HiRez Poll Bowie, David - THE RISE AND FALL OF ZIGGY STARDUST AND THE SPIDERS FROM MARS [Blu-ray Audio (Dolby Atmos)]

[rtbluray]

Please post your thoughts and comments on this new reissue of the classic David Bowie album "The Rise and Fall of Ziggy Stardust and the Spiders from Mars".
The album has been newly remixed in Dolby Atmos and is now available on Blu-ray Audio disc.

 

[chrisk5655]

Mine just arrived! I have to say this may be the best Atmos mix I have experienced! Crisp, clear and very immersive! Hearing things I have never heard even on the 5.1 SACD. Keep up the great work Ken Scott! Only disappointment, the fold out cheap cardboard sleeve, otherwise awesome!!!

 

[admsh]

Mine just arrived! I have to say this may be the best Atmos mix I have experienced! Crisp, clear and very immersive! Hearing things I have never heard even on the 5.1 SACD. Keep up the great work Ken Scott! Only disappointment, the fold out cheap cardboard sleeve, otherwise awesome!!!

It's very possible what you're hearing was never there before. I'm in the middle and I'm very confused. Not necessarily negative, I'm just really not sure yet. It's not the same album, that's for sure. They took a lot of creative freedom with this mix, and it's very front-centric. Sonically, it's great, I'll concede that.

Love the cardbox packaging btw lol

 

[ssully]

That's interesting to hear, as Ken Scott's 5.1 mix was wonderfully faithful to the sound and vibe of the original. I never got the sense that I was hearing stuff that was 'never there before', listening to it. It's one of my go-tos for how a surround mix of a classic album should be done.

So now I'm really curious to hear his new Atmos mix.

 

[edisonbaggins]

…it's very front-centric.

 

[chrisk5655]

It's very possible what you're hearing was never there before. I'm in the middle and I'm very confused. Not necessarily negative, I'm just really not sure yet. It's not the same album, that's for sure. They took a lot of creative freedom with this mix, and it's very front-centric. Sonically, it's great, I'll concede that.

Love the cardbox packaging btw lol

I understand and I am normally a purest, wanting to hear the ‘original’ studio version, as a result not a fan, usually, of live albums with few exceptions. On the other hand Ziggy was produced originally by Ken Scott, thus it was his and Bowie’s vision for it and I think he did a fantastic job recreating that with maybe just a fresh coat of paint to make it sound new! IMHO!

 

[chrisk5655]

Didn’t sound overly front centric to me, was alot going on all around, though not much from my rears, plenty in front and sides.

 

[admsh]

That's interesting to hear, as Ken Scott's 5.1 mix was wonderfully faithful to the sound and vibe of the original. I never got the sense that I was hearing stuff that was 'never there before', listening to it. It's one of my go-tos for how a surround mix of a classic album should be done.

So now I'm really curious to hear his new Atmos mix.

I'm not sure if it wasn't there or was changed to such a degree that it sounds different. In some places it sounds like the pitch was changed. It's strange. Again, not necessarily bad, it does sound marvelous.

And it's a mixed bag. Starman is very immersive.

I'm not going to post anymore, I jumped the gun on this after only listening to three quarters. I need a few more spins to make up my mind.

 

[edisonbaggins]

Might be nice if reviewers note the kind of system they’re listening on. E.g. 5.1, 7.2.4, 5.1.2, etc.

 

[admsh]

Might be nice if reviewers note the kind of system they’re listening on. E.g. 5.1, 7.2.4, 5.1.2, etc.

I'm on a 5.1.2 atm.

 

[Atomic Punk]

Might be nice if reviewers note the kind of system they’re listening on. E.g. 5.1, 7.2.4, 5.1.2, etc.

yes, i'm particularly interested how it sounds in 5.1

 

[James Jay]

Listening on a 7.2.4 Dolby Atmos System: I doesn’t sound front centric to me. If I was going to describe the Dolby Atmos mix I would call it tasteful. The Atmos mix is warm and clear, with solid bass and plenty of action on the side / height speakers. I never have heard Ziggy sound this good before. A big plus for being a stand alone blu ray & cheap to boot ($20 on Amazon Prime). I vote 10

 

[chrisk5655]

Might be nice if reviewers note the kind of system they’re listening on. E.g. 5.1, 7.2.4, 5.1.2, etc.

7.1.4 system

 

[The Hoople]

Just finished my first listen. At Maximum Volume, of course. Oh yeah, this is a keeper. 5.1.2 system(front height/Atmos).

