Audio Fidelity SACDs soon for Yes, Fleetwood Mac, Lynyrd Skynyrd (1 Viewer)

[ElevSkyMovie]

There are only so many titles labels can put out at once, there aren't very many engineers who do this kind of work, that's why you see the same guys on release after release.

Lee, since when does a label need an artist's permission to re-release an album? The label owns the masters.

Someone said a few posts ago that they wanted Nickel Creek. Aren't both their albums out on SACD?

 

[Michael St. Clair]

Someone said a few posts ago that they wanted Nickel Creek. Aren't both their albums out on SACD?

I just checked and sure enough they are!

Which points to another problem, which is that many releases are simply not stocked in many brick-and-mortar stores. This is not the first time that I've had entire releases I didn't know of because I hadn't searched online for them. Even Best Buy is not carrying everything (mine sure doesn't).

 

[dpippel]

I did Charles, and didn't mean to come off as if I was taking your comments out of context. I assumed that when you said "golden oldies" you were referring to a lot of the material that's being released on high-res. Maybe you were talking about older buyers?

 

[MattCPT]

I fully agree with those who feel that newer artist are needed on SACD. I become very frustrated every time I see a list of old material being re-released and no newer artists. I work with many "Baby Boomers" and have found that they have little interest in the SACD format. Most don't understand it, and many don't have the hearing necessary to appreciate it. This is of course an insignificant sampling of the population, but I don't agree with such a limited selection of current artists. To make matters worse the releases are STEREO hybrids. The biggest selling point (inarguably) to the mass market is the multi-channel aspect of high-rez. Few people outside of those on this forum see the benefit to paying more money for another copy of an old release that may or may not have a noticeable impovement in sound quality. People will however always notice a difference (good or bad) between stereo and multi-channel.

Release MULTI-CHANNEL HYRBID SACDs of current artists, PLEASE!!!
(without spindle cracks!)

 

[LanceJ]

Maybe not all newer artists are too happy with one format's habit of softening the impact of certain types of music.

Polite punk anyone?

LJ

 

[LarryDavenport]

I think the complaints about newer bands not getting the hi-rez treatment should partly be addressed to the bands themselves. Perhaps writing to your favorite bands official web page or waiting for them to do an online chat (ask them about SACD or DVDA) would speed up the process.

 

[dpippel]

I've been monitoring the SACD/DVD-A section at my local Best Buy and it hasn't been restocked in over a *month*. The local Circuit City has all of their SACD/DVD-A titles jumbled together on one little endcap with some DVD players. Not good.

 

[LanceJ]

Perhaps writing to your favorite bands official web page............

I've done this with four of my favorite bands over the past year, and while I don't think it was because of me I was finally told one band (a duo actually, with guest musicians) has discussed with DTS Entertainment the possibility of releasing a DTS-CD.

Yessiree I would certainly enjoy l o u n g i n g in my living room listening to their music in surround form.

LJ

 

[Phil A]

The Fleetwood Mac will indeed be pre-Warner stuff. Here is a post from mos. ago from their discussion group by

Marshall Blonstein, President of Audio Fidelity.


Posted: Aug Tue 19, 2003 8:26 pm Post subject: Early FLEETWOOD MAC

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"Hey guys: Would love your assistance. I need a pre-Stevie Nicks Fleetwood Mac fanatic to help me assemble a Fleetwood Mac title.

Fleetwood Mac recorded a number of tracks with Peter Green for the BBC. There is a great opportunity to put together a fantastic album

Put out the word I'm looking for someone who knows the early Fleetwood Mac material cold. Let's hear from you. I'm ready to go!

Marshall"

 

[LanceJ]

Fleetwood Mac recorded a number of tracks with Peter Green for the BBC.

Are they the same as available on this Silverline dvd-audio available since this past summer?

Now before everybody gets their panties all in a bunch over a Silverline title, just about everybody also knows this label has produced some excellent sounding--with fully discrete 5.1 mixes--dvd-audio albums. My own Dishwalla & New Age sampler from them are my own proof of this.

If anybody is worried about the use of DSP-derived fake surround effects, why not just turn-off/disconnect the rear channels? Since I'm a believer in tone controls for ugly sounding CDs/vinyl/tape, this action doesn't bother me. And after poking around the Internet, the CD version--from before dvd-audio even existed--has bad reviews for sound quality (actually, every CD review I read mentions this). So beware. But for fans of Fleetwood Mac that won't matter.

