Beach Boys: Pet Sounds....my new favorite DVD-A (1 Viewer)

[Ken Stuart]

Okay, I've compared "Wouldn't It Be Nice" on the following Pet Sounds Capitol disks:

- DVD-A mono track
- DVD-A stereo track
- DVD-A multichannel track
- 1990 Mono CD
- 1996 Pet Sounds Sessions CD Stereo track
- 1999 CD Mono track
- 1999 CD Stereo track

( I don't have the Hoffman DCC CD, nor any import CDs. And, I don't have the time to compare a dozen tracks in seven versions, especially when I'm not being paid. So, I am assuming that "Wouldn't It Be Nice" is representiative. )

I reconfirmed my previous opinion that the 1999 is a classic "lifeless" remastering - both the mono and stereo tracks are inferior to the earlier masterings.

And, the new DVD-A disk's mono and stereo tracks are both oddly tilted towards the high end and lacking in bass. I'd guess that either some Capitol flunkey did something to "improve it" after Linett finished, or else a mistake was made and some EQ was accidentally applied (or the wrong file was used - it almost sounds like LP pre-EQ).

So, the 1990 and 1996 CDs still sound the best for listening in mono and stereo.

However, I find the new multichannel mix to be the best-sounding version yet of Pet Sounds. It's true that Linett made some unusual choices for positioning the instruments and vocals, but I don't find anything "wrong" about that, it's just an artistic choice.

If I sit somewhere in the room other than the sweet spot, and listen to all these recordings, it's clear that the new multichannel version is better than any previous version. And this is a valid listening position for this album - since it was intended for mono, there is no original "sound stage" that is part of the album, so there is no valid reason for sitting in the "sweet spot"...

PS All the tracks were compared on a Sony 5-disk DVD/SACD changer, with the sole exception of the multichannel DVD-Audio track - so I used the high-resolution stereo and mono tracks from the DVD-Video side. The Sony reports that both tracks are 24bit and 96khz.

PPS

Note that the original mix doesn't even get an MLP-encoded DVD-A track, but rather a PCM 96K on both the DVD-video and DVD-audio sides of the disc.

From your comments Rich, I think you are under the misimpression that MLP encoding is somehow superior to PCM. In actuality, MLP is simply a clever scheme to compress a PCM file to fit in a smaller space, without losing any fidelity.

A 24bit/96khz PCM file should sound identical to a 24bit/96khz MLP file - the latter just uses less space.

By the way, this points out that DVD-Audio is only necessary to provide multichannel sound - DVD-Video was already capable of high-resolution stereo playback at the same 24bit/96khz spec as the multichannel mixes on DVD-A.

 

[Tomoko Noguchi]

Rich,

Yes, via the digital connection I can get mono and stereo without downcoversion.

My amplifier is Yamaha DSP-AZ1 and my player is Pioneer 747 or 47A (in the United States)

 

[Rich Malloy]

If I sit somewhere in the room other than the sweet spot, and listen to all these recordings, it's clear that the new multichannel version is better than any previous version. And this is a valid listening position for this album - since it was intended for mono, there is no original "sound stage" that is part of the album, so there is no valid reason for sitting in the "sweet spot"...

That's an interesting take on it, and I find myself agreeing with it. Not because I don't think it was mixed with the intention of the listener assuming the usual position, but because it sorta works in really interesting ways as I reorient myself around the room. (I really did turn myself to face the left wall for a period of time.) Maybe this works as the first party-room surround mix, which isn't exactly a bad idea. I confess that I sometimes wish my wife didn't move me a half-seat out of the sweet spot when we listen together. Losing the anchor isn't such a bad thing (and I mean the "sweet spot", not the wife).

 

[Justin Lane]

I listened to this surround mix again, and came to the conclusion that equi-distant spacing for all speakers is a must for listening in the sweet spot. If you are too far left or right, or have your surrounds placed closer to the listening postion than your mains, the three dimensional nature of the mix will be lost. I am also starting to think this may be more of a party mix, offering a decent presentation for everyone in the listening environment.

