Beck, Bogert & Appice in SACD Surround Sound from Sony Japan

QuadraphonicQuad

Help Support QuadraphonicQuad:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
That follows what I said earlier; the player knows 1) multichannel layer in use + 2) no LFE output detected. Thanks for posting that the BBA is 5.1 (sort of).

You're v.welcome as ever :)
I've no idea as a rank amateur (at best! not even that!) but I guess professionals just know to author these MultiCh discs as 5.0 or 5.1 with blank/silent channels since disc players/DACs etc don't all/always play ball when presented with anything other than that..? There has to be a standard doesn't there?
Maybe the Scarlet book or whatever it was for SACD lays down some of those ground rules for channel numbers and allocation in its spec.?
 
Thanks to everyone for all the new information that was added to this thread overnight!
So it appears that the new BBA SACD uses the same faux 5.1 presentation as the DTSCD, albeit with a different (better) mastering.
I'll probably get this SACD at some point when I can find it for a good enough price.
There's just too many other things I want to get right now to worry about this one, but the day will come! :)
 
Thanks to everyone for all the new information that was added to this thread overnight!
So it appears that the new BBA SACD uses the same faux 5.1 presentation as the DTSCD, albeit with a different (better) mastering.
I'll probably get this SACD at some point when I can find it for a good enough price.
There's just too many other things I want to get right now to worry about this one, but the day will come! :)

Well, I'm not sure its quite as straightforward as that (is it ever? :D ) in as much as the DTS CD does have a fake Centre & LFE (yes indeed!) but they sound at a relatively lower level than the fake Centre & LFE on the new SACD (although as I previously mentioned the new SACD sounds considerably louder overall than the old DTS CD).

I can't compare exactly because I've never been able to turn one of my DTS CD rips into anything other than the square box hedge of a DTS encoded WAV I'm presented with when I open the flaming things in Audacity! :eek:

Sorry to go OT for a second.. but if you Ryan or anyone else here has any tips on how to convert these DTS WAVs into FLAC (on a Mac, I know its easy on PC) please I'd love to know! TIA.
 
I finally sat down last night and listened critically on my main system to the newly remastered SONY Japan mch SACD of Beck, Bogert and Appice and I can state, unequivocally, that it's superior in every way, shape and form to the old DTS Entertainment RBCD......hands down.

I LOVE every song and of course heard things that the old DTS version could only hint at.

A MUST buy for Beck fans and look forward to more QUAD releases from SONY Japan.

Jon, can we expect a poll for this new release soon separate from that of the DTS RBCD?
 
I finally sat down last night and listened critically on my main system to the newly remastered SONY Japan mch SACD of Beck, Bogert and Appice and I can state, unequivocally, that it's superior in every way, shape and form to the old DTS Entertainment RBCD......hands down.

I LOVE every song and of course heard things that the old DTS version could only hint at.

A MUST buy for Beck fans and look forward to more QUAD releases from SONY Japan.

Jon, can we expect a poll for this new release soon separate from that of the DTS RBCD?

Great! It strikes you are a brand new transfer, and not the old one Sony would have provided to DTS 5.1, correct?
 
Great! It strikes you are a brand new transfer, and not the old one Sony would have provided to DTS 5.1, correct?

It may be the same. Both have "filler" info in the center and lfe instead of a "true" 4.0 mix. Those extra two channels really cripple dts and the limited bitrate, not so much with SACD, but I would prefer no filler channels on a quad mix.
 
Great! It strikes you are a brand new transfer, and not the old one Sony would have provided to DTS 5.1, correct?

More like brand new in the sense that they had access to either the original analogue QUAD master versus a 16/44.1 ADAT master from which DTS Entertainment RBCD was minted. There is an effortless quality to the recording and the surrounds and fronts blend together in a seamless fashion, much the way the AF QUAD FULL SAIL flows.....in other words, non gimmicky.

A little pricey but compared to AmazonUS ($81), CDJapan does offer the best price (roughly $50 delivered). I'm normally opposed to fancy packaging which adds a premium to the price but SONY has created a very cool 'giftwrap' for BB&A.

I'm hoping that robust sales will spur SONY to release other QUAD/5.1 SACDs from their arsenals as it would be a cryin' shame to keep these treasures under wraps.
 
More like brand new in the sense that they had access to either the original analogue QUAD master versus a 16/44.1 ADAT master from which DTS Entertainment RBCD was minted. There is an effortless quality to the recording and the surrounds and fronts blend together in a seamless fashion, much the way the AF QUAD FULL SAIL flows.....in other words, non gimmicky.

