Ok,Ok, I was curious and seeing all those big artist names like Bruce Springsteen, Bonnie Rait,K D Lang... I decided to rent this HD DVD from Block Buster.

Wow!!

The TrueHD 5.1 and DD+ are simply fantastics! Reference materials. The use/designs of all 5.1 channels on this disc is quite good. The sound is full, enveloping and make good use of integration between the front and back channels.

Video quality is clean, black and white, some grain here and there but overall very clean.

Even if you're not a fan of this music genre, it's worth a rental to check out the audio.

Yes. I have always thought that this was perhaps the best use of surround in a concert I have every experienced. I have an HD copy on DVHS and have ordered this HDDVD. I expect that it will be terrific.

Just received my HD DVD copy of "Black & White Night" yesterday and can only say that it is absolutely terrific. I couldn't believe how good it looked and sounded. This is now the third time I have bought this concert, first on Hi-Fi VHS, then on DVD when it became available and now on HD DVD. I can only say that this concert looks and sounds so good that I would personally pay $100.00 for it if I had to.

You might like this video ... Crying.:)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bVRDvR7pjN4&feature=related

That guy is amazing! I can't wait to see him n Vegas! :D

The original concert was produced in Dolby Surround. I thought the DVD 5:1 audio was FUBAR compared to the the original stereo track.

The TrueHD stream has most of the same objectionable mixing as the DVD DD and DTS streams have. If you want to hear this concert as it was originally intended, listen to the 2-ch stream. That said, the TrueHD does sound great.

As much as I enjoy the band of celebs, it's also fun to watch all of the Hollywood elite in the audience. I've lost count of how many times I've watched this concert, I have it in 4 different formats: Original stereo VHS recording from the Cinemax broadcast, VHS release, laserdisc release, DVD and now HD-DVD. I never tire of this music.

If you want to read up on an amazing life story, Orbison's life will not disappoint. If ever there was an artist who's life deserved a feature film biography, Roy is it.

The original concert was produced in Dolby Surround.


That explains, for a music video, how good it sounds throught out the surround channels.

"In Dream" you can hear the strings sections in the sourround channel blending with the fronts and just kinda floats above. This recording has a very full sound stage.

I watch this HD DVD on my A1. My system is good but nothing great:

Tosh A1
Harman Kardon AVR 645
Deftech BP7004s, CLR2002, BP2X

Some thoughts:

I too had this on DVHS off INHD. This disc is better. Crisper, so detailed. This was shot using 35mm, 16mm and 8mm cameras. Nice touch.

In my theater, the sound is fabulous. But I had never complained about it before this.

I don't know anything about the production company. But hats off to whomever had the foresight, the vision to shoot this on film ... the high def medium of the 20th century. If Simon & Garfunkel (concert in the park) and the Eagles (HFO) had had the same vision, those works would still today be as enjoyable. The Eagles have covered themselves now with the fabulous Melbourne concert. But S&G still do not, to my knowledge, have a release with even acceptable picture.

Another note: This release of B&W Night was widely reported as having an AR of 1.33. I was suprised by that since the INHD version looked so right in 1.78. Well, good news. The reporting was wrong. This release is 1.78.

Another note: This release of B&W Night was widely reported as having an AR of 1.33. I was suprised by that since the INHD version looked so right in 1.78. Well, good news. The reporting was wrong. This release is 1.78.

Particularly interesting in light of the fact it was shot at 1.33. (or originally produced at 1.33)

Particularly interesting in light of the fact it was shot at 1.33. (or originally produced at 1.33)

This was fabulous. One of my best disc purchases this year. Can someone who owns one of the standard DVD compare it to this to see if the video is cropped on this release.:)

I will keep it short and simply add to everyone else's praise for this HD release- don't hesitate - just buy it and reveal in a truly outstanding Dolby True HD audio experience. My music video library is rather limited so next to Neil Young's Heart Of Gold it looks like Roy will get a lot of replay time. Neil should think about Heart Of Gold being transferred to HD as well. Paramount needs to release more material - this would be one place to start.

I love Roy and enjoy most of the concert, but the constant mugging by Springsteen during Pretty Woman is hard for me to stomach.

This was a great event - captured for all time for anyone to enjoy . . . long past the death of the star himself.

It mixed Roy's old and new songs in his own style that put him at the top of the charts for many years.

I believe (not sure) that Oh Pretty Woman is in the top 10 rock and roll songs of all time.