I did find the mono mix lacking especially after listening to the surround, but the stereo I felt holds up well and is a very nice presentation of the material.

J

 

[Michael St. Clair]

By the way, this points out that DVD-Audio is only necessary to provide multichannel sound - DVD-Video was already capable of high-resolution stereo playback at the same 24bit/96khz spec as the multichannel mixes on DVD-A.

In this case, yes. If the disc had 24/192 stereo, DVD-A would be necessary for that version as well.

 

[Page]

I had bought this title and was waiting for some more opinions before opening it. (From that less than inspiring review at High Fidelity Review and the opinions of some of the members on this forum, I thought perhaps that the initial pressing of this DVD-A might be defective.) Curiosity got the better of me and I opened it this weekend and listened. It is nowhere as bad as I feared it was going to be. (I was afraid that there was going to be little to no bass from my subwoofer and that the sound of the album was going to be "lopsided" coming from my speakers.) Actually, I like it quite a lot. It sounds really good and the missing center channel doesn't bother me at all. I've heard "Pet Sounds" so many times over the years and realize that is not a "bass heavy" recording so the bass that my subwoofer is outputing sounds correct. (Why that reviewer at High Fidelity wasn't getting ANY bass, I don't know. Maybe his sub was faulty...or unplugged.)

I agree with Ken Stuart that the 5.1 mix is the best that "Pet Sounds" has ever sounded...(Peter Gabriel's "UP" is my favorite mulitchannel recording because of its attempt to really use the multichannel soundscape and all its possibilites.), but the "Pet Sounds" DVD-A sounds fine (to me) due to the age of the initial recording and idea of incorporating the initial artistic intent of the album.

 

[LarryDavenport]

I bought so many disc this weekend that I didn't have a chance to listen to all of Pet Sounds but I have to say that Caroline No sounded superb.

 

[Felix Martinez]

As someone who's recently purchased a DVD-A player, I can relate to your frustration. I don't know if it's my player (Denon DVD-1600) or the DVD-A format, or the discs I own, but changing audio tracks is absurdly unintuitive & inconvenient.

You can browse 99% of DVD-As out there with the Group button on your remote. I have a projector system and I rarely turn it on for casual listening (unless I want to see the goodies on the discs).

Some newer titles (like Donald Fagen's Kamakiriad) have been authored to allow you to toggle with the Audio button in DVD-A mode.

Switching between the stereo and multi-channel SACD layers is a real pain and, unless I'm missing something, you *do* need a monitor to see change the SACD set-up. I have a little miniDV camera I have connected to the player via s-video for these annoying instances (the projector is getting a progressive scan signal via component).

Cheers,

 

[Ken Stuart]

Switching between the stereo and multi-channel SACD layers is a real pain and, unless I'm missing something, you *do* need a monitor to see change the SACD set-up.

My Sony has big colored LEDs that indicate whether multichannel is playing and whether SACD is playing...

 

[Felix Martinez]

My Sony has big colored LEDs that indicate whether multichannel is playing and whether SACD is playing...

But to switch between the stereo and multi-channel SACD formats, don't you have to go into the DVD Player's set-up screen to set that preference (I have to do this with my Onkyo universal player)?

Cheers,

 

[Dan B]

Nope, my Sony SACD player (which doesn't have any video output) is very easy to switch between 2 channel & multi-channel just by hitting a button on the remote.

I'm still trying to figure out the Denon DVD-Audio. It seems that I need to switch DVD-Video Mode off & on to access certain features on DVD-Audio discs...and I don't ever know what features it turns on & off. (not to mention they should have called it DVD-Audio Mode instead of DVD-Video Mode IMO) When using the group button to toggle between the audio tracks, it doesn't always give a good indication of what audio format is playing...either on the Denon display or the TV display.

