HiRez Poll Benson, George - BREEZIN' [SACD/DVD-A]

[bmoura]

Mine's in the mail - I'm looking forward to comparing it to the DVD-A release.

And that is the key. Compared to the DVD-A 5.1 mix, this is an improvement. No question.

 

[bmoura]

It had to start somehow with something deemed marketable by their standards, however we might disagree.

True. All of the reissue labels are looking for titles that will sell. Both to the fans who want Stereo remastering and now the Surround fans.
Since Breezin' is the #1 Top Selling Jazz album of all time, it's a pretty logical choice to start with from the record company's point of view.

 

[steelydave]

And that is the key. Compared to the DVD-A 5.1 mix, this is an improvement. No question.

Can you explain how it's improved? Was the 5.1 mix actually remastered for the SACD release or did they just transcode the PCM mastering to DSD? Did Doug Sax really remaster the 5.1 mix a second time? Did they alter channel levels and/or tonality?

 

[bmoura]

Can you explain how it's improved? Was the 5.1 mix actually remastered for the SACD release or did they just transcode the PCM mastering to DSD? Did Doug Sax really remaster the 5.1 mix a second time? Did they alter channel levels and/or tonality?

To my ears, the underlying mix is the same but the levels have been tweaked. It makes the 5.1 AF SACD edition more listenable than they were on the 5.1 DVD-A. I compared the two editions and definitely prefer the new AF 5.1 SACD.
For the Stereo tracks, both the SACD Stereo and the CD Stereo were created from scratch by Steve Hoffman from the original Analog Master Tapes. Another improvement.

 

[Daggg]

Any cover scans possible high quality? Thanks in advance!

 

[Which_One_Is_Pink]

As has been said not a spectacular mix (tho as said slightly better than the DVDA) but not really bad either just not as adventurous as it could be and the fidelity not as good as it should be for the music, but I do love the music and over all with the lights down low and my eyes closed in the end I enjoyed it and am glad I have it. An 8 for me.

 

[LizardKing]

Any cover scans possible high quality? Thanks in advance!

Here you go....



I seem to have been shipped a really low number of the "limited" edition...

 

[Snood]

---

Dammmmmmn! Did George himself knock on your door to deliver it toooooooo?:banana:

Snood review to follow soon

 

[corneredcat]

Here you go....
View attachment 16069

I seem to have been shipped a really low number of the "limited" edition...

wow! number 1....too cool!

 

[bktouchstone]

If you've ever been to the dentist you've head all of these, but the surround mix sounds really good to me. This is a worthy purchase and I like the music. I think an 8 rating seems about right.

 

[IMachine]

I also had never problems with reverb or too less going on in the rears.
I have the DVD-A so I pass the SACD.
But super session is on it's way

I gave 7.

 

[blue.monk]

These comments are based on the new AF SACD. First of all I make no apologies for digging the content. Sure, it's a product of its time but I find it more musically satisfying and adventurous than its MOR reputation would convey. I have no issues with the surround soundstage. I find it effective and appropriate (band primarily in fronts with auxiliary percussion in rears). However I do find the use of reverb excessive, particularly for guitar and voice. Curiously the center channel is very faint but contains a bone dry feed of guitar and voice (along with bass and drums). If this channel were hotter it may have helped them feel more focused (or, of course, they could have just dialed down the damn 'verb!). I don't have the DVD-A for comparison but I'm glad to hear that folks find this release an improvement. The Hoffman mastering on the stereo layer sounds terrific. An 8 for me.

 

[John Svensson]

Any other reviews or a vote? Mine is in the mail.....John

 

[GOS]

I was pretty excited to get the SACD, only to be very disappointed. I seriously only listened to the first 2 songs. That was enough to tell me it was simply a very weak mix. Where the hell is the bass? Waste of my money. I give it a 5.

 

[steelydave]

I outlined the problems with the DVD-A version of this album in this thread, and to be honest a combination of morbid curiousity, cheap price, and the fact that Brian Moura WOULDN'T SHUT UP (honestly, does this guy work for Audio Fidelity or something? ) about the fact that the SACD sounded different/better than the old DVD-A led me to end up buying it.

I'm happy to report that the SACD, while not perfect (and missing the DVD-A bonus tracks) is a significant improvement over the old DVD-A and not just a simple recycling of the old master.


If you read my old thread, one of the problems I had with the DVD-A was that the frequency response abruptly cut off at 18kHz, which isn't even CD quality, and definitely not 'high resolution'. There's a perfect example of this treble loss in the first track, 'Breezin'' - there's a tambourine mixed in the rear left channel, and on the DVD-A it's really harsh and mid-rangey, which is totally unlike the stereo mix where it's nice and smooth and sits perfectly in the mix. The problem isn't that the midrange has been boosted on the DVD-A, it's missing all of that high frequency goodness so its midrange sticks out like a sore thumb by comparison. The new SACD has high frequency content well above 30kHz, and tonally sounds much more like the original stereo mix, ie. really good.


Have a look at this spectral analysis of the first track on the album, Breezin'. The green plot is the DVD-A (PCM) version...notice how it dives off a cliff starting at 10kHz and is totally gone well before 20kHz. Now look at the pink plot, which is the SACD (DSD) version, which shows flat frequency response well up to 20kHz and beyond.