A trivia note - one of his songs - I do not remember which one it was - he did the entire song in a single take when it was first recorded. The Engineer said there was nothing he could do to make it better.

He reached the top of a very crowded ladder during a time that bands were exploding on the scene almost on a weekly basis. And there was ALWAYS . . . .

The Big "0"

RIP Roy Orbison. Thank you for the songs that many will cherish forever.

And now we have a videography of his last media covered concert.

I saw Roy Orbison in concert twice. He was every bit as good in person as he was with all the post processing his recordings receive.

What you see in the video is pretty much the way he normally performed - song after song, no very little chatting with the audience.

His life would make a great film - lots of mystery around him as a person and plenty of tragedy in his life.

Sigh, another cropped 4:3 title. :( So much for OAR not being an issue with HDM. Since this is only about an hour long, they could have put both ratios on the disc.

Sigh, another cropped 4:3 title. :( So much for OAR not being an issue with HDM. Since this is only about an hour long, they could have put both ratios on the disc.

I understand you desire for OAR but this disc is really about music. It is the kind of disc you can put into your player and leave the display turned off.

Think of it as an advanced audio CD - that just happens to offer a video of the event.

PS - I wish they would reissue the CD of The Traveling Willberry's (or what ever the name of the band was that he belonged to for that very short time.)

Sigh, another cropped 4:3 title. :( So much for OAR not being an issue with HDM. Since this is only about an hour long, they could have put both ratios on the disc.

uumm... I think I'm confused. My HD DVD shows 1:78 full screen on my HD display

I think the post refers to the fact that the show was originally shot and presented in 1.33, so it had to be cropped on top/bottom to fit the new 1.78 version.

I reviewed this show when it first aired: All they sent me -- all they really could at the time, I guess -- was a VHS...which I watched with a monaural hookup. And STILL it was clear that this was the model for how TV concert productions should be done.

uumm... I think I'm confused. My HD DVD shows 1:78 full screen on my HD display

It's unclear which is full frame. The show was originally broadcast in 1.33 ratio. If that was how it was filmed, then 1.78 ratio on the HD DVD has to be cropped on top and bottom. On the otherhand, it's possible that the original broadcast was the cropped or pan and scanned version. We just need someone with both to see which version shows more of the picture.

great disc for the Dolby True HD 5.1 audio

great disc for the Dolby True HD 5.1 audio

Agreed, this is a reference standard for music in 5:1. Even though I object to the way it's mixed, it sounds awesome.

I just wanted to add another note and that is... the fact that this disc is of reference material, its price is alo very reasonable. I doubt that there's another music video out at the moment that can surpass it.

I just compared the SD DVD with this new disc. The new HD DVD is cropped top and bottom with the same width as the SD DVD. So, as some have guessed, it was obviously shot 1.33 and cropped for this 1.78 release. And wouldn't you have guessed it. There is 8mm footage in this program. I doubt any of that would have been anything other than 1.33.

PS - I wish they would reissue the CD of The Traveling Willberry's (or what ever the name of the band was that he belonged to for that very short time.)

They did reissue that disc, remastered, earlier this year along with the second disc (including bonus tracks for each) and a DVD with a documentary and the music videos. The package is simply called "The Traveling Wilburys."

Interestingly, the videos on that are also cropped to 1.78:1.

PS - I wish they would reissue the CD of The Traveling Willberry's (or what ever the name of the band was that he belonged to for that very short time.)

Your wish was granted about 2 months ago.

Excellent - thank you both for the heads up. Now I can order that specal music package and also the new 3 CD 25th Anniv. Edition of Blade Runner.:)

I just compared the SD DVD with this new disc. The new HD DVD is cropped top and bottom with the same width as the SD DVD. So, as some have guessed, it was obviously shot 1.33 and cropped for this 1.78 release. And wouldn't you have guessed it. There is 8mm footage in this program. I doubt any of that would have been anything other than 1.33.

I do think the 8mm footage suffered a bit from the crop and stretch, but without a side by side comparison you wouldn't know.

I do think the 8mm footage suffered a bit from the crop and stretch, but without a side by side comparison you wouldn't know.

"Stretch?" Please say it isn't so!

The 8mm footage is a little more noticeably grainy. But the image is not stretched ... it's just blown up resulting in the loss of top and bottom imagery. And to conclude, it looks very good. I know there are many (most) instances where releasing in an AR other than the original compromises the content. I really think this one is an exception. Just my opinion ... but I think it looks great.

