***Official "Dark Side of The Moon SACD" Review Thread*** (1 Viewer)

[Lee Scoggins]

http://www.highfidelityreview.com/ne...umber=15987675

Enjoy!

 

[Michael St. Clair]

Already mentioned here.

I thought we had agreed that we don't need a million 'Dark Side' threads.

 

[Lee Scoggins]

Sorry, I missed that post Michael.

Still, does it not warrant its own thread so we can have reactions to the coming reviews?

If there was ever a time for a general thread like we do in the HT Software Forum, then this is it.

 

[Rich Malloy]

Actually, the review is at this link: http://www.highfidelityreview.com/re...umber=19939611

I love all the High-Res websites, but HFR is, for me, the first and last word when I wanna know the scoop. This is a typically in-depth, even phenomenal review. And I love how the "center channel issue" has grown even more complicated, with Guthrie schooling us on how it can be used (and not used).

(See, for comparison, the review of Natalie Merchant's "Tigerlilly" at HFR, and also listen to Diana Krall's "When I Look In Your Eyes".)

 

[Lee Scoggins]

I love all the High-Res websites, but HFR is, for me, the first and last word when I wanna know the scoop.

I agree Rich - I find HFR to be superb and they scoop most people all the time. I find Brian Moura to be a very consistent and credible source.

I too am interested in the non-use of center channel. Done well, that should sound awesome.

By the way, I used the first link to HFR because it described the reviewer's system which I think is always important.

 

[Michael St. Clair]

I find the emphasis that some listeners place on the center channel to be misguided. My system images well enough that, if you are in the sweet spot, you'd have a hard time telling whether the center is on or I had turned it off and engaged 'phantom'.

The center is absolutely essential for watching movies outside of the sweet spot, it keeps the dialog on-screen.

To me, a good mix is one where you you can close your eyes and not even tell where the speakers are, but you can pinpoint the location of different musical elements. I remain unconvinced that three speakers are needed to make this happen in front of you.

I have several Quad discs and visitors often think that all of the speakers are active when listening.

As far as the review goes, he really should have spell/grammar checked it; spelling isn't a pet peeve of mine but it makes the site a little more professional.

I do like (and typically trust) the HFR reviews but am more familiar with Brett and Mark's opinions.

 

[Rich Malloy]

I find the emphasis that some listeners place on the center channel to be misguided. My system images well enough that, if you are in the sweet spot, you'd have a hard time telling whether the center is on or I had turned it off and engaged 'phantom'.

For myself, my "center preference" (or unpreference) is really only based on a single multichannel mix: Krall's "When I Look in Your Eyes".

But, now that I think about it, it's not really the non-use of a discrete center channel for vocals that bugs me so much about the Krall mix... rather, it's the spread of her voice to all channels. Had it been primarily mixed into the mains to create a sorta wider center image, I'm sure I'd have no problem with it (and, now that I think about it, I'm sure quite a number of my discs have it mixed just in this way... including, perhaps, Guthrie's mix for "In the Flesh").

 

[Lee Scoggins]

I think it is interesting to discuss a brief question I asked Mike Hobson, a big supporter of DVDA, at the recent Atlanta Audio Society. He was discussing that many of the Mercury classical albums were recorded on three tracks and I asked if that would be perfect for a so-called tri-field presentation (L-C-R) and he said that would be very valid. Add a little room tone in the sides and you have a perfectly natural surround presentation based on tapes from the 50s and 60s.

So my point, and its a minor onw, is that there are instances where LCR may make some sense, but I do find the center can be over-emphasized as well.

 

[Ed St. Clair]

Blown opportunity!
This 4.1 mix, primarily taking out the anchor of a 5.1 sound stage presentation, is a sad example of 2003 mixing technique.
Why not just use Alan Parson's Quad mix, if your only going to put the bass & sax in the center channel?
Stupid!
HFR;

in the haunting and famous wordless vocal of ‘Great Gig in the Sky’, the Clare Torry solo lurks from all channels but the center.

Ugh!
One of the greatest vocal solo's in the history of rock, if not recorded music, is turned into a chorus.
Blasphemous!

 

[Jordan_E]

The Floyd in surround.
All I need now is a dome overhead and some lasers!

 

[Ed St. Clair]

to be misguided.

as well?

 

[Jesper]

For how long does Sony have the rights for Dark Side Of The Moon?

I think we should wait for the DVD Audio version and Alan Parson mix.

 

[Ed St. Clair]

This mix does give 'us' HiRez, so we can clear hear where they screwed up DSotM!

 

[Michael St. Clair]

Obviously I never use any kind of 'phantom' center with DVD-A or SACD; there is no such processing to provide for it. But I have listened to some movies and music (DTS CDs, concert DVDs, and so on) in both ways.

And I'm not suggesting that centers are evil, or that nobody should use them.

I simply feel that the need for the center channel is overrated, and that sometimes it may be overemphasized.

My opinion. Your milage may vary.

Even if you are a staunch center-channel advocate, I wouldn't be quick to judge the disc before listening...

 

[Michael St. Clair]

If one "properly" sets up a two channel music system, one can achieve phantom surround information as well.

While fronts are truly in front of you, surrounds are largely or wholly to the side (if set up correctly). Therefore, a center rear is actually adding another plane to the soundstage.

Also, center rear is typically used for movies, where you are more likely to have people out of the sweet spot. When I listen to music, it is usually alone or with one other person.

Again, in my experience, if the fronts are imaging really well you won't be able to tell if the center is active or not.

 

[Ed St. Clair]

over-emphasized

. Right?

 

[KeithH]

I can't wait to get this disc. Seeing as the reviewer preferred the CD layer to the MFSL UD1 gold disc, which I feel is excellent, the stereo SACD track should be a real treat. Whoo-hoo!

 

[Ed St. Clair]

another plane to the soundstage.

Is soooooooooooooo, lame!
Besides, adding as you stated, superior off axis soundstaging as well!

Michael,
I am sorry, I miss the point of your answer to my quote (post 15 of 16).
Are you agreeing with me that a properly set up "stereo" system can also create phantom surround information as well?
Thanks.

 

[LanceJ]

Two other problems many people forget about regarding center channels: 1) their position in relation to the other front channels and 2) most likely it won't fully match the left/right mains sonically speaking.

Two potentially big problems IMO.

And why I am an advocate of 4.1 channel surround.

If you have these speakers, you have a pretty good solution to the matching problem anyway. The mounting plate for the midrange/tweeter rotates--to maintain even dispersion--so you can use it as a full-range center channel.

And less important, but still irritating: what happens in the car environment? "O.K. sir where do you want us to cut the hole for your center channel?" :frowning:

LJ

 

[Jeff Ulmer]

is recorded taking advantage of the discreet 6 channels now available to them.

Again, I disagree. There is no reason why a music only mix should have anything to do with the LFE track, as again, this is not something that most listening environments can be set up accurately for. Low end should be bass managed. That way, the tonal representation stays intact, and select low end frequencies aren't being emphasised or downplayed due to improper system calibration.

I advocate a 4.0 approach, which will more successfully translate to a variety of listening environments reasonably intact, including the car, which is where I see surround really having a chance to take off.