I don't know if the mastering of the 5.1 is technically a new mastering, but it's definitely different from the mastering on the DVD-A. In addition to the high frequency content you can see there's a bit of pronounced bass response between 300Hz and 400Hz on that plot too. Also, the LFE channel appears to be newly derived - it's louder than the old one, and on track 6 ('Lady') the DVD-A had the orchestral intro in the LFE channel (copy and paste mistake?) whereas this new SACD does not. Interesting!

Having said that, I still think you need to pretty radically boost the center speaker to make this mix sound good. If you're listening to this album thinking 'where's the bass?' the answer is 'it's in the center speaker!' Based on my previous alterations of the center speaker for tweaking the 5.1 mix on the DVD-A I've come up with some new numbers for tweaking the SACD version if you've converted it to PCM like me and are going to re-author to FLAC. They are as follows: Track 1: 10.5dB, Track 2: 14dB, Track 3: 12.5dB, Track 4: 12.5dB, Track 5: 10.5dB, Track 6: 12.5dB. I don't feel that you need to tweak the LFE track on this release because the newly derived version on this release seems to do the job.

Is this a great mix? Probably not. But I definitely think it's a good one, especially if you boost the center speaker. The new SACD is a substantial improvement in sound quality over the old version and I'm glad it's been released. If you like this album at all, I think it's worth buying - I don't think it deserves the 'smooth jazz' moniker a lot of people use derisively to describe it either. There are a lot of strings and other sweeteners used to broaden it's appeal, but at the core of the album is some really strong, sometimes aggressive ensemble playing.

 

[IMachine]

I outlined the problems with the DVD-A version of this album in this thread, and to be honest a combination of morbid curiousity, cheap price, and the fact that Brian Moura WOULDN'T SHUT UP (honestly, does this guy work for Audio Fidelity or something? ) about the fact that the SACD sounded different/better than the old DVD-A led me to end up buying it.

I'm happy to report that the SACD, while not perfect (and missing the DVD-A bonus tracks) is a significant improvement over the old DVD-A and not just a simple recycling of the old master.


If you read my old thread, one of the problems I had with the DVD-A was that the frequency response abruptly cut off at 18kHz, which isn't even CD quality, and definitely not 'high resolution'. There's a perfect example of this treble loss in the first track, 'Breezin'' - there's a tambourine mixed in the rear left channel, and on the DVD-A it's really harsh and mid-rangey, which is totally unlike the stereo mix where it's nice and smooth and sits perfectly in the mix. The problem isn't that the midrange has been boosted on the DVD-A, it's missing all of that high frequency goodness so its midrange sticks out like a sore thumb by comparison. The new SACD has high frequency content well above 30kHz, and tonally sounds much more like the original stereo mix, ie. really good.


Have a look at this spectral analysis of the first track on the album, Breezin'. The green plot is the DVD-A (PCM) version...notice how it dives off a cliff starting at 10kHz and is totally gone well before 20kHz. Now look at the pink plot, which is the SACD (DSD) version, which shows flat frequency response well up to 20kHz and beyond.

View attachment 16935

I don't know if the mastering of the 5.1 is technically a new mastering, but it's definitely different from the mastering on the DVD-A. In addition to the high frequency content you can see there's a bit of pronounced bass response between 300Hz and 400Hz on that plot too. Also, the LFE channel appears to be newly derived - it's louder than the old one, and on track 6 ('Lady') the DVD-A had the orchestral intro in the LFE channel (copy and paste mistake?) whereas this new SACD does not. Interesting!

Having said that, I still think you need to pretty radically boost the center speaker to make this mix sound good. If you're listening to this album thinking 'where's the bass?' the answer is 'it's in the center speaker!' Based on my previous alterations of the center speaker for tweaking the 5.1 mix on the DVD-A I've come up with some new numbers for tweaking the SACD version if you've converted it to PCM like me and are going to re-author to FLAC. They are as follows: Track 1: 10.5dB, Track 2: 14dB, Track 3: 12.5dB, Track 4: 12.5dB, Track 5: 10.5dB, Track 6: 12.5dB. I don't feel that you need to tweak the LFE track on this release because the newly derived version on this release seems to do the job.

Is this a great mix? Probably not. But I definitely think it's a good one, especially if you boost the center speaker. The new SACD is a substantial improvement in sound quality over the old version and I'm glad it's been released. If you like this album at all, I think it's worth buying - I don't think it deserves the 'smooth jazz' moniker a lot of people use derisively to describe it either. There are a lot of strings and other sweeteners used to broaden it's appeal, but at the core of the album is some really strong, sometimes aggressive ensemble playing.

Interesting.
But, I have learned that a roll-off in the high frequency range is totally usual.
The curve from the SACD seems strange to me.
OK, the roll-off starts too early, but not doing a roll-off is not the normal way.

 

[ar surround]

I never owned this title before but recall most of the cuts from the soothing, "cool jazz" chill-out radio stations of the '90s. I would say that I prefer listening to the stereo layer augmented with PLIIx (or Lexicon Logic 7 even more so.) But I can say that I dislike the ambient 5.1 mix. This is another title that I am glad to have acquired while the price is still reasonable. I gave it a 7, but probably should have given an 8. Content is a 10. Benson's playing is superb.

 

[Spock]

Great album and an ok surround mix - but what happened to the dynamics? It sounds very flat. I give it a 6. The vote is for the sacd.

 

[kap'n krunch]

as a pancake

 

[Spock]

as a pancake

Yes - very disappointing, I do like the album