A little pricey but compared to AmazonUS ($81), CDJapan does offer the best price (roughly $50 delivered). I'm normally opposed to fancy packaging which adds a premium to the price but SONY has created a very cool 'giftwrap' for BB&A.

I'm hoping that robust sales will spur SONY to release other QUAD/5.1 SACDs from their arsenals as it would be a cryin' shame to keep these treasures under wraps.

Will you verify yea or nay to the added useless fill in the center and lfe like the dts-cd had? My memory is poor now that I am going to hit fifty in a couple months. Pretty sure someone posted the channels in Audicity. Or I am mixing this up with another recent release that also was on dts-cd.
If they went directly from the quad master, it makes no sense to add the filler channels once again. TIA

Edit. Post # 140 is my source. ...thanks marpow.
 
Will you verify yea or nay to the added useless fill in the center and lfe like the dts-cd had? My memory is poor now that I am going to hit fifty in a couple months. Pretty sure someone posted the channels in Audicity. Or I am mixing this up with another recent release that also was on dts-cd.
If they went directly from the quad master, it makes no sense to add the filler channels once again. TIA

Edit. Post # 140 is my source. ...thanks marpow.

Himey, I have a 4.2 channel set up (ALL full range speakers) in my main system and thus cannot comment on the center fill or .1 LFE channel. Sorry.
 
Will you verify yea or nay to the added useless fill in the center and lfe like the dts-cd had? My memory is poor now that I am going to hit fifty in a couple months. Pretty sure someone posted the channels in Audicity. Or I am mixing this up with another recent release that also was on dts-cd.
If they went directly from the quad master, it makes no sense to add the filler channels once again. TIA

Edit. Post # 140 is my source. ...thanks marpow.

From what I can see there is a synthesised Centre & LFE on the new SACD from Sony Japan, I put up a screengrab on here the other day showing that anyway.

I suspect that if that is the case, the Centre was derived from the Front L&R and the LFE is the sum of all 4 channels with everything above a certain low frequency filtered off.. but could be way off with that, it's just a hunch.
 
From what I can see there is a synthesised Centre & LFE on the new SACD from Sony Japan, I put up a screengrab on here the other day showing that anyway.

I suspect that if that is the case, the Centre was derived from the Front L&R and the LFE is the sum of all 4 channels with everything above a certain low frequency filtered off.. but could be way off with that, it's just a hunch.

I have NO idea why SONY felt it necessary to alter the original QUAD mix by summing the front l/r channels into a faux center. As we have all learned from AF's QUAD releases, a phantom center is more than capable of delivering a stunning synthesis of the front r/l channels and by synthesizing the bass to a .1 LFE channel and quite 'possibly' eliminating existent bass frequencies is totally unnecessary, IMO.

Leave well enough alone and let nature take its course. Those old QUAD mixes, when done properly, don't need any alterations, IMO. The word QUADRAPHONIC emblazoned across the top of the 7x7" cover SAYS IT ALL.
 
With Sony Japan doing the production and dist. of this effort (kind of in-house), and the higher than normal price point, they don't need as strong sales to make this a success, and worth continuing with more titles. It won't end up in the cutout bins so to speak.

I don't honestly know how large the quad / surround market is currently, but of course these Sony SACDs are not only for that market. Overall, it will sell out it's run, not driven by the surround market.

I might have to bite the bullet and buy this one, as it is 70s Jeff Beck, and it rocks.

Really hope they do Rough and Ready & Wired Quads..! :yikes :violin
 
Amazon US is finally getting this out on Aug. 9th. Was getting worried but all seems well now. They say I should receive it on Aug. 10 to 13. Only 54 bucks and not the 81 they are asking for now. I ordered it early before they jacked up the price. Free shipping too. I could have saved even more by going direct to Japan but ordering from Amazon is so easy for me I could not resist.
 
Thanks to the extreme generosity of another QQ member who wishes to remain nameless, I was able to get my hands on a copy of this album so that I could do one of my reviews/technical audits on it...oh and maybe enjoy the music as well. ;)

I'll save the pictures and graphs for later just in case you're the kind of person who tunes out on that kind of stuff - in a nutshell, my findings indicate that this SACD (contrary to what I was expecting) is from an entirely new hi-res transfer compared to the old DTS CD, and to my ears it's a very substantial (I wanted to say huge, but lets not go crazy ;) ) improvement over the old DTS CD. I've owned the DTS CD since it was released, and this new SACD is so much better that at times I felt like I was listening to a new mix - it addresses both of my major misgivings with the original DTS CD, one being that it was a bit 'hollow' in the bass and muffled in the top end, and that the sound field was a bit unbalanced, namely that the rear left speaker was too quiet. I know this is an expensive disc to buy but if you like this album, or Jeff Beck, or hard rock in general in surround, this is worth buying even if you own the old DTS CD. When I originally got this as a DTS CD 15 years ago, I remember being pretty disappointed with it and thinking that it sounded like they'd just taken the stereo version and done a 'set it and forget it' mix with the rhythm guitars in the rear speakers. The SACD reveals (to me at least) that this isn't the case at all - there are all kinds of discrete things in the rear speakers in addition to the rhythm guitars, and some tracks even feature the drums spread over all 4 speakers (main kit in the front, cymbals in the rears).

