DOWNLOAD featuring:
- The Fall Of Hearts 12 original album tracks plus bonus track ‘Wide Awake In Quietus’ featuring guest guitarist Paradise Lost’s Gregor Mackintosh.
All formats, except digital download, are now available to pre-order seperately or in bundles from the official Katatonia webstore: http://www.omerch.eu/shop/katatonia

Their surround releases have all been actual DVD-Audios in the past; however, this says "high resolution" but then only lists a DTS 96/24 codec. I don't expect actual high resolution, here. Oh well, I'll take it!
 
I hope this is not compressed to death. I love Katatonia. I will be preodering for sure.
 
I've been play testing this and it sounds really, really good. Very discrete and tastefully mixed. Bruce's empathy with Jonas really comes through in it, I think. In fact, imho, it could be Bruce's best mix so far.

As ever, I don't bother with the compression database,or whatever it's called. I would rather listen than have some numbers tell me what to think, but it didn't sound squashed to me.
 
I've been play testing this and it sounds really, really good. Very discrete and tastefully mixed. Bruce's empathy with Jonas really comes through in it, I think. In fact, imho, it could be Bruce's best mix so far.

As ever, I don't bother with the compression database,or whatever it's called. I would rather listen than have some numbers tell me what to think, but it didn't sound squashed to me.

I do not go off any database. I listen.
 
I've been play testing this and it sounds really, really good. Very discrete and tastefully mixed. Bruce's empathy with Jonas really comes through in it, I think. In fact, imho, it could be Bruce's best mix so far.

As ever, I don't bother with the compression database,or whatever it's called. I would rather listen than have some numbers tell me what to think, but it didn't sound squashed to me.
Neil since sounds like you do have some sort of communication with band, may you enlighten us for the reason to go DTS route, instead of lossless DVD-A as it been previously?
 
Neil since sounds like you do have some sort of communication with band, may you enlighten us for the reason to go DTS route, instead of lossless DVD-A as it been previously?

Otto, my contact has been with Bruce, not the band. Unfortunately I had no input into format decisions and, as far as I'm aware, Bruce didn't either. ...must be a Kscope or band thing. :(
 
that's sux, given that they are not ignorant in regards of lossless DVD-A and BD-A.
oh well, let's hope they will offer download version surround in lossless format.
 
that's sux, given that they are not ignorant in regards of lossless DVD-A and BD-A.
oh well, let's hope they will offer download version surround in lossless format.

DTS 24/96 sounds every bit as good as MLP 24/96. There is no way anyone can hear the difference.
 
DTS 24/96 sounds every bit as good as MLP 24/96. There is no way anyone can hear the difference.
really?
cannot speak for anyone but for myself i hear differences among lossless PCM and lossy DTS. that's main reason
i don't buy anymore surround releases if they are limited to DTS/DD only. for possible remark in regard of
artists/surround support - i'm done with such childish reasons. with present technology and ever shrinking prices
for production there no excuse for labels/artists to continue such work on 20 y.o. technical base.
in this particular case it's even more frustration, because the band shows regress, moving from lossless format
to lossy. i guess in couple of years we may expect next release exclusively in mp3 or AAC surround.
 
for possible remark in regard of artists/surround support - i'm done with such childish reasons. with present technology and ever shrinking prices
for production there no excuse for labels/artists to continue such work on 20 y.o. technical base.

I had an e-mail conversation just three days ago with an independent who was struggling to justify the additional expense of putting out lossless over DTS on DVD. At the kind of numbers the smaller artists/bands who support surround are dealing with it is still very much a limiting factor.

I don't know how many sales having a surround release is "worth" but I'm pretty confident it's, unfortunately, a lot lower than we would like to think. Supporting the artists that support surround is far from "childish."
 
I had an e-mail conversation just three days ago with an independent who was struggling to justify the additional expense of putting out lossless over DTS on DVD. At the kind of numbers the smaller artists/bands who support surround are dealing with it is still very much a limiting factor.

I don't know how many sales having a surround release is "worth" but I'm pretty confident it's, unfortunately, a lot lower than we would like to think. Supporting the artists that support surround is far from "childish."

Indeed. I am happy with DTS, thanks.
 
Neil, excuse my ignorance but what kind of "additional expense" involves use of 48/24 PCM, which will let him/her
to compile DVD-Audio with lossless surround without necessity to pay royalty fee for use MLP codec which is a must
for similar stream in 96/24 on DVD-A?
i personally with no doubt would prefer even 48/24 lossless over 96/24 lossy.
distribution of downloadable version in .wav or flac removes even this restriction
and eliminates fees, associated with physical print on CD, DVD or BD.

b.t.w. i'm very sorry for Ian Anderson he was faced tough choice to mortgage his house to be able get JT catalogue
reissue in lossless or limit reissue to cheaper DTS :)
 
In a perfect, imaginary world, we would get all of our favorite artists' releases in DVD-audio, BD-A, SACD - whatever - with minimal-to-no added compression, and, of course, mixed by our favorite surround engineers. However, generally speaking, the music industry today is a place of - at best, compromise and missed opportunity; at worst, ignorance, apathy, and incompetence - where they shovel out whatever generic fodder they believe will generate a quick buck...