Sorry for the thread crap.

LJ

 

[Phil A]

I hate thread crap myself. Smells terrible. Marshall has been asked the question on the Audio Fidelity forum about the High Fidelity review article and I guess he will respond shortly with the details - http://www.audiofidelity.net/message...opic.php?t=155

 

[LanceJ]

Phil A: Most of the reason I wrote what I did is I can't understand why such lousy-sounding material is being given the hi-res treatment. Just like good speakers, hi-res systems will simply bring out more sonic lousiness from the original master tape. So why bother? Well anyway, at least people could do a comparison of the formats with these different discs.

LJ

 

[Phil A]

Lance, I guess there is a market for it for an independent label like Audio Fidelity, which seems to get derive their business from older classic artists (e.g. Donovan, Zombies, Richie Valens, Buddy Rich, etc.). There is a discussion group and people regularly request that Marshall try to get different material. I have a couple of other Audio Fidelity CDs and from what I have they have done a fantastic job with older stuff. I really like the Donovan disc, wish they had some more tracks of his though. Have not heard the material you noted, but one of the things they generally do is get the original master tapes. It is possible that what you heard was not derived from an original master tape. I'm not saying lousy material will sound good and at the moment I don't personally have any great interest in the latest announcements of what is forthcoming from Audio Fidelity (I could change my mind perhaps later), just adding what I can to what material might be available from the announcements.

 

[LarryDavenport]

I think the Silverline BBC disc for Fleetwood Mac is great. It has some different versions than what was on the 2-cd set (or else the mixes are so different they just seem like different takes).

But I'm a bit dissapointed that Audio Fidelity appears to be doing a rehash of the DVDA when they could release the Boston Tea Party shows in 5.1 or do something with the Blue Horizon studio recordings.

Ideally I wish Warners would get off their ass and release remastered versions of Then Pay On, Kiln House, Future Games, Bare Trees, Mystery To Me, Penguin, and Heroes Are Hard To Find (as well as the Buckingham-Nicks stuff already announced).

BTW I am turning 40 next month so yes I like "oldies" but I would kill for some decent "new" music in Hi-Rez, especially Queens of the Stone Age, PJ Harvey, White Stripes, or Ween (though I think White Stripes and Hi-Rez is an oxymoron).

 

[Lee Scoggins]

Just like good speakers, hi-res systems will simply bring out more sonic lousiness from the original master tape.

Lance, some engineers tell me that remastering in DSD or hirez PCM is actually better for sound since 1) the editing tools and audio effects are less prevalent, and 2) the hirez sources have much more detail that can highlight mistakes (to be corrected after).

I think that's why some remasterings with PCM can sound better on SACD and on DVDA.

 

[ElevSkyMovie]

Lee,

I think there are very few artists who have much say about what their label releases, that's why you see so many compilations and greatest hits. I agree that super stars probably have some pull with the label, but I don't think any others do.

Hopefully labels will listen as more and more artists ask for high-rez releases, but the artists will only ask if we ask them first and they see that there is a market for high-rez releases.

 

[Lee Scoggins]

but the artists will only ask if we ask them first and they see that there is a market for high-rez releases.

I think is in part why Sony is signing up some heavyweights like Dylan, Floyd, etc. to help drive home the value and serve as reference points...

 

[andrew markworthy]

Meh. More boomer fodder. Hate to be all negative-nancy, but I just can't see myself listening to any of this classic rock radio dreck with anything approaching enthusiasm.

I agree - with the brilliant stuff that Britney and co have produced over the past few years, who cares about boomer fodder?

 

[Rich Malloy]

andrew, since the heyday of Fleetwood Mac and Lynyrd Skynyrd, we've heard a lot more than Britney & Co., including not just a few brilliant acts from your very own native land. For most folks, this won't be news.

I mean, if you're gonna build a man of straw, at least give him a little backbone!

 

[TheLongshot]

To be honest, it is only the "moldy oldies" that I'd probably be buying anyways, since most new stuff that would probably be considered for hi-rez is not going to be stuff that I buy. Most of the bands I like nowadays are on small labels. This is why hearing news that bands like Yes and Rush may get hi-rez releases is more exciting to me. The only "new" SACDs I own are Nickel Creek and Natalie MacMaster.

Jason