Unreleased Fleetwood Mac 5.1 mixes

[rtbluray]

Ken Caillat, who mixed Rumours in 5.1, has a Facebook page related to his new book on the making of Rumours, and someone asked him about 5.1 mixes of "Fleetwood Mac" and "Tusk". He replied:

I mixed the 5.1 surround mixes of both Tusk and the White Album, but before they could be released, DVD audio died and WB put them on the shelf. You may be able to get them thru John Kellogg <[email protected]>

So I went to JHana Music but I didn't see any mention of Fleetwood Mac nor any possibility that they even have these 5.1 masters. Maybe I'll have to use my old friend the contact button...

 

[rtbluray]

And already a very quick response from JHana Music:

Hi

We'd love to release them on - but its a licensing issue with Warner Brothers. As you might expect, major labels are not quick of fore thought to do something cutting edge to release this music to people who may want it.

We will continue to try to convince them this year

Thanks for your support

The Jhana Music Team

 

[DennisMabry]

Wow, those albums would be cool. I thought Rumors was excellent. Actually, early on, it was a great disc to grab if you wanted to show what DVD-A and high resolution multichannel was all about. Perhaps this could be another lucrative project for Acoustic Sounds.

 

[rtbluray]

Perhaps. Does Acoustic Sounds/Analogue Productions manufacture DVD-Audio too, or just SACD? Cause it's not that I wouldn't buy these titles on SACD, I would just like if possible to have all of the artists 5.1 catalogue on the same format.

 

[cupboy]

...I would just like if possible to have all of the artists 5.1 catalogue on the same format.

Well, then buy Rumours on SACD from Japan.

 

[LizardKing]

Or why don't HDtracks release stuff in 5.1???

 

[DennisMabry]

Perhaps. Does Acoustic Sounds/Analogue Productions manufacture DVD-Audio too, or just SACD? Cause it's not that I wouldn't buy these titles on SACD, I would just like if possible to have all of the artists 5.1 catalogue on the same format.

Yeah, just SACD. But Chad is quite the entrepreneur, not afraid to go after the niche markets.

DVD-A would be my preference as well, but to be honest, I would support these titles in any format.

Thanks for posting their response. Makes for a great New Year speculation!

 

[BananaSlug]

I'd prefer Blu-ray at this point, but I'd likely buy on any format. I wonder if he does get the rights, does he get to choose the format that he'd like to release it on?

 

[0tto]

Yeah, just SACD. But Chad is quite the entrepreneur, not afraid to go after the niche markets.

if so, he should switch from SACD to DVDA or BD. out there way more households with BD and DVD players than SACD.
anyway unbreakable status SACD as an audio carrier have been already ended. another advantage - DVDA and BD unlike
SACD can carry an extra data, such like audio stream for use with mobile devices, which would be quite attractive for many
consumers with such gears in their pockets or cars.

 

[bmoura]

if so, he should switch from SACD to DVDA or BD.

Chad and Acoustic Sounds are doing quite well with their SACD reissues. That would explain why they continue with releases in that format.

 

[cupboy]

SACD is an audiophile format. Blu-ray is not. How many audiophile quality Blu-ray players are there? One left (OPPO)?

Actually I can't think of any dedicated Blu-ray players that cost more than about $400 now. Most machines are around $150. And none of them have multi-channel outputs anymore. Most buyers of Blu-ray players have eyes, but no ears. Not 4 ears, not even two.

 

[Old Quad Guy]

I too would prefer BR or DVD-A, but I'll take them as they come. One thing about SACD is it has the CD layer, which works for folks without the set-ups or players. And if folks buy it helps us all.

 

[JonUrban]

One track from "The White Album" made it to an Acura demo DVD-A. The other two were rumored for years. What sucks is that HDTracks is selling the stereo HiRez of these albums but not the 5.1. Which, to me, is totally stupid.

I would take all of these unreleased HiRez 5.1 projects on any format, SACD, DVD-A, Blu-Ray, who cares? Just get them out there.

 

[ArnoldLayne]

Can some government please shut down Warner Brothers and hand all their licenses and rigths to a serious record company?

 

[mandrix]

I would absolutely love to have some old Fleetwood Mac in 5.1. Future Games, Mystery To Me & Then Play On come immediately to mind.

 

[0tto]

Chad and Acoustic Sounds are doing quite well with their SACD reissues. That would explain why they continue with releases in that format.

could be you're right. particularly given the fact his priorities set toward vynil records, perhaps SACD viewed
just like sub-product. it just hard to see future of such obsolete format as SACD are, as a growing market.

I would take all of these unreleased HiRez 5.1 projects on any format, SACD, DVD-A, Blu-Ray, who cares? Just get them out there.

i do. you see, every action has consequences. releasing of surround in formats acceptable not just to limited
amount of appropriate hardware owners, gives greater chance on wider spread of interest to such formats and
thus interest of the producers to supply the market with such product. sure, i have no issues of use any of present
HiRes and Surround formats, but not majority of the potential consumers. i just like to have way wider selection of
titles and artists in affordable cost.