The quad mix was done by Don Young, who also did the quad mixes for the self-titled Jeff Beck Group albums (get it on SACD!) and Rough And Ready (hopefully on SACD someday soon) and I think this mix is definitely in the same league as the self-titled album quad mix, but maybe with a more consistent approach toward instrument placement from track to track compared to the self-titled album.


Some observations about this disc, in random order:

1.This is a 5.1 disc, but the center channel is so low in volume it doesn't really interfere at all with he 'quadness' of the playback or the front soundstage. In fact, the level of the center channel relative to the other channels is even lower than the center channel on the DTS CD.

2.There's way more bass on the new SACD version than the DTS CD, but it all comes from the .1 channel. If you turn off the .1 channel, the low end frequency response is almost identical to the old DTS CD. Having said that, I think the SACD sounds way better and way more 'full range' than the old DTS CD. The LFE track on the SACD starts to roll off after about 120Hz, versus the DTS CD which rolls off after 60Hz - the result is the SACD LFE track has a lot more bass guitar in it, whereas the DTS CD LFE is primarily just bass drum.

3.The top end is much smoother and better defined than the DTS CD. There are weird 'notches' in the frequency response of the DTS CD above about 12kHz (presumably due to the lossy DTS codec) that aren't present on the SACD, and from a more subjective viewpoint, there were a bunch of moments where things popped up in the rear speakers of the SACD, including guitars, piano, and especially vocals, with such clarity that actually made the hairs on the back of my neck stand up.

4.The dynamic range of both the 5.1 and 2.0 layers is excellent, measuring 11 on the DR meter. I compared the SACD stereo layer to my old late 80's/early 90's unremastered Epic CD (EK 32140) and a while few of the tracks on the CD have 1dB more dynamic range, but the difference is so small that EQ choices (ie more bass) could easily account for that difference. The quad mix seems similarly unmolested (5 of the tracks are DR11 and 3 are DR12) and the waveforms don't look crushed at all, not to mention that it sounds great and powerful to my ears. If they've done anything to this album dynamic range-wise, it's so minimal as to be inaudible.

5.The SACD appears to be from a completely new digital transfer vs. the DTS CD. Not only is there frequency response over 30kHz (you'd expect to see a sharp cutoff at 22.05kHz or 24kHz if this was from a 44.1kHz or 48kHz ADAT transfer) on the SACD, I lined up the waveforms from both the DTS CD and the SACD of the first track (Black Cat Moan) and they're slightly different in duration, which indicates that they're from different playbacks of the original analog tapes.

Spectrogram of track 1 (Black Cat Moan) showing frequency response easily up to 30kHz
01---front-left-spectro.jpg


Compare that to a spectrogram of a track from the Jeff Beck 'Blow By Blow' SACD - note the way the frequency spectrum is 'buzzcut' at 22kHz with nothing above that except for ultrasonic noise from the DSD process
jeffbeck_spectral.jpg


Waveform display of the 5.1 channels from Track 1 (Black Cat Moan) on the SACD - a few things of note here versus the DTS CD: the lower volume of the center channel, and the higher volume of the LFE track and left surround (LS) channel.

SACD - Track 1
track-1---SACD---waveform.jpg

DTS CD - Track 1
track-1---DTS---waveform.jpg

If anyone has any questions about this disc feel free to ask. And I don't think there's a poll thread for this title yet, but if there is one, or one is created mods, please feel free to move this post with my blessing.
 
Thanks for the info Steelydave.Now I'm even more interested to hear this. I thought that the DTS CD could have been better but at the time it was better than the Q8 which always sounded muddy to me. My Q8 of this is the only Columbia Q8 to have a reddish tape in the cart and I always figured it was the tape stock used.
 
Thanks to the extreme generosity of another QQ member who wishes to remain nameless..................

Thanks SteelyDave for the very comprehensive post. I did create a poll for this disc, and then copied your post above to that thread as "Post #2". This way folks can get your info both places!

Great job!!!
 
Back
Top