HiRez Poll Crosby, David - IF I COULD ONLY REMEMBER MY NAME [DVD-A]

[~dave~~wave~]

One would have hoped that Rhino would include the 5.1 mix and hi-res stereo that came with the original DVD-A. Perhaps for the 100th anniversary, they will release only the left channel and in mp3.

Post 95 above claims the hi-res stereo is flawed.

The positive I take from this is the re-master and unreleased material, which will be affordable at $25 list for the CDs or available in "hi-res" on the streaming services.
The preview demo track is streaming on Amazon music in 24/96 FLAC.

Anybody on this forum who wanted the 5.1 should already have it.
If not, giddy-up.

David Crosby - If I Could Only Remember My Name.... (CD, US, 2006) For Sale | Discogs

 

[H.A.L.]

I have the 5.1 but for once the extra material attracts me.

Guess I'll be buying it.

 

[TVB]

The title of this disc aptly describes the music..Crosby forgot all the words!

 

[Mj33]

A demo disc for me. Amazing sonics, I mean amazing. The Dead's American Beauty was recorded at the same time as this album, hence their participation. A loving mix, utterly transcendental. Now for a surround mix of Terrapin Station or Blues for Allah. A 10.

 

[castironshore]

I've listened to this one now for 3 straight days, and damn if it isn't a 10!

OK, it's not the most commercial music you're going to find here - if you're looking for "Almost Cut My Hair" or "Long Time Gone", it ain't here.

However, the surround mix on this disc is SO PERFECT, and the sound quality in HiRez is SO PERFECT, and the cavernous vocal layers on the songs with no words is so.....hymn-like, it's just remarkable.

The guitars are spread around the speakers, and you can hear the strings twang and they sound SO GOOD! I particularly like tracks 8 and 9, which are reminicent of the opening of the Crosby/Nash "Wind on the Water" song about the whales. If you like that opening, you will like these tunes.

It's funny. I am a huge CSN(Y) fan, ever since the first LP (in real time), and I have all of their solo efforts, but I never really gave this album a chance back in the days when it was released. Songs for Beginners (Nash) was much more commercial and "standard", and I played that a lot, but this one I owned but passed on.

Today, in 5.1, it's like a totally new album. Well worth checking out (if you can find it!)

Agreed. Fantastic surround mix. I found this a few days ago for only $9 (Amazon 3d party seller). If you don't have it, deals can be found.

 

[artwwweb]

Mix: 5/5: Very discrete but with linking reverb where necessary. Backing vocals feel very 'in the room'. Often a different guitar in each corner - what more could you want?
Sound: 5/5: Stunning. The acoustic instruments sound so real.
Music: 4/5: Lots of mellow without being bland. Really beautiful. Some nice, slightly restrained guitar wig-outs. (Bonus track is not as good. Nice, but overlong for what it is. But it's a bonus so no points deducted for that.)

3*5 + 2*5 + 1*4 = 15 + 10 + 4 = 29/30 = 9.66 = 10.

(I had already listened years ago and decided that the mix and sound were superb, so my score is not biased by the sad news of Crosby's death today. )

 

[M-K]

Music is 10. For sure. Mix is 8. A bit loud mastered, so I gave a 9.

 

[Dynamic Editor]

Listening through right now, and I do feel the opening track has a significantly weaker surround sound mix than the rest of the songs.

The back two channels are essentially identical to each other (but in opposite polarities), which doesn't really make much sense, because there are elements in those back channels that are only shared with one of the front channels, such as the vibraphone at 2:27 and the congas right after.

They also have this really weird phasiness to them (especially around 2:50), which makes me feel that there were some elements that were accidentally folded over or something. There's none of that phasy sound over the entire rest of the album.

 

[Wagonmaster_91]

"I do feel the opening track has a significantly weaker surround sound mix than the rest of the songs."
It may have to do with the fact that the recording of "Music Is Love" was a recording of Crosby teaching the song to Neil Young and Graham Nash (and whoever else was in the room). Crosby intended to to do a "proper" version in the following days. When David went home for the evening, Neil & Graham decided to see if they could make a more finished "demo" of the recording. They surprised David with it the next morning, but everyone agreed that the looseness of the feel was great and there was no point to do a "proper" recording. (There were some over dubs done to it.)

 

[Dynamic Editor]

"I do feel the opening track has a significantly weaker surround sound mix than the rest of the songs."
It may have to do with the fact that the recording of "Music Is Love" was a recording of Crosby teaching the song to Neil Young and Graham Nash (and whoever else was in the room). Crosby intended to to do a "proper" version in the following days. When David went home for the evening, Neil & Graham decided to see if they could make a more finished "demo" of the recording. They surprised David with it the next morning, but everyone agreed that the looseness of the feel was great and there was no point to do a "proper" recording. (There were some over dubs done to it.)

I can understand that the song has a loose feel, but given what is in the front two channels, what exists in the back two channels doesn't make sense unless there was some sort of error in the surround sound mixing. It's not that the back channels are ambience or something. If that were the case, the back channels shouldn't be identical.