 

[Rich Malloy]

You definitely don't need a monitor for SACD... and unless you've got a combo DVD/SACD player, you can't even hook a monitor to it.

To change between SACD/CD layers requires the push of one button on my remote or my player. To change between stereo and multichannel likewise requires the push of one button.

But this is something that the DVD-A format is addressing, and I'm glad to hear it's all but entirely fixed at least for DVD-A tracks with the "group" button (or whatever). It seems like an easy fix for Dolby Digital, DTS and LPCM tracks too... why not just let me toggle between them using my audio button, just as I do for (most) DVD-Video discs?

 

[Justin Lane]

You definitely don't need a monitor for SACD... and unless you've got a combo DVD/SACD player, you can't even hook a monitor to it.

Rich,

This is only true if you own an SACD only player. Some of the newer universals require you to go into the players set up menu to change between stereo and multichannel tracks. As the SACD format progresses, it is becoming more and more like DVD-A, including reliability on a monitor in the new universals and the possible release of SACD II, which mirrors the functionality of a DVD-A.

Us owners of early audio only SACD players dont need to go into a menu to switch between tracks, but we do have to stop the music and then press a button to do so. With most DVD-A, a switch between tracks requires no stopping of the music, and just a simple push of the group or audio button without use of a monitor to switch between tracks.

With the apparent death of audio only players, the improved DVD-A authoring, and the probable proliferation of universals, any user friendly advantage SACD may have, seems to be going out the window.

J

 

[John Kotches]

I have a Philips SACD1000, which is a DVD/SACD player and can toggle between MC and Stereo with the "Sound Mode" button.

I don't even have the composite output hooked up for the time being.

Regards,

 

[Larry Geller]

I think I've solved the mono problem
After seeing so many different reactions (mostly negative) about the mono mix on the DVD-A, I was really eager to see for myself when I got the disc on Friday. After listening to it, I think that I have figured out what is wrong. This all applies to the DVD-A side & the DVD-V side. First of all, many people couldn't get their decoders to decode the mono mix, but were able to decode the stereo mix. I am one of them. Secondly, some people seem to think it's a 2.0 mono track, while other refer to a 1.0 center-channel-only mix. The problem is EVERYBODY IS RIGHT! The problem is due to an authoring mistake, but there is also a SECOND authoring problem, that causes my DVD-A player (Toshiba 5700) to DECODE THE DISC INTO DOLBY PRO LOGIC when you listen to the mono track with the player set to 6-channel analog and use the receiver's (Yamaha DSP A-1) 6-channel input to listen. THIS IS WHY IT CAME OUT OF THE CENTER CHANNEL ONLY, LACKED BASS & GENERALLY SOUNDED CRAPPY! In order to get it to play properly in 2.0, I had to set the DVD-A player to bitstream & listen to the receiver thru the regular DVD input set to analog. Once you do this all the bass comes back (on Let's Go Away For Awhile it's MASSIVE--if you have a lack of bass at the beginning of the track then you probably have the above problem) and the sound becomes very acceptable. Now, I haven't compared it with Steve's yet, but what I hear now is far from "unlistenable"!
Your player-amp combo may handle this issue differently than my setup, but I think that this is the crux of the problem.

Now, on to my thoughts on the disc. This disc is how the Beatles should be done & has convinced me as to DVD-A over SACD. There is no way SACD could handle the kind of perfect package we have here--THREE mixes, FOUR videos, lyrics on screen as the disc plays, FORTY-FIVE minutes of musical Discography highlights, tons of photos, liner notes and credits. THIS is value for your money (even at EMI's ridiculously high price).

This is the BEST PIECE OF SOFTWARE EVER RELEASED IN THE HISTORY OF MUSIC!!!

