• 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!

Marillion "Script for a Jester's Tear" (Deluxe Edition with 5.1 Blu-Ray!)

Help Support QuadraphonicQuad:

Oldie

New member
Joined
Oct 25, 2019
Messages
1
Location
New York
It is strange but Fish music store list this item as "in stock" (though it will be released in April)
did anybody tries to order it from Fish?
 

minimumtumbleweed

Active Member
Joined
Feb 28, 2019
Messages
80
Location
Canada
So it seems Andy Bradfield and Avril Mackintosh did the surround mix as they did on Clutching.....great!
Yikes... they did a pretty poor job on CAS. Here's hoping they've learned a bit about surround mixing in the time since then. At the very least, hopefully they won't completely change the album like they did there...
 

Simon A

2K Club - QQ Super Nova
Joined
Jun 13, 2015
Messages
2,190
Yikes... they did a pretty poor job on CAS. Here's hoping they've learned a bit about surround mixing in the time since then. At the very least, hopefully they won't completely change the album like they did there...
Perhaps it was their mandate to do so. The band and their management rarely divulge their intentions for such projects. The band already has multiple 5.1 mixes under their belt. They surely have requested a certain result be offered. They also have final say on the mixes so had they been dissatisfied, they could have the mix shelved or redone.
 

splinter7

500 Club - QQ All-Star
Joined
May 2, 2005
Messages
558
It is strange but Fish music store list this item as "in stock" (though it will be released in April)
did anybody tries to order it from Fish?
I imagine that the "in-stock" designation is a by-product of the limitations of his sales management system or something like that.
It sounds like he received his stock early because Warner UK is allowing him to sell copies at the merch tables on his upcoming tour dates before the official release date. Fish stated that pre-orders coming through his web store will not be shipped earlier than the release date.

I kinda recall the same type of deal being made for one of the other Fish related releases and it turned into a bit of fiasco.
Fish was on the road at the time of the release date and he didn't have enough personnel back at his HQ to pack & mail on the release date.
There was some social media moaning about the delay getting the release.

That all being said, a purchase of this deluxe edition either through Fish or Marillion's online store is more beneficial to these musicians.
Neither the band or Fish own the rights to this or any other of EMI era releases. Sadly - they both make more $ as a "re-seller" than from royalties.
 

Sixtyten

Active Member
Joined
Mar 22, 2012
Messages
71
Location
OWC
Yikes... they did a pretty poor job on CAS. Here's hoping they've learned a bit about surround mixing in the time since then. At the very least, hopefully they won't completely change the album like they did there...
Agreed. Giving this one a miss
 

edisonbaggins

2K Club - QQ Super Nova
QQ Supporter
Joined
Aug 13, 2015
Messages
7,055
Location
Wherever I May Roam
Well, I'll stick my neck out there and offer a more positive view. I don't think CaS 5.1 came out perfect, but it's enjoyable for me. I agree, mainly with the overall 8 rating it has in the polls.
And I offer up this superb analysis by our very own Jonathan:
 

sjcorne

2K Club - QQ Super Nova
Joined
Jan 1, 2010
Messages
2,419
Location
Southern NY
Well, I'll stick my neck out there and offer a more positive view. I don't think CaS 5.1 came out perfect, but it's enjoyable for me. I agree, mainly with the overall 8 rating it has in the polls.
And I offer up this superb analysis by our very own Jonathan:
I stand by those words - I still like the 5.1 CaS enough to make it my go-to version of the album.

That being said, I do hope that Bradfield & Mackintosh play it a little less safe this time as there are so many cool moments/effects in Script that are perfect for surround - a few that come to mind are the phone ringing at the end of "He Knows You Know", the conversation during the guitar solo in "Chelsea Monday" (one of my favorite Fish-era tracks), the prayer and soldiers loading their guns in "Forgotten Sons", and the bits of chatter popping up in "Garden Party" ("pressman flash", etc). Even the old stereo mix was fairly aggressive with Fish's vocals hopping around and lots of instrumentation panned hard left/right.
 

splinter7

500 Club - QQ All-Star
Joined
May 2, 2005
Messages
558
At the very least, hopefully they won't completely change the album like they did there...
Huh - can you explain why you feel that? To my ears, the mix doesn't deviate too far from the overall feel of the stereo mix I have been listening too for 30 + years. There doesn't sound like there are enough changes to classify this as a "re-envisioned mix". Yes, some elements have been brought farther out in the mix and I feel the drums may have been de-emphasized but I think it is pretty faithful overall.