Seriously, how many will purchase this disc to pay close attention to the PQ, albeit it's very good. It's the audio!!!

The 8mm footage is a little more noticeably grainy. But the image is not stretched ... it's just blown up resulting in the loss of top and bottom imagery. And to conclude, it looks very good. I know there are many (most) instances where releasing in an AR other than the original compromises the content. I really think this one is an exception. Just my opinion ... but I think it looks great.

Some folks apparently assume that "stretched" means "stretch-o-vision", so I probably should have stated that differently. The original master was 4:3, and this release is obviously remastered. While mastering, the image was cropped and stretched vertically AND horizontally, when compared to the original master. There's more than enough resolution to do this in the mastering process without hurting the image quality, except on the 8mm footage. So the result is that the 8mm footage will look less sharp, which was the intent anyway. If you compare the DVD and HD-DVD, in the 8mm footage, you can see this.

A better term than stretch might be "enlarged". All this presumes that a new master was created from a fresh film transfer, or that a high-res digital master existed that did not require a fresh transfer.

I also agree that in most of the concert, the cropping is not objectionable. There's a few closeups where tops of heads are cropped, but again it's not at all objectionable and the faces are correctly framed.

I just watched this, and I have to agree that the audio is awesome.

A rental which became a purchase :D :p

A rental which became a purchase :D :p

Me too!

Just received my HD DVD copy of "Black & White Night" yesterday and can only say that it is absolutely terrific. I couldn't believe how good it looked and sounded. This is now the third time I have bought this concert, first on Hi-Fi VHS, then on DVD when it became available and now on HD DVD. I can only say that this concert looks and sounds so good that I would personally pay $100.00 for it if I had to.

I just listened to this disk in DVD format this evening, on my Toshiba XA-2 feeding an Integra DTC-9.8 preprocessor, and the DTS soundtrack is already very good. Does the HD DVD/TrueHD version a significant improvement in sound over the DVD/DTS version, :confused:?

If yes, I will also pick up a copy.

Does the HD DVD/TrueHD version a significant improvement in sound over the DVD/DTS version, :confused:?

If yes, I will also pick up a copy.
That would depend on your equipment. But here the answer is a very definite yes.

If anyone is looking for a really good bio on Roy, pick up the DVD "In Dreams", released by Sony Legacy and produced by Barbara Orbison. Came out in 2006, it's great stuff that you won't see anywhere else.

Ok,

I did NOT like the sound. NOT natural.
Will stick to 2 channel.

And very HOT track at +15db.

But good as not to distort in any case.

Ok,

I did NOT like the sound. NOT natural.
Will stick to 2 channel.

And very HOT track at +15db.

But good as not to distort in any case.

I agree, the 5:1 mix is very unnatural, doesn't sound at all like a live performance. The DVD is the same. But the sound quality is a lot better than the 2-ch, so it's a trade-off either way. I tried the 2-ch with DD PLIIx applied and the effect is quite good, just not as clear and strong as the THD.

The audio is absolutely great! Man this bodes well for the future of concert hi def DVDs!

I'm buying this rental also.

I saw Roy in concert in Jacksonville Florida away back in 1960. When they introduced him the girls were screaming their heads off--until he walked out on stage: portly, thick glasses, not exactly Elvis. Then he began his first song and that monster voice had them screaming at twice their original volume. One of the greats.

This is a classic surround mix. It has been available in DD DVD, DTS DVD, SACD and DVD-Audio. This is the latest version. If you are not used to hearing a real surround mix you may not like it. You have to stop thinking "front centric" and enjoy the music. I think it's great! :D

Seriously, how many will purchase this disc to pay close attention to the PQ, albeit it's very good. It's the audio!!!

+ 1... TruHD on this is awesome! I also have the DVD and DVD-Audio but TruHD rules! HD video is also more pleasant than 4:3 sd-DVD!

