HiRez Poll Beatles, The - Sgt Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club Band [BluRay]

[GOS]

I think I will now listen to Pepper...in 5.1....and comment further about how I like it.

 

[kap'n krunch]

Will you still need me, will you still feed me - when I"m 55?!

dang I just thought about it.. I AM 54!!
STUDIO 54!!!!

 

[4-earredwonder]

I think you voted a 9 or 10 initially on this release and then changed it to a 6...I thought you would be happy and just let it go...but evidently you haven't....I just question your contention that "many" people feel the way you do about this release because it's not reflected in the voting even though they can change their vote...and your contention that only quality releases are both discrete and not overly loud...I don't consider this release "overly loud" and there are quite a few highly regarded(quality)releases that aren't very discrete...I do give you credit for admitting that you had "over expectations"....this statement from a member is an illustration of my point..."sonically it sounds as good as I have ever heard it, but the piles of disappointment at what (might)have been weighs heavy on this release"....so it's the best sounding version of this album ever released...but it's not as good as he thought it would be...if that's not an expectation problem I've never seen one..so that's all I can say on this matter...you can beat this dead horse if you wish...but I'm done...

First and foremost, Clint, I think it was prudent that Jon and fellow moderators allowed us to change our initial votes. With all the superb surround remixes bestowed upon us just this year, especially the [IMO] brilliant D~V 70's QUAD SACDs, Pepper sounded TEPID in comparison.

I know you and other Beatles' purists don't relish THIS comparison, but after hearing LOVE over the years, the Pepper remixes and ALL Giles/Sir George's Beatles' remixes on that 'compilation' were TRUE 10's and sounded MUCH MORE buttery smooth, at least on my system, compared to Pepper which ran HOT!

In a democratic society, the right to alter one's opinion should NOT BE QUESTIONED and no one should be chided if they diminished their original votes.

And such changes should not deter any perspective buyers from purchasing the Sgt. Pepper boxset. There are a majority of 10's, 9's and 8's which in and of themselves point to a very satisfied fan base but if you're concerned with those who voted lower, FOR ANY REASON, remember that it IS their perogative to do so.

 

[jimfisheye]

I stand by my bad attitude on this one. High fidelity might not be the end all be all. Sometimes creativity trumps all else (that was supposed to be "beats" - the old definition). There's just something so distracting about hearing a surround mix that is clearly lower fidelity that the stereo version when you are familiar with it. It's easier to be forgiving when it's a stepped on 40 year old Q8. (That's still disappointing though even then.) You're right Clint, I definitely had expectations. Some people kind of made a big deal about this band and that helped lead to expecting perfection from the masters on this kind of big deal of an album. Sorry for breaking your etiquette on the poll. I'm just going to leave that all alone and write things.

Some of these lesser fidelity reissues really smell of intentional work to keep selling marginal upgrades over and over too. That marketing greed bit pisses me off when it happens to music and gets me going. Maybe they'll work their way back to how it used to sound one day? That sounds paranoid... But the thought that top engineers working on something as revered as this could not really know what they're doing and innocently screw it all up is just ridiculous.

 

[Frogmort]

I'm listening to this in TrueHD EX 6.1 on my 7.2 setup, and I swear there seems to be better surround than from the 5.1 DTS-MA. I've listened to both versions ripped to flac and they sounded pretty much identical, but I think there is some actual flagged info that is lost sometimes when ripping to flac, particularly with Atmos or DTS-X. Even though I don't have a receiver and speakers that do object based sound, there is something definitely stripped away by ripping to flac from Atmos or DTS-X.

On my particular setup, the added rear center matrixed channel from the 6.1, spread across my back surround channels naturally adds to the general surround back-fill, and makes me feel less like the surrounds should've been mixed louder in the 5.1. The TrueHD EX 6.1 actually sounds fuller in the surrounds, on my setup.

 

[oxenholme]

Several times I have attempted to listen to this Blu-ray. I can never last more than a couple of tracks before stopping it. Loud, in the face, strange eq.
The only mixes that I find okay are Strawberry Fields and Penny Lane. Fixing A Hole is almost okay. Dolby TrueHD. DTS is a waste of space.

I go back to the original LP. Nice quirky mixes, lovely sound. A joy to listen to.

I am surprised that I gave this let down a 6. I must have been feeling generous.

 

[Simon A]

Several times I have attempted to listen to this Blu-ray. I can never last more than a couple of tracks before stopping it. Loud, in the face, strange eq.
The only mixes that I find okay are Strawberry Fields and Penny Lane. Fixing A Hole is almost okay. Dolby TrueHD. DTS is a waste of space.