BTW, I like it.



also---Normally, I listen to all hi-rez tracks with the DVD-A player set to 6-ch analog thru my receiver's 6-ch input. However, when I do this with Pet Sounds, the DVD-A player automatically engages Dolby Pro-Logic & routes it to the center channel ONLY. I can tell this because when I go into the DVD player's display it says "Dolby Pro-Logic". Another weird thing I didn't mention in the last post is that if the player is set to 6-CH, but I listen to my regular DVD input set to digital, THEN I can decode the digital 2-CH mono signal, something that also shouldn't happen!

 

[Ken_McAlinden]

It seems like an easy fix for Dolby Digital, DTS and LPCM tracks too... why not just let me toggle between them using my audio button

Rich,
Quite frequently, different mixes (mono, 2 channel, multi-channel) will have slight variations in running time due to fades, slight variations in tape machine speeds, and other such stuff. As such, while I think it makes a lot of sense to be able to switch on the fly between different codecs of the same mix (e.g. DD 5.1 & DTS), it would be impractical to do it for different mixes in many cases.

Regards,

 

[Rich Malloy]

I should have been more clear, Ken...

While it'd be great to toggle between tracks "on-the-fly", I'd simply like to be able to toggle between them before hitting "PLAY" (or, likewise, "STOP", "toggle", "PLAY"). I outlined the steps required to switch between tracks on this disc in an earlier post, and of those steps I suggest that there are at least 3-4 extraneous ones. And monitor required.

This is only a minor hassle, however. But it seems the fix should be an easy one.

 

[Steve_AS]

Rich,

Yes, via the digital connection I can get mono and stereo without downcoversion.

My amplifier is Yamaha DSP-AZ1 and my player is Pioneer 747 or 47A (in the United States)

Hmm. With 'Linear PCM out' set to Down Sample Off, My
Pioneer DV-45a passes the *mono* via digital at the full 96/24, but according to the audio display the *stereo* 96/24 is downsampled for digital output. When I set it to Down Sample On, I get a downsample message for both mono and stereo. Are you sure yours isn't downsampling the stereo tracks? If so, it's an interesting difference between the 47a and 45a.

 

[Rich Malloy]

Hmmmm... this is sorta interesting. Can anyone confirm beyond the shadow of a doubt that they are sending the 24/96 stereo signal via digital connection? No "internal downsampling", whether selected or automatically triggered?

I am certain that I'm getting the mono signal without downsampling via the digital connection as both my Pioneer 414's "96kH" light is illuminated and my Outlaw 1050 receiver flashes "PCM 96K" when it locks on and plays. However, when I select the stereo track, the "96kH" light on my player illuminates and my receiver flashes "PCM 96K", but doesn't lock on the signal. It will only lock onto the stereo track signal (via digital connection) if a manually reset my Pioneer 414 to "downsample" (is that the correct term?) all 96kH signals to 48kH. The Pioneer 414 still identifies the track playing as "96kH", but my receiver does NOT flash the "PCM 96K" light before locking onto the signal... which it now can lock on and playback.

I guess an interesting followup question would be whether anyone CANNOT playback the mono 24/96 track via the digital connection without "downsampling" to 48kH?

 

[Paul.S]

Larry Geller, you raise some very interesting issues in your post #35.

Rich M.: you mentioned the electronic (the lights on your Pio 414 and Outlaw 1050) confirmation of the mono mix apparently being played back at its native 96/24 resolution but the stereo mix being down-rezed when playing via your digital connection, but not any aural confirmation (how do they sound comparatively speaking?).

I know the mono versus stereo difference will probably make sound quality comparisons more difficult, but I'm curious about how the hopefully 96/24 mono mix your 414 and 1050 are playing back compares to the (allegedly) down-rezed stereo 96/24 track.

The reason I ask/make this point is because--especially given Lerry Geller's post #35--what if the disc is flagged incorrectly, causing some receivers and/or players to incorrectly indicate whether you are hearing 96/24 or not? This would hardly be a first in the DVD world.

As some engineers have told me, 'trust your ears, not the meters.' In addition to hopefully some sound quality comments from you, I look forward to responses from other listeners on this.

Paul