Michael Jackson's SACD's

Jonathan Burk

Second Unit
Joined
May 31, 1999
Messages
458
Location
Castaic, CA
Real Name
Jonathan Burk
From http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,30233,00.html :
I am also told that Jackson has spent not only millions on the making of Invincible, but millions more on the planned re-release of his catalogue by Sony this fall. All of his albums, from Off the Wall through HIStory, were remixed for the new Sony Super Audio CD format. But Jackson, working through an engineer, went through 50 different mixes of each song from each album. “He went through them and over and over again. It’s not like they hadn’t already been remastered for CD in the first place. And it was the same engineer who did it the first time. The guy just leaks money.”
Should be interesting.
 

KeithH

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Mar 28, 2000
Messages
9,413
I just read about this on Audio Asylum. It should be interesting. I've been very impressed with the Thriller stereo SACD, which I believe is slated for a stereo/multi-channel SACD release. I think the title track would be outstanding in surround sound. Otherwise, I would buy Off the Wall on SACD in a heartbeat.
------------------
My:
HT Pics ; Equipment List ; DVD Collection ; LD Collection
KeithH: Saving the Home Theater World Before Bedtime
 

Brian Perry

Senior HTF Member
Joined
May 6, 1999
Messages
2,807
The article does not mention whether or not these "remixes" are in surround sound or if they were done simply to improve the fidelity for SACD (or both). On the one hand, listening to 50 different versions of each song implies different surround mixes, at least to me. But I also believe -- and this has been an oft-stated concern of mine -- that they will tweak/eq the tracks to differentiate the sound from the CD version. In other words, whatever the final mix is, will they release the identical mix on plain old redbook CD? I don't think they will, because most people will not notice the difference unless they also do some audio sweetening.
Furthermore, wasn't Bad recorded digitally? If so, at what resolution? Chances are it was no more than 16-bits, in which case any purported claim of an improved mix for SACD or DVD-A would be completely bogus.
 

RicP

Screenwriter
Joined
Feb 29, 2000
Messages
1,126
Furthermore, wasn't Bad recorded digitally? If so, at what resolution? Chances are it was no more than 16-bits
Why do you say this?
Are you familiar with digital recording in a professional studio? If you are then you'll know that even as way back as 1981, they weren't recording with 16-bit resolution.
Bad was most likely recorded at a resolution equivalent to 24/88.2 and quite possibly higher if they remix each track individually.
------------------
Ric Perrott

My Theater ;My DVD's
 

RicP

Screenwriter
Joined
Feb 29, 2000
Messages
1,126
I don't understand what you're saying here. What does the remixing have to do with the specs of the original recording
What I meant was that you an achieve a higher quality in the remix if they still have the original multi-track stems in full 20/88 as opposed to intermediate mixes. By utilizing the isolated stems, they could create a very good multi-track master from the original high quality digital masters.

------------------
http://www.ricperrott.com
Ric Perrott
 

Forum Sponsors

Forum statistics

Threads
344,882
Messages
4,723,506
Members
141,351
Latest member
muskantdramu