For those that were worried about the drums, whatever Mr. Scott did worked. It's the first time I've heard Ziggy where it seems the compression blanket has finally been lifted and there's actually life in the sticks. A beautiful thing.

Admittedly not a very adventurous mix but certainly room encompasing and worlds better than the old 5.1 SACD. Seems a bit frontcentric, but that may be my 5.1.2 setup and the fact that my rear surrounds were in the walls before I moved here and are not ideally placed for my main listening positon. I can see what Scott meant by trying to get a stagelike presence for Bowie's vocals. At times during Ziggy/Suffragette/Suicide the vocal seems to be more center/right like he's moving about the stage. Noticeable, but it didn't bother me. It might have been there in other songs, but that is where I first started to notice. And the last "give me your hands" seems to come from everywhere. The vocals do sound a little different from the earlier versions, but not in a bad way. Just different and not much in the center channel.

The acoustic guitars in Lady Stardust are much more up front which is a nice touch. About the only negatives I can come up with is I wish he had been a bit more adventurous during Moonage Daydream, and Mick's guitar doesn't quite seem to have the power during "THE solo" as the original stereo version (haven't listened to the 2024 stereo yet). Crank that thing and let it float around everywhere! And Five Years didn't quite pack the punch I was expecting.

I'm not casting my vote until I get a few more listens to all the mixes, but I can't see it going lower than a 9.

 

[Mcallister]

This is far from frontcentric. All I can say is wow, very adventurous, hi fidelity mix and things are going on everywhere, I’m listening on a 9.8.6 system direct and the mix utilizes all 15 speakers including the wides, jaw dropped so far…..

 

[GOS]

I'll listen more tonight, to the Atmos and try to comment tomorrow. So far, I find it very solid. Often, the front heights solidify what you hear in the front speakers. For example, during Ziggy Stardust, Bowies vocals are pronounced in the right front and right height to superb effect. When in the sweet spot, you get the sensation that his vocals are floating somewhere outside of the obvious speaker placements. I like that.

I find it more of a bubble, than super discrete placement in a specific speaker. I haven't listened to the 5.1 in some time. But I have to say that in a 5.1.4 system, it's certainly very good. Fidelity is punchy and vocals are not lost at any point.

 

[SomethingAnything]

It's very possible what you're hearing was never there before. I'm in the middle and I'm very confused. Not necessarily negative, I'm just really not sure yet. It's not the same album, that's for sure. They took a lot of creative freedom with this mix, and it's very front-centric. Sonically, it's great, I'll concede that.

Love the cardbox packaging btw lol

This review reads like the reverse of the one above it. I don't know what to think.

Update: so now I've read all the reviews to date. I was initially excited with that first review -- especially as I'd had some fears given what that Ken Scott bloke had said (and the story about him being rude to that guy who messaged him to ask if he'd made use of the rears, and then blocked him) -- and then my hopes plummeted with this negative review immediately after it. Especially 'very front centric'. The reviews moving on are a mixed bag, but a lot more reassuringly positive. Especially Gos's above.

Living in Oz, heaven only knows when my copy will arrive, but at least I can look forward to it now.

 

[BillSamm1]

What I STILL don't understand is why there are 2 versions of the same 1972 stereo mix on there. One at 192/24, the other at 48/24. They should have kept the 192 and put the 2012 5.1 mix on here. What the ??

 

[The Hoople]

What I STILL don't understand is why there are 2 versions of the same 1972 stereo mix on there. One at 192/24, the other at 48/24. They should have kept the 192 and put the 2012 5.1 mix on here. What the ??

Yeah that’s a head scratcher. After reading Ken Scott’s thoughts on the 5.1 from 2012 now, all I can think of is he just didn’t want another version of that out there.

 

[dquad]

Vote: 8

Best Atmos Track: 5 Years

The song "5 Years" starts from rear left speaker and the gradually makes its way to the front. This gave me the impression it was going to be an immersive experience throughout. Most of the tracks are front-centric. Reading the reviews above, it has been a mixed bag of opinions on this. I'm on a 7.1.4 system. The mix sounds amazing and has great fidelity but it's rarely adventurous. The engineer did an excellent job with the bass. It provides an extra thump not previously heard. Those familiar with the song "It Ain't Easy", the chorus always had some distortion especially in the later part of the song. I'm happy to hear the distortion is gone from this mix.

I'm not a fan of the packaging but that never alters my vote. I usually focus on the mix and the content. After listening to the album 3 times, overall it's probably a 7.5 but I voted an 8. They could have really done something epic with the songs "Ziggy Stardust" and "Starman", but it's just par for the course.