Curious to hear your view.
 

minimumtumbleweed

Active Member
Joined
Feb 28, 2019
Messages
80
Location
Canada
Huh - can you explain why you feel that? To my ears, the mix doesn't deviate too far from the overall feel of the stereo mix I have been listening too for 30 + years. There doesn't sound like there are enough changes to classify this as a "re-envisioned mix". Yes, some elements have been brought farther out in the mix and I feel the drums may have been de-emphasized but I think it is pretty faithful overall.

Curious to hear your view.
For specific songs: they felt the need to add a guitar solo to "Going Under", some of the vocals have been changed on "Incommunicado", and the solo has been rearranged on "Sugar Mice" (I might be forgetting some). But overall, the mix has poor dynamic range, is overly harsh and bright, doesn't really do anything interesting with the channel separation, and in some places actually loses some of the effects that were present in stereo, such as the panning of the guitar at the beginning of "Hotel Hobbies" (just one example).

The one good thing that came out of getting the Blu-Ray was the original 1987 mix included, which has been hard to find on CD. It honestly sounds better upmixed into surround than the actual surround version.
 

minimumtumbleweed

Active Member
Joined
Feb 28, 2019
Messages
80
Location
Canada
Perhaps it was their mandate to do so. The band and their management rarely divulge their intentions for such projects. The band already has multiple 5.1 mixes under their belt. They surely have requested a certain result be offered. They also have final say on the mixes so had they been dissatisfied, they could have the mix shelved or redone.
Yeah, overall I think this is the case. I think Fish in particular seems to really dislike the whole surround bit, and the band honestly seems pretty indifferent to it all. Obviously, Steven Wilson had Brave sitting on his desk for a long time, and I think that was more of a personal project for him, but the band overall doesn't seem to care too much about how these mixes are done. I will say that I was pleasantly surprised by Michael Hunter's mix of Afraid of Sunlight, and I really enjoy the live shows that have been included on each special edition.
 

splinter7

500 Club - QQ All-Star
Joined
May 2, 2005
Messages
558
minimumtumbleweed said:
For specific songs: they felt the need to add a guitar solo to "Going Under", some of the vocals have been changed on "Incommunicado", and the solo has been rearranged on "Sugar Mice" (I might be forgetting some). But overall, the mix has poor dynamic range, is overly harsh and bright, doesn't really do anything interesting with the channel separation, and in some places actually loses some of the effects that were present in stereo, such as the panning of the guitar at the beginning of "Hotel Hobbies" (just one example).
Interesting viewpoints. Aside from agreeing that this mix may be more immersive than discrete; I am going agree to disagree with you on this one :)
I have to really focus to hear the change in vocals on Incommunicado and it sounds like it is only near the end of the song when the title word itself is being repeated. This has been my third favorite album of all time for 30 years - the new mix doesn't through me off. After I dial back the center a bit, the PCM feed sounds fine on my system.

You probably know this but... Going Under wasn't even on the LP or cassette versions on the initial release.
It was placed on the CD as a bonus cut (much the same way that After Me was a bonus cut on the CD for Seasons End).
It sounds to me that B&H used the alternate version that was used on the Incommunicado single. That version had the guitar solo.

I will say that I was pleasantly surprised by Michael Hunter's mix of Afraid of Sunlight
I am not intending this to be snarky so please don't think I am trying to create a dust up.
It is just that what you wrote about the AOS mix seems contradictory to your statement on being disappointed with Clutching being completely changed. Out of the two (Clutching & AOS), Hunter's AOS mix is by far the one that deviates furthest from the feel of the original mix. Part of that is out of necessity since he had to work without the masters.

