Dark Side SACD question

[[email protected]]

Everybody has mad a big deal about the new mix on the DSoTM SACD. What
I don't see answered is if the standard CD layer is a stereo only mix
of the SACD or is it just the old CD version?

I don't yet own a high def format player, but would like to but the CD
for 'future system upgrade', but only if there's some advantage with
CD.

Any thoughts or comments, please.

Philip

[Mkuller]

>
wrote:>
>Everybody has mad a big deal about the new mix on the DSoTM SACD. What
>I don't see answered is if the standard CD layer is a stereo only mix
>of the SACD or is it just the old CD version?
>
>I don't yet own a high def format player, but would like to but the CD
>for 'future system upgrade', but only if there's some advantage with
>CD.
>
>Any thoughts or comments, please.
>

I personally have no interest in changing my music library to another format so
the CD version is all that interests me. Having said that, it appears that the
red book CD layer of the DSOM SACD is a new remaster. That it is available for
$12 makes it easily accessible.

Although I did not compare this version directly with any of the older CD
versions, I found the new one to be the best I've heard. The chimes in "Time"
seem to have more detail and 3-D body (decay) to them. The voices far in the
background are more audible and the lower bass has more definition. JA from
Stereophile has criticised the new version saying that although the background
seems to be cleaned up, it is recorded at a higher level, compressing the
dynamics. So there you have it.
Regards,
Mike

[Steven Sullivan]

wrote:
> Everybody has mad a big deal about the new mix on the DSoTM SACD. What
> I don't see answered is if the standard CD layer is a stereo only mix
> of the SACD or is it just the old CD version?

er...the SACD stereo mix and the CD layer stereo mix and the old CD
version stereo mix are all *the same mix*. They are different remastering
of the same mix (probably from the same original master tape).

--
-S.

[[email protected]]

I bough this and listen to the multichannel is bringing back memories of my
Quad 8-track which I recorded onto a 4 channel reel to reel. But the voices
on Us and Them do not circle like the old quad 8 track mix.

Now being an audiophile I'd say the 2 channel version is a great
disappointment, cannot stand listening to it. My MoFi CD and LP's blow it
away. I also have a English SQ quad LP that blow the 2 channel mix away.
Don't know what they were thinking of with this 2 channel mix.

Kurtis

> wrote in message
news:O7DOa.10253$ye4.10604@sccrnsc01...
> Everybody has mad a big deal about the new mix on the DSoTM SACD. What
> I don't see answered is if the standard CD layer is a stereo only mix
> of the SACD or is it just the old CD version?
>
> I don't yet own a high def format player, but would like to but the CD
> for 'future system upgrade', but only if there's some advantage with
> CD.
>
> Any thoughts or comments, please.
>
> Philip
>

[Penury]

On Wed, 09 Jul 2003 05:31:52 GMT, wrote:

>I bough this and listen to the multichannel is bringing back memories of my
>Quad 8-track which I recorded onto a 4 channel reel to reel. But the voices
>on Us and Them do not circle like the old quad 8 track mix.
>
>Now being an audiophile I'd say the 2 channel version is a great
>disappointment, cannot stand listening to it. My MoFi CD and LP's blow it
>away. I also have a English SQ quad LP that blow the 2 channel mix away.
>Don't know what they were thinking of with this 2 channel mix.
>
Hi Kurtis:
For a lot info on the making and reviews of DSOTM, check the
following URLs:

From "Sound and Vision":

http://www.soundandvisionmag.com/article.asp?section_id=4&article_id=443

http://www.soundandvisionmag.com/article.asp?section_id=4&article_id=444

http://www.soundandvisionmag.com/article.asp?section_id=4&article_id=445&page_number=1

And from "Stereophile":

http://www.stereophile.com/showarchives.cgi?851

http://www.stereophile.com/showarchives.cgi?852

http://www.stereophile.com/shownews.cgi?1649

The above details the decisions made in the mix of the latest
version, as well as the mix of the Quad version. A must read for DSOTM
fans.

-=Bill Eckle=-

Vanity Web pages at:
http://www.wmeckle.com

[Gav]

wrote in message news:<O7DOa.10253$ye4.10604@sccrnsc01>...
> Everybody has mad a big deal about the new mix on the DSoTM SACD. What
> I don't see answered is if the standard CD layer is a stereo only mix
> of the SACD or is it just the old CD version?

According to online articles that I have seen, all three are tailor
made remasters specifically for that format. That said, the 'sound'
is pretty much the same across all three of them, it's just that they
were remastered independently to get the best possible sound quality.

> I don't yet own a high def format player, but would like to but the CD
> for 'future system upgrade', but only if there's some advantage with
> CD.
>
> Any thoughts or comments, please.

Well, at first I though the new remastering job was great because
everything, especially background sounds and instruments, seemed so
clear and audible.

However, repeated listening reveals the disc as sounding quite
compressed to me so it seems that the 'clarity' comes from that
compression. I also got hold of the DTS-CD transfer of the original
quad tape (from the net)and I think it is overall a more enjoyable
mix, even if the sound quality is not up to the SACD version.

Gav