This is a classic surround mix. It has been available in DD DVD, DTS DVD, SACD and DVD-Audio. This is the latest version. If you are not used to hearing a real surround mix you may not like it. You have to stop thinking "front centric" and enjoy the music. I think it's great! :D
Nothing "classic" about it at all. A proper surround mix would make you feel as though you were in the audience. A proper mix would create a spacial sound stage where each instrument seemed to be located on stage, with reverberations from the room itself. Having backup vocals coming from over your right shoulder, and violins and guitars coming from over your left shoulder is anything BUT natural or correct. This is not an action picture, it's a concert. The 5:1 audio was created long after the concert was first released, and IMHO it is botched badly. No self-respecting music engineer would have created this. That said, the TrueHD does have spectacular audio quality, but if you want to hear the concert the way it was originally mastered, use the 2-ch stream with Dolby Surround or PLIIx decoding.

Agreed.

I've never been to a concert where they have speakers behind my head ;)

I've never been to a concert where they have speakers behind my head ;)

Actually, I have. Large stadium-type venues will use time-delayed repeaters all across the audience. But I digress. What makes this case so egregious is that the sound quality is so good, and the music is gooder. The mis-placed sounds are just distractions from the pure joy of the concert. That said, I'm still liable to use the TrueHD stream and crank it up. Maybe if I put the surrounds in front of me it would be better? :rolleyes:

I've never been to a concert where they have speakers behind my head ;)

Pink Floyd, Emerson, Lake and Palmer, The Who...

-t

On the one hand... I really like surround music mixes that put you in the middle of the music, as in DVD-A or SACD surround releases from acts like Steely Dan, Porcupine Tree, Toy Matinee, etc.

On the other hand... I agree in general that concert recordings should give you "the best seat in the house," which is generally not on stage.

On the third hand... despite appearances, this was not a live concert in the traditional sense. It was a TV show, produced as part of HBO/Cinemax's "Super Sessions Live" series back in the 80's. I still have my VHS tape recorded off cable at the time.

Therefore, sound would have been produced for optimal recordability, emphasizing separation and clarity, for later mixdown from the multitrack master. Room acoustics would have been ignored or even actively suppressed. Audience behavior would have been controlled (and obviously was).

Therefore, my feeling is that either approach would have been legitimate, but that both would have been artificial because the entire context was artificial. Putting room audience and ambience in the surrounds would support the same illusion of a concert that the video was made to simulate, but would still be artificial because it was not recorded that way, because there was no real room ambience to record.

The "studio surround" approach is also artificial, but then this in fact *is* the way it was recorded: a multi-track master intended for later mixdown, with the final form of the presentation (stereo, Dolby Surround, etc.) to be determined by the form of the product.

So the situation isn't quite as "black and white" as some seem to think. :)

You "stereo up front" guys are so quick to stomp all over an aggressive surround mix it makes me sick. Listen to the stereo mix if you don't like it.

Just because your mommies sat you in front of a TV during your growing years and you became used to having everything come at you from the front does not make it right.

People sit in front of the stage because that's where they fit. If there were stools on the stage, we'd sit there. Geez, I get so tired of the anti-surround minions with their "sweet spot" idealism. If your brain can't handle sounds coming from behind you, look both ways before you cross and stick with the stereo soundtrack.

Hey! I like the surround TrueHD on this soundtrack... I like everything surround that's why I paid a ton of money on my HT system :)

Tell 'em oblio! Yes, there is a stereo track for those who don't like the surround mix, so stop whining please.

The surround mix might offend purists but overall sound quality is very very good- if your an orbison fan I highly recommend this disc...the man was a genius...

I've used the 'standard' disc for a long time as the demo for my surround sound system. Just ordered the HD disc. Can't imagine that it could sound better, but I'm ready to be convinced! :)

I've used the 'standard' disc for a long time as the demo for my surround sound system. Just ordered the HD disc. Can't imagine that it could sound better, but I'm ready to be convinced! :)
It'll take about 10 seconds of the TrueHD stream to convince you.

Hey! I like the surround TrueHD on this soundtrack... I like everything surround that's why I paid a ton of money on my HT system :)

Even if instruments in the front have their sound coming from the back? Sheesh.

Even if instruments in the front have their sound coming from the back? Sheesh.

it would be if they stick speakers in the middle of the arena and you're up front!!!

I first saw this on WVIZ Public Television in Cleveland few years ago during a pledge drive and loved it.

I am watching it in HD DVD with Tru HD with some very nice speakers (B&W 700 series) with a Pioneer Kuro 6010 Plasma and Denon 3806 AVR.

All I can say is WOW.

Highly recommended.

You "stereo up front" guys are so quick to stomp all over an aggressive surround mix it makes me sick. Listen to the stereo mix if you don't like it.