I go back to the original LP. Nice quirky mixes, lovely sound. A joy to listen to.

I am surprised that I gave this let down a 6. I must have been feeling generous.

You do know you can change your vote, right? You're more than allowed to change this to a 2 or a 3 if you feel like it.

 

[jdmack]

I didn't love this when it first came out, so I put the blu ray away and figured I'd wait a while before listening to it again. I listened to it last weekend, and I was struck by the same two issues that bugged me the first time. First is that if I play this too loud, the midrange has a harshness that fatigues my ears fairly quickly. The other thing is that instruments and vocals are either entirely in the front, or half way between front and rear. There is hardly anything exclusively in rear channels (if anything at all). I really enjoy the new stereo mix, but I don't think I'll be putting on the 5.1 mix again.

 

[Franklin]

The other thing is that instruments and vocals are either entirely in the front, or half way between front and rear. There is hardly anything exclusively in rear channels (if anything at all). I really enjoy the new stereo mix, but I don't think I'll be putting on the 5.1 mix again.

Have you tried boosting the rears by 3dB? (For the album only, not the single) It makes a real difference.

 

[edisonbaggins]

Have you tried boosting the rears by 3dB? (For the album only, not the single) It makes a real difference.

IIRC, I prefer the Dolby to the DTS on this one. There are claims or theories that the Dolby was encoding in 6.1. As I have a 7.1 setup, perhaps this would open up or enhance the rears of the Dolby mix a bit.
I agree that lowering the fronts by 3dB helps the album enourmously, both in Dolby and DTS.

 

[jdmack]

Have you tried boosting the rears by 3dB? (For the album only, not the single) It makes a real difference.

Thanks! I'm willing to give it a shot. But I have a switching system that allows me to listen to just the front or just the rear speakers, so I know that anything in the rears is also in the fronts to some degree. That said, maybe I should try edisonbaggins' suggestion above and listen to the Dolby mix.

 

[jdmack]

OK, I tried the above suggestions and moved my score to an "8." It still has a harshness in the midrange to my ears, but the content is an 11, so I have to take that into consideration when scoring.

 

[Franklin]

Yeah, the sound is harsher than I'd want too.

 

[MikeMonaco]

 

[GOS]

LOL! Awesome....more data.

 

[beerking]

Who ate all the pies?

 

[beerking]

Blimey didn't vote on this ...good job me head is screwed on otherwise it would fall off!!

Desperately want to give it a 10 but sorry folks a 9 it is.

Giles deff missed a trick here.

6 more days to go!!

 

[sjcorne]

So I finally picked this up during Barnes & Noble's great Black Friday sale. I'm gonna give it an 8. This box is a monster! Love how they made it look like the master tape box.

The 5.1 mix has been well-covered at this point, not much to add that hasn't already been said. I absolutely agree that a 3 dB drop on the front three channels is necessary to enjoy this. "Strawberry Fields" is really active and well done, love how the harp pans around the room. "Fixing A Hole" and "When I'm 64" are also pretty good in terms of discrete rear activity. The rest is spotty, most songs seem to have more going on in the side-walls than the rears themselves. I have to assume there were some limitations here, even though Giles had access to pre-bounced multis.

 

[windhoek]

My first foray into the polls. Here goes...

Sonics
- Dynamic range 5/10 - not the worst but certainly not the best
- Equalisation 10/10 - no marks lost

Mix
- Degree of discreteness 5/10 - a safe, middle of the road mix
- Cohesion of mix 8/10

Content
- Quality of music 10/10
- Quality of performance 10/10

Packaging
- Function 10/10 - everything's easily accessible
- Form 9/10 - top drawer packaging… but it’s bloody big and a wee bit awkward when it comes to storing it next to similar-sized box-sets/LPs

Bonus Points
- Value 6/10 - considering no LPs are included, it’s a lot of money for a book, some pictures, 4-CDs, 1-DVD and 1-blu ray
- Satisfaction 7/10 - points lost because of dynamic range, the degree of discreteness and cost

Total 84/100
QQ Total 8/10

EDIT: I just changed my vote from 8 to 7 having heard subsequent Beatles multichannel mixes that are so much better than the 8 given for this mix, which is simply too generous by comparison. There's just no way I'm prepared to say the mixes on White Album and Abbey Road are just a smidge better and so the scores need to reflect that gulf in quality.

 

[Franklin]

Like the working out!