Beyond You on the new mix has a different sound from the mono version on the original release and different vocal tracks were apparently used for Cannibal & Out of this World.
 

minimumtumbleweed

Active Member
Joined
Feb 28, 2019
Messages
80
Location
Canada
Interesting viewpoints. Aside from agreeing that this mix may be more immersive than discrete; I am going agree to disagree with you on this one :)
I have to really focus to hear the change in vocals on Incommunicado and it sounds like it is only near the end of the song when the title word itself is being repeated. This has been my third favorite album of all time for 30 years - the new mix doesn't through me off. After I dial back the center a bit, the PCM feed sounds fine on my system.

You probably know this but... Going Under wasn't even on the LP or cassette versions on the initial release.
It was placed on the CD as a bonus cut (much the same way that After Me was a bonus cut on the CD for Seasons End).
It sounds to me that B&H used the alternate version that was used on the Incommunicado single. That version had the guitar solo.



I am not intending this to be snarky so please don't think I am trying to create a dust up.
It is just that what you wrote about the AOS mix seems contradictory to your statement on being disappointed with Clutching being completely changed. Out of the two (Clutching & AOS), Hunter's AOS mix is by far the one that deviates furthest from the feel of the original mix. Part of that is out of necessity since he had to work without the masters.

Beyond You on the new mix has a different sound from the mono version on the original release and different vocal tracks were apparently used for Cannibal & Out of this World.
Yes I do know it wasn't originally there. It's been on the CD for a few decades though, and honestly there wasn't a good reason to put the alternate version. At least include both versions remixed. I don't think AoS sounds too much different from the original. Obviously Beyond You is not in Mono, but it can't really be if it's going to be in 5.1. Mostly, it's just more respectful to the feel of the original. I have a few issues with Brave as well, but overall that also was more true to the spirit of the original. Same goes for Misplaced Childhood.
 

MCDave

300 Club - QQ All-Star
Joined
Oct 4, 2016
Messages
365
Location
Colorado
Every time I see a picture or video of Fish back then, it astounds me how different he looks today. The other guys look a lot older but they're still recognizable.
 

RuudMans

Active Member
Joined
May 24, 2014
Messages
72
Location
The Netherlands
I have to say it is funny to read discussions about people complaining about the remixes deviating too much from the original. Isn't that what a remix is all about, really? What else is the point in doing a remix, if only to make it sound exactly like the original mix? As long as it doesn't screw things up horribly (Karn Evil 9 3rd Impression of Brain Salad Surgery comes to mind), i can stomach pretty much any kind of remix. I just see them as an alternative reality that can coexist happily alongside the original mix. But hey, so many people, so many opinions. No offense intended to anyone.
 

MCDave

300 Club - QQ All-Star
Joined
Oct 4, 2016
Messages
365
Location
Colorado
I only complain when I don't like the remix as much as the original. In most cases, titles only get remixed in surround one time in their life, so it's a one-time shot to make it glorious. If it isn't all we want it to be, it's a big disappointment. The ELP albums come to mind. Both Misplaced Childhood and Clutching at Straws weren't bad, but could certainly have been better.

For me, the best use of surround mixes is to simply separate the instruments by placing them in channels more or less discretely, and with improved fidelity and dynamics. I don't usually care for a "reimagined" album mix.
 

minimumtumbleweed

Active Member
Joined
Feb 28, 2019
Messages
80
Location
Canada
I have to say it is funny to read discussions about people complaining about the remixes deviating too much from the original. Isn't that what a remix is all about, really? What else is the point in doing a remix, if only to make it sound exactly like the original mix? As long as it doesn't screw things up horribly (Karn Evil 9 3rd Impression of Brain Salad Surgery comes to mind), i can stomach pretty much any kind of remix. I just see them as an alternative reality that can coexist happily alongside the original mix. But hey, so many people, so many opinions. No offense intended to anyone.
Well, maybe when you're talking about remixing some track to make it a hip-hop or electronic style track or something along those lines. For these kinds of remixes, at least in my opinion, making things "different" is not the goal. First of all, the main goal is to mix it into surround. Secondly, the goal may be to improve the mix if there were problems with it, but this isn't always necessary. For example, Steven Wilson has often declined to remix the stereo version of an album if he doesn't perceive any serious issues in the original mix, i.e. Misplaced Childhood or Songs from the Big Chair.

Obviously just my opinion, but I think the two "types" of remixing should be considered separately. In the end, you're making this package for the diehard fans who want to hear their favourite classic album in surround.
 
2
Group builder
Top