Jim.olga
Active Member
- Joined
- Jun 20, 2023
- Messages
- 58
Just for reference - I have a 5.1.2 system with the Atmos speakers up on the front wall. I have two Micro 3000s bridged.
HiRez Poll Bowie, David - THE RISE AND FALL OF ZIGGY STARDUST AND THE SPIDERS FROM MARS [Blu-ray Audio (Dolby Atmos)]
- Thread starter rtbluray
- Start date
Help Support QuadraphonicQuad:
I wasn't going to get this as I have 40th 5.1. However, Wilson's latest Larks Tongues Atmos was so good I figured I'd take a chance, though I'm unfamiliar with the guys doing this mix. I gave it an 8(thought about a 7). It does sound good but wasn't blown away like Larks. Not very adventurous and the vocal pan at the end of Suicide came off as gimmicky. Perhaps blasphemy but not my favorite Bowie. That would be either Scary Monsters or Man Who Sold the World. 5.2.2 system.
I have a 5.1 setup, so my Atmos is a fold down.
I think it sounds fantastic. Listened closely again with an ear toward the drums to see if I could hear anything off. Do the hits sound a bit too identical and sampled? Do they not fit with the music? The answer to both those questions is a resounding no. They are supplemented on top of the existing hits and it works well. I would prefer he worked more with the original tracks, but if they were on a stereo stem and not individual tracks, you couldn't EQ or affect them without affecting everything else. If he had just the snares or kick or toms, he could do a lot more with some EQ, maybe some light reverb, and possibly even doubling or detuning off the top of my head to make them less dry. But what he does works and fits the music. I think a big part of that is the bass has also been adjusted accordingly to sit well with the drums. For those small complaints about the guitars, there may have been some slight tonal adjustments there too in order to make them sit better in the low end. Overall, this is a much less brittle mix than the original, and it does give it a fresher, more modern take. Everything sounds clean, and David has never sounded this "in the room" with Ziggy before.
The mix is mostly static, but there is some cool panning in there. Like most rock music, it doesn't need to be overly adventurous.
I think it sounds fantastic. Listened closely again with an ear toward the drums to see if I could hear anything off. Do the hits sound a bit too identical and sampled? Do they not fit with the music? The answer to both those questions is a resounding no. They are supplemented on top of the existing hits and it works well. I would prefer he worked more with the original tracks, but if they were on a stereo stem and not individual tracks, you couldn't EQ or affect them without affecting everything else. If he had just the snares or kick or toms, he could do a lot more with some EQ, maybe some light reverb, and possibly even doubling or detuning off the top of my head to make them less dry. But what he does works and fits the music. I think a big part of that is the bass has also been adjusted accordingly to sit well with the drums. For those small complaints about the guitars, there may have been some slight tonal adjustments there too in order to make them sit better in the low end. Overall, this is a much less brittle mix than the original, and it does give it a fresher, more modern take. Everything sounds clean, and David has never sounded this "in the room" with Ziggy before.
The mix is mostly static, but there is some cool panning in there. Like most rock music, it doesn't need to be overly adventurous.
Finally received my copy. Listening in 5.1.4, I'm really pleased with the mix. There are points when it feels very front centric but these perhaps help when the other channels do get used for them to feel like an expansion of the music, increasing intimacy. It is active in the height speakers, but perhaps not dynamically so. One way to look at the Atmos mix is to compare it to the Stereo mix, processed with Dolby Surround. Played this way and without adjustment to gain, the 2012 remix is much more lively and vibrant across all channels - winning the loudness war - but Bowie's vocals are muddied a bit in the center. It's clear the Atmos mix was intentional and more subtle than the standard surround processing. I think the Atmos mix is better served by upping the volume a bit (equalize for Bowie's vocals) and when you do, that's when it shines. This is what I did on 3rd listen. I'm happy to have the 2 Stereo mixes on here as well as the Atmos.