Just because your mommies sat you in front of a TV during your growing years and you became used to having everything come at you from the front does not make it right.

People sit in front of the stage because that's where they fit. If there were stools on the stage, we'd sit there. Geez, I get so tired of the anti-surround minions with their "sweet spot" idealism. If your brain can't handle sounds coming from behind you, look both ways before you cross and stick with the stereo soundtrack.Where is the stool you could sit in that puts Roy in front, the violins over your left shoulder and the backup singers over your right shoulder? What concert have you ever attended where you sat on a stool on the stage? Where have you ever seen this?

That being said, this surround mix is unrealistic. It is great music and I enjoyed it very much, but it's unreal.

Are you looking for "whiz-bang" effects or a realistic recreation of the live event?

I am, by no means, an anti-surround minion. I was hooking up my Dynaco Quadapter and then a Dolby Surround adapter (and attending concerts) when many of you were hoping to graduate from kindergarten. All I ask is that the mix be realistic: if I see a guy with a machine-gun, or a Fender bass at near front right, I do not find believable a mix that sends me the sound from over my right shoulder, i.e. far right rear.

I also was a Quad surround guy back in the day. I don't find it offensive to have ambient sound coming from the sides or surrounds. I would imagine that, as an example, you would certainly get some ambient surround sounds bouncing around Royal Albert Hall, no?

Where is the stool you could sit in that puts Roy in front, the violins over your left shoulder and the backup singers over your right shoulder? What concert have you ever attended where you sat on a stool on the stage? Where have you ever seen this?

That being said, this surround mix is unrealistic. It is great music and I enjoyed it very much, but it's unreal.

Are you looking for "whiz-bang" effects or a realistic recreation of the live event?

I am, by no means, an anti-surround minion. I was hooking up my Dynaco Quadapter and then a Dolby Surround adapter (and attending concerts) when many of you were hoping to graduate from kindergarten. All I ask is that the mix be realistic: if I see a guy with a machine-gun, or a Fender bass at near front right, I do not find believable a mix that sends me the sound from over my right shoulder, i.e. far right rear.

Just listen to the stereo track and all of your sounds will come out in front of you, just like you want them to. It's that simple. Remember, you're watching a VIDEO, you're not AT THE CONCERT!!!! :rolleyes:

Just listen to the stereo track and all of your sounds will come out in front of you, just like you want them to. It's that simple. Remember, you're watching a VIDEO, you're not AT THE CONCERT!!!! :rolleyes:

+1

all of your sounds will come out in front of you, just like you want them toI believe you mis-read or mis-interpreted my post. I did not say I want all the sound to come from the front. I said:All I ask is that the mix be realisticHave you watched Pearl Harbor? If you saw the Japanese plane front and center, would you praise a surround mix that put the plane at right rear because, after all, it's a "video," and you're not actually in Pearl Harbor and it's not 1941?

If you genuinely think the surround mix need bear no relation to what is portrayed on the screen, then we must agree to disagree. If you think the ideal surround mix can be different for concerts than action movies than comedies than science fiction, then we must again agree to disagree.

Where is the stool you could sit in that puts Roy in front, the violins over your left shoulder and the backup singers over your right shoulder? What concert have you ever attended where you sat on a stool on the stage?


Actually, being an ex-musician, I have sat in the middle of all of the performers on stage and I really like the surround mix on this disc. Brings back memories.

I believe you mis-read or mis-interpreted my post. I did not say I want all the sound to come from the front. I said:Have you watched Pearl Harbor? If you saw the Japanese plane front and center, would you praise a surround mix that put the plane at right rear because, after all, it's a "video," and you're not actually in Pearl Harbor and it's not 1941?

If you genuinely think the surround mix need bear no relation to what is portrayed on the screen, then we must agree to disagree. If you think the ideal surround mix can be different for concerts than action movies than comedies than science fiction, then we must again agree to disagree.


Actually, I understand your point and can see where you're coming from. I think if you ever tried one of the "Monster" surround discs, where they have an "on stage" surround mix and a "front row" mix, you can see how it's done both ways.

Sure, you have to "suspend belief" when listening to a mix like this, but it's fun and it opens the mix up. Shoot, half the time I listen to this type of DVD I'm not watching it anyway. Just like I'm not always in the mythical "sweet spot" when listening to SACDs or DVD-A's.