 

[Bob Squires Jr]

One problem with Acoustic Sounds / Analogue productions releasing it is that it would probably wind up as stereo only just like the SHM-SACDs.
Hopefully someone will see reason, like they did with WYWH.

And why would one think that BD can't be an audiophile format seeing as to how DVD wasn't originally either.
BD 5.1 Lossless will play on ANY BD player, you wouldn't need a special player like you do DVD-A or SACD.

But no matter how you slice it... I'd near kill for the Fleetwood Mac / ST album.
It's still my all time favorite.
But until then, at least I have "Monday Morning" which is also one of my favorite tracks!

 

[LizardKing]

Just release them in any hi-rez bloody format!!!! Arghhhh...

 

[scratch17]

I'd love both Tusk and the white album in 5.1. I have the Rumours DVD-Audio disc.

I saw a post somewhere that quoted a spokesman from HDtracks as saying they were close to starting to offer high resolution 5.1 albums. The usual delivery medium would be as FLAC files. The post was early fall. I've not heard a whisper since then.

FLAC would be my choice of delivery for the following reasons.

1. More titles will be released as downloads, than on physical media, regardless of channel format. Releasing a download of an album is less expensive for music companies than creating a disc with the same digital audio on it. Low cost, and subsequent higher potential profit, incentivizes companies to release more titles. Want proof of this? See --> http://www.audiostream.com/content/hd-music-download-sites

This website didn't exist a year ago. The list is only a few months old. And it's growing like gangbusters.

2. Universality. Regardless of the file format, a high resolution digital audio file can be converted to just about any other file format. There is much (even free) software available to convert FLACs to other formats. Even if your audio file server doesn't support one format, simply load it into your conversion software and output the file format you require. Also, there is free audio file server software that will play back these files on a computer.

If you need a different file format to create a physical disc because you don't have a file server or don't want to play back from a computer, convert the file to a file type your disc creation software requires. Once converted from FLAC to (for example) WAV, software packages are available to create DVD-Audio and Blu Ray discs. While the disc creating software isn't inexpensive, if you want to play, you have to pay.

By the way, the converse is also true. If you release an album on physical media, it is in a single format that is not easily converted to another format.

3. My Oppo BDP-93 plays multichannel lossless FLACs, so if and when HDtracks starts to release 5.1 titles, I'll be on board.

I love the convenience of the file server built into this player. Album track, artist and even art is displayed. I've converted all of my 200 or so DVD-Audio discs to .ISO files, so I never have to grab a disc, open the player, push play and wait for it to load. I simply navigate to the .iso file and push play. The file loads much more quickly than it does from a physical disc. Overall I get to sit at my listening seat and play discs much more quickly and conveniently.

I know I've gone off topic somewhat here, and I apologize for doing so.

Now I really feal I must go way off topic. Earlier in this thread Cupboy said:

SACD is an audiophile format. Blu-ray is not. How many audiophile quality Blu-ray players are there? One left (OPPO)?

I really am annoyed by these types of arguments. It's bad enough that corporations and some press pundits push one format over another.

The fact is that high resolution digital audio is high resolution. SACD, DVD-Audio, PCM, DTS-MA, Dolby True HD, FLAC, WAV; if recorded well all of these can sound fantastic.

Can an individual tell the difference between these formats with the same music? Possibly. I won't (nor can anyone reasonably) say the definitive answer is "no"!

I have the Blu Ray disc and SACD of Pink Floyd's Dark Side of the Moon. I am willing to pay anyone $10 to tell me which disc they are listening to at better than statistical average in a blind fold test on my "audiophile" playback system.

I know that I personally can't tell that there is any significant difference. At most, I'm willing to say that sometimes I think I hear a difference.

I learned audio recording under Dr. Floyd Toole, in Ottawa at Marc Sound. I own a project recording studio, so I've made digital audio recordings. I've heard what digital audio is capable of at 24 bit / 192 Khz resolution. More significantly, I have heard what audio sounds like in a commercial studio with a Neve mixing desk feeding an Ampeg 440-C mastering analog recorder from a Scully 24 track recorder. This experience has always been my benchmark.

Today's high resolution formats, regardless of format, are as close as I've ever gotten to what I heard at Marc Sound.

 

[JonUrban]

3. My Oppo BDP-93 plays multichannel lossless FLACs, so if and when HDtracks starts to release 5.1 titles, I'll be on board.

I love the convenience of the file server built into this player. Album track, artist and even art is displayed. I've converted all of my 200 or so DVD-Audio discs to .ISO files, so I never have to grab a disc, open the player, push play and wait for it to load. I simply navigate to the .iso file and push play. The file loads much more quickly than it does from a physical disc. Overall I get to sit at my listening seat and play discs much more quickly and conveniently.

Greatpost, scratch! Do you have a USB stick plugged into the 93 or is there enough internal RAM in it. That's very nice. What a great way to store and play surround titles.