That's why I'm extremely grateful for a label such as Kscope, who signs talented musicians, and attempts to give fans a choice with regards to music formats - be it expensive, lush, deluxe editions; vinyl; or even surround releases (they're one of the only labels, off the top of my head, who continually release new music in surround - albeit, DTS 96/24). With that being said, while there may not be a real, conceivable reason not to add a lossless codec, almost infinitely more important is a proper mastering job where the entire mix isn't limited to death. And, let's face it: a sloppy, careless mastering is still going to sound terrible in a lossless format. DTS 96/24 is a perfectly capable codec (as evidenced by the numerous JTull surround releases), and I think that encouraging labels to back off on the heat of their mixes is vastly more important than a lossless codec that, for most, is going to yield negligible results.

Otto, you certainly make some valid points, but I personally think there's bigger problems that need focusing. Additionally, outright boycotting one of the few labels that's attempting to support surround (who have released some fantastic lossy surround discs), for something as minimal as not adding a lossless codec, is only going to hurt the surround movement as a whole. Also, you're missing out on some great releases! :music
 
von kulper
please stop to look for excuses on behalf of labels/artists. as i said above, there are plenty of options up to freebies
in regards of avoiding technical licensing fees as for individuals and so mass producers. sure, world isn't perfect but in that
instance all it there, just take and use.
crappy work will sound bad in either lossless or lossy but good one, shrinked and degraded to lossy, it's a crime.
b.t.w. it's not boycott from me but just expression of my consumer choice. if i do not enjoy quality of product, why i should buy it?
over years i bought plenty of such, which now does idle on shelves but over same time i haven't seen any even slightest appreciation
for my effort from labels. they continue supply outdated crap. the difference only for last 15 years, in inflated retail prices.
 
Just in case anyone is taking a count, please put me in the "if it ain't lossless I won't buy it" camp. I love lossless! DTS just leaves me wanting...wanting to stop listening. Obviously some people have no issue between lossy and lossless and some do. It's pointless to argue about it; it's simply the way it is. I'm probably going to give DTS another chance and buy Stand Up when the Steven Wilson mix comes.
 
In a perfect, imaginary world, we would get all of our favorite artists' releases in DVD-audio, BD-A, SACD - whatever - with minimal-to-no added compression, and, of course, mixed by our favorite surround engineers. However, generally speaking, the music industry today is a place of - at best, compromise and missed opportunity; at worst, ignorance, apathy, and incompetence - where they shovel out whatever generic fodder they believe will generate a quick buck...

That's why I'm extremely grateful for a label such as Kscope, who signs talented musicians, and attempts to give fans a choice with regards to music formats - be it expensive, lush, deluxe editions; vinyl; or even surround releases (they're one of the only labels, off the top of my head, who continually release new music in surround - albeit, DTS 96/24). With that being said, while there may not be a real, conceivable reason not to add a lossless codec, almost infinitely more important is a proper mastering job where the entire mix isn't limited to death. And, let's face it: a sloppy, careless mastering is still going to sound terrible in a lossless format. DTS 96/24 is a perfectly capable codec (as evidenced by the numerous JTull surround releases), and I think that encouraging labels to back off on the heat of their mixes is vastly more important than a lossless codec that, for most, is going to yield negligible results.

Otto, you certainly make some valid points, but I personally think there's bigger problems that need focusing. Additionally, outright boycotting one of the few labels that's attempting to support surround (who have released some fantastic lossy surround discs), for something as minimal as not adding a lossless codec, is only going to hurt the surround movement as a whole. Also, you're missing out on some great releases! :music

(y):smokin
 
Neil, excuse my ignorance but what kind of "additional expense" involves use of 48/24 PCM, which will let him/her
to compile DVD-Audio with lossless surround without necessity to pay royalty fee for use MLP codec which is a must
for similar stream in 96/24 on DVD-A?
i personally with no doubt would prefer even 48/24 lossless over 96/24 lossy.
distribution of downloadable version in .wav or flac removes even this restriction
and eliminates fees, associated with physical print on CD, DVD or BD.

b.t.w. i'm very sorry for Ian Anderson he was faced tough choice to mortgage his house to be able get JT catalogue
reissue in lossless or limit reissue to cheaper DTS :)

In this case the deal breaker was the additional cost of simply getting lossless authored. The artist doesn't have the capability to do it himself and the additional cost of using an authoring house made this particular project untenable, borderline at best.

Your comment about Ian Anderson suggests to me that maybe you don't have an accurate perception of how small margins or circulations are for those at the lower end of the market, where a few hundred euros makes the difference between being able to do something that's cost neutral vs. making a loss.
 
that's not big deal. your friend can come here at any time and ask for assistance as did others.
i guess at least about 10-15% of members in here familiar with DVD-A authoring and can do
this for free, just to add to list one more HiRes surround release.
in regard of my remark about I.A. i've been sarcastic. really feel sick from cheapness not only labels but some asrtists as well.
 
Back
Top