So I'll agree with you that it's "unnatural" if you're watching the video from your arm chair, but if you close your eyes, it's very nice! :D

I believe you mis-read or mis-interpreted my post. I did not say I want all the sound to come from the front. I said:Have you watched Pearl Harbor? If you saw the Japanese plane front and center, would you praise a surround mix that put the plane at right rear because, after all, it's a "video," and you're not actually in Pearl Harbor and it's not 1941?

If you genuinely think the surround mix need bear no relation to what is portrayed on the screen, then we must agree to disagree. If you think the ideal surround mix can be different for concerts than action movies than comedies than science fiction, then we must again agree to disagree.

Well spoken. It's like watching a film with several people on the screen talking, and one voice is coming from behind for no discernible reason. But I think you're wasting your time on this debate. Some folks don't think they're getting their money's worth from a surround system unless they're bombarded with sound from all directions. (The question of being realistic is of no consequence).

I actually think that the mix could have been OK if it wasn't so "heavy-handed". If they had just toned it down a bit and placed the affected sound a little further forward in the sound field. I just don't like being hit over the head with it. I've tried lowering the gain on the surrounds, and it does help a lot. Even so, the audio quality of the HD track is too good to not use it.

I believe you mis-read or mis-interpreted my post. I did not say I want all the sound to come from the front. I said:Have you watched Pearl Harbor? If you saw the Japanese plane front and center, would you praise a surround mix that put the plane at right rear because, after all, it's a "video," and you're not actually in Pearl Harbor and it's not 1941?

If you genuinely think the surround mix need bear no relation to what is portrayed on the screen, then we must agree to disagree. If you think the ideal surround mix can be different for concerts than action movies than comedies than science fiction, then we must again agree to disagree.

So every time they cut to a different camera, the surround field should shift to reflect your new virtual perspective? No, of course not.

In a music video, audio positioning must remain fixed. But your viewpoint is not fixed; you are not in the "best seat in the house;" you are everywhere a camera can go. Does the traditional "music in front, anudience behind" surround mix really work best when the camera is rarely in that kind of position?

The answer is, sometimes it sounds better that way, and sometimes it doesn't. For a performance recorded in Royal Albert Hall, the room's acoustics are part of the experience, and a mix that puts room and audience ambience where it belongs serves to help recreate the original experience.

For a show recorded in some nondescript club or local venue -- a room which itself is designed to suppress its own room acoustics, as most high-end nightclubs are -- and which is shot with multiple mobile cameras -- an immersive surround mix is IMO entirely consistent with the visual experience being reproduced.

Because the original intended audience for this show was at home, watching on TV. And still is.

Just picked up a copy of this and holy shxx - it blew my socks off!!!

I knew it was going to be trouble on the day when I hooked up the HD-DVD to the Vandys...

This is real music.

My $.02 on surround sound. It obviously works very well with films, because the director can put your observation point anywhere he wants and the sound can realistically support that. Just about any sound can come from anywhere.

With music, it is easy to imagine that you always have to be seated front row center in a concert hall. If that is the case, then the only sound you would hear from the surrounds is the audience sitting around you. I believe that would be poor use of this technology.

A film director has a perfect right to pick your relative position while watching a movie. A sound mixing engineer also has a perfect right to pick your seat at a concert, and design the shape of the stage. You don't always get to sit in the same place, and that is part of the fun. With this concert and also with both of the Eagles' DVD's, I am happy to have had my seat located on the very front of the middle of the stage, looking at the band, with less fortunate people sitting behind me. You see, I am the guest of honor at this concert. The stage is slightly bowed so some performers are nearly off my shoulders. I can look up once in a while to see a big TV monitor showing video of the concert from all different angles. I am completely enveloped in the moment.

I like that.

With music, it is easy to imagine that you always have to be seated front row center in a concert hall. If that is the case, then the only sound you would hear from the surrounds is the audience sitting around you. I believe that would be poor use of this technology.

Completely wrong. There's an abundance of reflections and reverberations that come from all directions. That's what gives one the "feel" of the room and is the basis of nearly all DSP sound fields offered on an AVR. In most concert venues, the majority of sound from the stage comes from far left and far right where the main speaker towers are located. We'll never know what the speaker placement was in the Coconut Grove on that night. But I'm guessing that the speakers didn't move during the concert.

The issue with this particular mix is that the performer's apparent position in the room IS constantly changing. Some may like this sensation, some do not. It's certainly not the norm.