Al Stewart's "Year of the Cat" (Remixed in 5.1 surround by Alan Parsons!!)

[Charly Mann]

I get a little better sound on the 5.1 mix with the DOLBY option - though I did my own 5.1 mix of the album some years ago with some inexpensive software (about $40), and in many ways that mix is less muddy and more discrete. - I got my box set from AMAZON USA yesterday.

 

[sjcorne]

Now let's see if "Time Passages" appears some day.

Mark Powell at Esoteric already announced on Facebook that it's coming later this year

 

[J. PUPSTER]

Listened to just the Center channel of the Old and the New versions "Year of the Cat" in Audacity just now and compared some things (with charts)

Overall, I'd say the new version is almost twice as loud (center channels only) as the old version.

On the old version (this is zoomed in considerably) there is an opening strum of guitar that's missing, and if you listen closely you can hear the difference, as you can see below:

Here's a Spectrogram view of about the first couple of minutes (Old on top)
- the new version is much brighter sounding, and the older version smoother (duller?); you can really tell on something like the cymbal crashes at around the 1:36-37 mark.

As to what's in the mix over all, they do sound similar to me with Center used primarily as a "Helper" channel, to help with a fuller front sound stage where nothing particular stands out.

Both have: Acoustic guitar, Drums w/cymbals, Bass Guitar, Orchestration (strings) at about 3:10; Sax solo at about 4:14; some Synth. keys at about 5:22 etc.; Electric Guitar solo at about 3:25 ( which seems to be brought out much hotter in the newer version than the old version.) And seems to me Al's vocals have more reverb applied to them on the new version.

 

[JonUrban]

Good job there, Mr. Pupster!

 

[JonUrban]

Mark Powell at Esoteric already announced on Facebook that it's coming later this year

That further implies that these are the original 2003 mixes, tweaked a bit and finally issued almost 20 years later. I would find it very difficult to believe that a label would commission a new surround mix of these two albums in 2021.

 

[sjcorne]

Mine arrived from Deep Discount earlier today. First impressions are mixed--I like the 5.1 mix from a surround perspective (plenty of isolated information in the rears, typically piano and strings), but the EQ applied makes it a bit of a tough listen. It's like they ran the entire mix through an acoustic guitar preset. I took around 3-5 dB out at 10 Khz on Foobar's graphic equalizer plugin, which seemed to help a bit.

 

[jefe1]

My copy just arrived from DeepDiscount today but no time to listen yet.....you're making me nervous what you said sjcorne.......

 

[J. PUPSTER]

My copy just arrived from DeepDiscount today but no time to listen yet.....you're making me nervous what you said sjcorne.......

ahh, don't worry about SJ, he's a young professional; he'll hear stuff us old farts don't have a snowball's chance in hell ever hearing again

 

[steelydave]

Mine arrived from Deep Discount earlier today. First impressions are mixed--I like the 5.1 mix from a surround perspective (plenty of isolated information in the rears, typically piano and strings), but the EQ applied makes it a bit of a tough listen. It's like they ran the entire mix through an acoustic guitar preset. I took around 3-5 dB out at 10 Khz on Foobar's graphic equalizer plugin, which seemed to help a bit.

I've noticed this trend with a number of major-label 5.1 releases (aside from Steven Wilson's stuff, where he apparently has enough clout to insist on no mastering of his mixes) of the last 5 years or so, they seem to be getting brighter and brighter as the years go on. This one is just the latest, and maybe most extreme example, but APP's Ammonia Avenue (and to an extent Eye in the Sky) suffers from it to, as do all the titles that Craig Anderson mastered for WMG, including the Fleetwood Mac 5.1s and especially the Doobie Bros. Quadio which it literally pains me to say is so bright it's pretty much unlistenable for me.

I'm not sure if the cause of this is aging mastering engineers who've lost the top end of their hearing and are compensating with EQ as a result of what they're hearing, or if they can hear fine and they're mastering with a listener lacking in top-end hearing in mind, but it seems entirely unnecessary either way. Giving the high end of the EQ spectrum a little bump in mastering can really make a vintage recording come alive, but what's going on with these is several levels of magnitude beyond that.

 

[jefe1]

Well pupster thats likely true but my hearing is not completely gone yet...
I made time to listen I find Flying Sorcery quite nice and spacious in DTS 5.1

I remember the songs off the radio like On the border and Year of The Cat. Broadway Hotel is a nice mix too.
Unsure about brightness on the top I feel it and it bothers my ears after awhile.

I can tell you this I much prefer stand alone discs.
I have no use for posters postcards books that you read once and large boxes to store. I am not 15 years old anymore. It of course is there to justify the price they want

In switching on the fly from DTS to Dolby I notice the dolby is at a much lower level.

It will take more listening to come to a conclusion.
I am not as analytical and cognizant as many here are on the mixes but do notice bad sound quality
My first love is music and I try to enjoy it and not think too much right away.

Wow this is a short album at 39 minutes.
My cat is sprawled on the bed its always the year of the cat here.....

 

[J. PUPSTER]

Well pupster thats likely true but my hearing is not completely gone yet...
Unsure about brightness on the top I feel it and it bothers my ears after awhile.
My cat is sprawled on the bed its always the year of the cat here.....

for some reason I read "rear of the Cat" OK maybe worry a little then... YCMV

 

[sjcorne]

I made time to listen I find Flying Sorcery quite nice and spacious in DTS 5.1

I remember the songs off the radio like On the border and Year of The Cat. Broadway Hotel is a nice mix too.