Just received my copy a few hours ago. My system consists of an ARCAM AVR-31, OPPO-UDP 205 and an audioquest PowerQuest power conditioner. My speakers are new B&W 805 D4 Diamond Series, B&W in ceiling surrounds (4) a B&W center channel and two (2) B&W subwoofers. Not quite sure what this configuration is and if someone knows, please let me know! Being a life-long two (2) channel audio enthusiast and record/cd collector (and now Blu-ray SACD, DVD-Audio and DTS cd's), I am very aware of how this album sounds as I have had the original RCA "orange" label, the MOFI lp, RYCO clear vinyl and Virgin CD reissues. I also have the SACD as my high rez reference. Now, on to this new Blu-ray release...the Atmos mix is a total revelation and an absolutely stunning immersive listen! The layers and details in the recording that can now be appreciated really DO put you in the studio with Bowie, Ronson et al. What did surprise me, however, was the timeless quality of the recording and its subsequent performances as they (it?) have/has aged so very, very well. Additionally, the session orchestra arranged by Mick Ronson cannot be overstated as they are indeed MARVELOUS! My only quibble is that the packaging is rather "lightweight" and NOT up to par for such a landmark album. The onscreen graphics are very cool, but the lack of additional session outtakes, etc. was a bit of a bummer. Overall, this is a "highly recommended" release and one that I will be coming back to time and again. I don't know how I can rate this as anything but a "10".
I’m listening in 10.1.6. Amazing - the best Atmos disc in my collection now, in terms of the application of Atmos to enhance an old recording and make it new and sometimes different. Great use of overheads, although the middle overheads are mostly ambient (front/rear overheads are very active). “Soul Love” is my very first Atmos piece to actually use center rear (sax isolated).
So clear compared with the 5.1 SACD.
A solid 10 for me. Movements in Atmos are not gimmicky (panning just to pan) - restrained but very discrete and effective.
(Photo shows all channels during Ziggy Stardust are active except for center rear)
So clear compared with the 5.1 SACD.
A solid 10 for me. Movements in Atmos are not gimmicky (panning just to pan) - restrained but very discrete and effective.
(Photo shows all channels during Ziggy Stardust are active except for center rear)
Attachments
Last edited:
I voted 9, this was one of the first albums I bought as a wee 12 year old so I know this album upside down and inside out. The atmos is brilliant compared to the original 5.1 BUT could/should have been better.
The packaging has to go down as the worst in my obscenely large cd/sacd/dvd/blu ray collection
The packaging has to go down as the worst in my obscenely large cd/sacd/dvd/blu ray collection
fourml8r
Senior Member
review of atmos version on my 5.2.4 system.
i was hovering around a score of 8 after the first listen, but last night i had the opportunity to play it nice and loud. i upped my vote to a 9. overall very enjoyable. this is the best this album has ever sounded by a longshot. so much more detail in his voice and in the instruments. i was hearing lots of nuances and detail that i could not make out in the original or SACD which i also own.
the only areas for improvement would be a more aggressive atmos mix, its not tame but not wild either. in defense the atmos does add to the experience without taking anything away. a bit more low end would have been nice but there were definitely recording limitations 50+ years ago. these are very minor gripes and not anything that will change.
for the $20 price, this was a no-brainer. glad to have it in my collection and will likely be a go to option when friends come over and what to hear something worthwhile.
i was hovering around a score of 8 after the first listen, but last night i had the opportunity to play it nice and loud. i upped my vote to a 9. overall very enjoyable. this is the best this album has ever sounded by a longshot. so much more detail in his voice and in the instruments. i was hearing lots of nuances and detail that i could not make out in the original or SACD which i also own.
the only areas for improvement would be a more aggressive atmos mix, its not tame but not wild either. in defense the atmos does add to the experience without taking anything away. a bit more low end would have been nice but there were definitely recording limitations 50+ years ago. these are very minor gripes and not anything that will change.
for the $20 price, this was a no-brainer. glad to have it in my collection and will likely be a go to option when friends come over and what to hear something worthwhile.
I listened to "Starman" on both the Atmos & the SACD isolating the rear channels along with the Atmos height speakers and was surprised how well the SACD rears were mixed out. If I'm going to listen to the album I'm choosing the BR, although the SACD is a good second choice.
quadrifonico
Senior Member
I'm honest I didn't expect much... But I'm positively surprised, finally this landmark album sounds right in multichannel 
plumpy, full, thick, greasy, rough, lifelike. There's plenty of movement with elements precisely placed in space as spatial music should be always. Éléments which move and exchange their positions, but always rationally and without creating any confusion. All speakers are equally used (and heavily!). Music during crescendos literally fills up the entire ceiling. And one thing I love: heights are complementary to the other "main" speakers, you never have the feeling the guitarist is playing hanging from your ceiling (something I hate). This deserves a 10 from me, without even thinking
plumpy, full, thick, greasy, rough, lifelike. There's plenty of movement with elements precisely placed in space as spatial music should be always. Éléments which move and exchange their positions, but always rationally and without creating any confusion. All speakers are equally used (and heavily!). Music during crescendos literally fills up the entire ceiling. And one thing I love: heights are complementary to the other "main" speakers, you never have the feeling the guitarist is playing hanging from your ceiling (something I hate). This deserves a 10 from me, without even thinkingI just started the disc and its already lost a point for the FBI privacy warning and the audio on the menu.
