[DevoX]

I've liked Bjork since back in the days of The Sugarcubes... she's got a lovely voice and I was anticipating this DVD-Audio release of her latest album, "Vespertine"...


I cannot say how profoundly disappointed in this disc I am! The album itself is great and there is active LFE on a DVD-A disc for once... but here's the kick in the ass that really pisses me off to no end...


The disc is clearly labeled as 5.1 24/96... but I find out that it is, in fact, only 5.1 24/48. This is complete crap! I want to listen in 6-channel and 2-channel... and both of these are 24/48 and not the advertised 24/96.


I wanted to hear Bjork's vocals at 24/96... that's why I bought the disc. Not something barely better than CD (nobody give me lip about this being 24-bit and not 16-bit... the samplerate plays a much more important role, IMO).


How do these DVD-A people expect to accomplish anything when they keep f***ing things up like this!? I swear. I was upset when the A.I. Soundtrack was only 24/88... but I can live with that. But now we get something on the DVD-A front that is not some no-name jazz musician or 1970s rockers and the totally f-up the entire reason for the DVD-A format...


I am very upset.


-- Robert

 

[Chris Williams]

Quote:

Originally posted by DevoX How do these DVD-A people expect to accomplish anything when they keep f***ing things up like this!? I swear. I was upset when the A.I. Soundtrack was only 24/88... but I can live with that. But now we get something on the DVD-A front that is not some no-name jazz musician or 1970s rockers and the totally f-up the entire reason for the DVD-A format...

I just bought it tonight, and as I don't have a DVD-Audio player as of yet, I'll be listening to the Dolby Digital tracks to start with. Is it possible they had to reduce to 24/48 to fit these other formats on?


Personally, I'm not convinced that any music produced in a studio in a multi-channel format would have the dynamic range to make the difference between 48 and 96 noticeable. Only live to 2 channel (read no-name jazz artists) will retain that. Bjork's voice is always compressed and limited in various ways on her records and in concert. There's no way it would work in a radio context otherwise.


The part that interests me is not the absolute audio quality, which is not really a major consideration in pop/rock production the way it is in jazz and classical, but the usage of the multichannel format. The production of Bjorks albums often features a deep, complex soundstage.


On the other hand, I will agree...Bjork is one of the few singers with a voice that could take advantage of DVD-Audio. I want to hear 5.1 mixes of "Debut" and "Post" as well. Imagine what they could do with the mix of "There's More To Life Than This" or "Human Behavior".

 

[DevoX]

Hi Chris,


I doubt they had to reduce the size of the material or lower the sample rate for the disc. I have other DVD-A discs that have both DTS, DD, DVD-A 5.1, and 2.0 tracks without any problems. This album is not particularly long, either.


I believe I disagree with the difference between 48khz and 96khz... if one were to believe a lot of the hype around the new Bjork album, it would appear that the originals were recorded at or higher than 96khz and designed, from the beginning, to be a 6 channel presentation. The CD would be a byproduct of a downmix. I wouldn't put it past Bjork to experiment with 6 channel.


However, the sticker on the disc clearly indicates that it's a 6 channel 24/96 recording when it is, in fact, not.


I have heard 24/96 material of studio material that is drastically better than the 16/44 counterpart.


I feel really, really ripped off by the record label at this point.


-- Robert

 

[Chris Williams]

We just listened to the DVD. I don't have a DVD-Audio player yet, so we could only listen to the Dolby Digital track. But even this limited, compressed format exceeded the quality of the original recording from what I can tell. The lead vocal was always compressed and limited, and it probably was on the original recording. Bjork (and a lot of singers) listens to her performance via headphones while singing - after the processing chain. Only the choir, strings and some instruments like the glockenspeil sounded relatively uncompressed. I don't think this was a limitation of Dolby Digital either, as the compression on the lead vocal was noticeable and localizable as a specific thing in an otherwise uncompressed soundfield.


They should have labeled it correctly, but I don't think they were trying to cheat anyone. I think they decided to release it at 48 because 48 quite comfortably exceeds the limitations of the source.


Now, if this was a 5.1 mix of something like Holly Cole's album "Don't Smoke In Bed", I'd be in agreement about the need for 96.

 

[bmwrob]

I received mine yesterday from Tower records. I only gave the disc a few minutes listening before I gave up (I had ordered a few other DVD-A/SACD as well). The first impression was that it was far from a top-notch recording. I had expected more even from a 48/24 recording which could sound very nice indeed. There is a sticker on the cover which clearly states that it's supposed to be a 24/96 5.1 recording. On the Warner home page it's also stated:

http://www.dvdaudiopreview.com/titles/bjork/index.html


I just can see how Warner can give out this false information.

 

[Grubert]

Can any of you please elaborate on the multichannel usage on this album? If possible, indicating specific songs and/or passages.


Thanks a lot.

 

[Chris Williams]

Quote:

Originally posted by Grubert Can any of you please elaborate on the multichannel usage on this album? If possible, indicating specific songs and/or passages.

I just left Chicago for Kansas City this morning, and I don't have the Bjork disc with me, so I can't listen to it to answer you question properly.


I started listening to it by myself, and after one song I had to go get Vickie. We both wound up listening to the whole album in the dark. Then I went to do some other stuff, while Vickie listened to the whole album again.


Suffice to say that it's a very nice 5.1 mix that creates a compelling sonic landscape. I can hardly wait to hear 5.1 mixes of Homeogenic and Debut and Post.

 

[orbillius]

I too was fooled into buying this with the expectation of 24/96 2 channel. Very dissapointing. The BB King and Eric Clapton album has some nice tunes on it though