Those two in bold impressed me the most--I particularly liked the violin solo in the rear right speaker during "Broadway Hotel". In general, I'm finding the surround mixes on side 2 to be much more ambitious than side 1. "Lord Grenville" and "On The Border" seem to have a lot less going on in the rears than the other tracks.

 

[jefe1]

Oops I did a Gos there.......

 

[perzon57]

Glad to hear it's not only me that's not entirely satisficed with the sound.I tried the AC 3 with Dolby upmixing,and that worked well.Strings and some other sounds goes to the top speakers and I like it better this way.

 

[ar surround]

Mine arrived from Deep Discount earlier today. First impressions are mixed--I like the 5.1 mix from a surround perspective (plenty of isolated information in the rears, typically piano and strings), but the EQ applied makes it a bit of a tough listen. It's like they ran the entire mix through an acoustic guitar preset. I took around 3-5 dB out at 10 Khz on Foobar's graphic equalizer plugin, which seemed to help a bit.

I'm not sure if the cause of this is aging mastering engineers who've lost the top end of their hearing and are compensating with EQ as a result of what they're hearing, or if they can hear fine and they're mastering with a listener lacking in top-end hearing in mind, but it seems entirely unnecessary either way. Giving the high end of the EQ spectrum a little bump in mastering can really make a vintage recording come alive, but what's going on with these is several levels of magnitude beyond that.

Um, would that be me? I took the 22kHz - 8kHz high frequency test this afternoon and I can hear the 11kHz tone, but no higher. (Same as a couple of years ago.) However, I didn't notice the annoying high-end boost on the album as noted by Jonathan and Dave...Perhaps a blessing because it sounds very nice to my old ears.

Oh, and I also learned today that my new iMac has a cheap sound card because it generates "aliases" above 15kHz. Perhaps I should give Apple a hard time and demand a proper sound card under warranty. Wouldn't that be a blast? A useless exercise, but a blast.

 

[J. PUPSTER]

Mine arrived from Deep Discount earlier today. First impressions are mixed--I like the 5.1 mix from a surround perspective (plenty of isolated information in the rears, typically piano and strings), but the EQ applied makes it a bit of a tough listen. It's like they ran the entire mix through an acoustic guitar preset. I took around 3-5 dB out at 10 Khz on Foobar's graphic equalizer plugin, which seemed to help a bit.

May be dumb question but; does this Foobar plugin only make those adjustments as it's playing the files, or actually adjusts the files permanently?

 

[himey]

I've noticed this trend with a number of major-label 5.1 releases (aside from Steven Wilson's stuff, where he apparently has enough clout to insist on no mastering of his mixes) of the last 5 years or so, they seem to be getting brighter and brighter as the years go on. This one is just the latest, and maybe most extreme example, but APP's Ammonia Avenue (and to an extent Eye in the Sky) suffers from it to, as do all the titles that Craig Anderson mastered for WMG, including the Fleetwood Mac 5.1s and especially the Doobie Bros. Quadio which it literally pains me to say is so bright it's pretty much unlistenable for me.

I'm not sure if the cause of this is aging mastering engineers who've lost the top end of their hearing and are compensating with EQ as a result of what they're hearing, or if they can hear fine and they're mastering with a listener lacking in top-end hearing in mind, but it seems entirely unnecessary either way. Giving the high end of the EQ spectrum a little bump in mastering can really make a vintage recording come alive, but what's going on with these is several levels of magnitude beyond that.

I wouldn't put the Doobies in the unlistenable category but I will admit, the dubs from the reels sound more natural.

Do you put the Chicago quadio's in the same category? Personally I don't, thankfully.

 

[sjcorne]

May be dumb question but; does this Foobar plugin only make those adjustments as it's playing the files, or actually adjusts the files permanently?

Only as it's playing the files. This is the quick-and-dirty curve I came up with to soften the hi-hat in "On The Border":

In case anyone's wondering, some multichannel recordings I would consider to have 'perfect' tonal balance are Donald Fagen's Kamakiriad, The Pineapple Thief's Versions Of The Truth, and Ultravox's Vienna.

 

[The Rang]

I wouldn't put the Doobies in the unlistenable category but I will admit, the dubs from the reels sound more natural.

Do you put the Chicago quadio's in the same category? Personally I don't, thankfully.

Gee, now I’m hearing this about the Doobies Set, long after I bought it.
I got it for the 2.0 (which was redundant anyway because I have the MoFi SACDs).
A friend also owns both, will suggest we do a comparison and if I don’t like what I hear on the BRDs I’ll sell my sealed copy

 

[4-earredwonder]

Gee, now I’m hearing this about the Doobies Set, long after I bought it.
I got it for the 2.0 (which was redundant anyway because I have the MoFi SACDs).
A friend also owns both, will suggest we do a comparison and if I don’t like what I hear on the BRDs I’ll sell my sealed copy

Don't be hasty. On my system [separate components and full range speakers] the Doobie's QUADIO discs sound ASTOUNDING! Likewise, on my first listen, Year of the Cat considering it's DTS sounds amazing as well.