Originally Posted by USAFChief
Snowing outstide...great day to be a bum and listen.Grahm Nash - Songs for Beginners
& Songs for Survivors
(DVD-As). Both very nice in 5.1...good mix/use of surrounds...and more important, great music. Folks, Jeff has some convincing points with the 5.1 vs. 2.0. When 5.1 is done right, 2.0 can't match. Still some great 2.0 stuff not to be ignored, but putting this on after some good 2.0 stuff and I have the wow moment when it plays.
My point on 5.1 is solely about sound qualtiy, and then mostly about analog-era titles. Going back to the multitrack masters and then going forward from there with today's technology is tantamount to a guarantee that the sound quality will be the highest possible and will be what was heard by the artists, engineer and producer in the studio when originally recorded. (Maybe better. See my point about the sound quality of "today's" effects.)
And when I say "today's technology" I don't just mean the recording "medium." Consider that studios of that era used plate reverbs, and those plate reverbs used transducers to input the sound into the plate and pick out the sound at various spots around the plate. (Some studios would have even used spring-type reverbs.) This was for "wetting" the mixed elements. Delays for doubling and or echo were done with tape machines. Even when digital delays came onto the scene - I had an Eventide Harmonizer in the late 70's - the circuitry was stone age compared to today.
If today's digitally recorded mixes used effects from the 70's, the mixes would be muddy, e.g. a voice might be crystal clear, but if that is thickened (e.g. doubled) and then "placed" in a large hall would sound like sh1t. Using current effects technology yields a pristine source and pristine effects; it all blends together seamlessly.
So, flogging this horse a bit more, remastering a SACD from the old analog stereo mix might improve the sound quality over the master used for the vinyl or CD, but it also brings forward all of the older effects. REMIXING, even into a STEREO mix ensures the highest quality possible from the original sessions. It seems rare, though, that remixes are done in stereo, and that is why I harp on preach
recommend 5.1 mixes as the ultimate.
A recent exception to the needs-to-be-surround-to-be-the-best is ELP and ELP Tarkus. When I get my 5508 back, I plan on comparing the original stereo CD to the REMIXED stereo CD to the REMIXED stereo HI-RES DVD-A. I have expectations that I will hear proof of my theory with respect to sound quality and today's vs yesterday's technologies.
The two hi-res surround Nash titles you mention had me breaking out the bong.
JeffEdited by pepar - 2/2/13 at 11:26am