Why do they insist on putting audio on the menus ? I hate that.
The sound is really good so far....
I give it 9
Why do they insist on putting audio on the menus ? I hate that.
The sound is really good so far....
I give it 9
Last edited:
Listened to the 2024 stereo today and it sounds great too.
But I have to admit the original stereo mix with 192khz of Moonage Daydream STILL kills the others for me.
I’m going with a 9 rating.
But I have to admit the original stereo mix with 192khz of Moonage Daydream STILL kills the others for me.
I’m going with a 9 rating.
Let me start by saying that I'm listening in Atmos downmixed to 7.1 so YMMV. The Atmos mix on Ziggy is good. The big improvement IMO is in the mastering. This recording is dry and super clean. I'm hearing things I've never heard before, which is really great. The 5.1 SACD is probably a little more true to the original recording that was raw, edgy and in your face. This version cleans it up and gives it more of an audiophile feel. There were a couple times that I felt something buried or missing. Suffragette City definately needed more oomph. However this is a different mix and I love the clarity in contrast. So as of today, I would give this a 9. Excellent sonics, mix is good, packaging poor but adequate. I love it but just a bubble shy of perfect. It is also good that we still have the 5.1 SACD when we want that visceral delivery. I plan to delay voting until I hear it on a friends system for comparison.
Last edited:
Sometimes the Atmos mix just doesn't have the same "punch" or "power" that the stereo mix has. The best other example that I can reference is Fleetwood Mac's "Go Your Own Way" on Blu-ray (Atmos) vs the stereo mix on the same Blu-ray. I would luv to know why this happens...
fourml8r
Senior Member
Steven Wilson has mentioned in interviews that since rock music is generally a close knit of instruments, that sometimes when you start to pull them apart into different areas / tracks (i.e. 5.1 / Amos, etc.) the music can lose some of its' cohesiveness and impact.
I think this is also true for Porcupine Tree's Closure/Continuation, both studio and live - I definitely prefer 5.1 on those, the punch is missing on the Atmos for many songs. However on his solo Harmony Codex I do prefer the Atmos.
Victor Bisio
Active Member
- Joined
- Mar 15, 2024
- Messages
- 89
I voted "9". It's not the record I grew up with; a bit to clean and "polite". But at 72 years old, it's a more audiophile experience.
In the booklet notes from Ken Scott, he says, "My whole philosophy with this has been to make it more like a live experience" and "Hopefully it just feels as if you're in the theatre with this amazing show going on". With that, I was filled with dread that a studio album was going to sound like a venue experience. Nope! Listening to this on a Pioneer VSX-LX805 11.1 and it is amazing. In the first minutes of Five Years, a piano effect, swoops over head from Rear Right to Front Left. In Moonage Daydream, "moon" and "age" was popping up around me inside the immersive bubble. Yes, on one track, Ken Scott moves David's voice from left speaker, front, to right speaker. Sonically impressive, this is the best I've ever heard Ziggy Stardust and the Spiders From Mars. David's voice sounds live--clear and crisp. I enjoyed the visuals of images I've never seen before from the cover photo shoot. I don't mind the packaging at all and the insert has plenty of information. I geeked out with the 48/24 Atmos mix. Affordable and not burdened down by some bloated box set. Definately a demonstration disc. On the back, "TO BE PLAYED AT MAXIMUM VOLUME", absolutely! Indeed! Enjoy! A easy 10 for me. Highly recommend--especially if you are a Bowie fan.
SURROUND MIX - 3
AUDIO FIDELITY - 3
CONTENT - 3
OVERALL PACKAGE - 1
SURROUND MIX - 3
AUDIO FIDELITY - 3
CONTENT - 3
OVERALL PACKAGE - 1
Last edited:
shedsoundsmedia
Active Member
I received on release day (my birthday!) and took it for a few spins. Here's my thoughts !
Enjoyed your review above. I just got this will give listen this weekend. I also do not have atmos just a 5.0 system.
Sorry to hear the original mix is not flat and the new one compressed.
If you look for the Ryko cd issue it has Velvet Goldmine plus some other outakes and demos.
Sorry to hear the original mix is not flat and the new one compressed.
If you look for the Ryko cd issue it has Velvet Goldmine plus some other outakes and demos.
Similar threads
- Poll
- Poll
- Poll
- Poll
