David Bowie: Ziggy-era Box out in June; Dolby Atmos Blu-Ray out in Sept!

[4-earredwonder]

Blu~ray.com's HIGHLY RECOMMENDED review of THE RISE AND FALL OF ZIGGY STARDUST AND THE SPIDERS FROM MARS

https://www.blu-ray.com/movies/Davi...-the-Spiders-from-Mars-Blu-ray/363836/#Review

 

[Dynamic Editor]

Blu~ray.com's HIGHLY RECOMMENDED review of THE RISE AND FALL OF ZIGGY STARDUST AND THE SPIDERS FROM MARS

https://www.blu-ray.com/movies/Davi...-the-Spiders-from-Mars-Blu-ray/363836/#Review

It's so weird that the review doesn't at all compare between the original stereo mix and the new 2024 mixes. Like, I don't mind that aspect being a sidepoint, even in a review of this caliber. Not addressing it at all, though? That's just... odd.

 

[4-earredwonder]

It's so weird that the review doesn't at all compare between the original stereo mix and the new 2024 mixes. Like, I don't mind that aspect being a sidepoint, even in a review of this caliber. Not addressing it at all, though? That's just... odd.

Probably because it was on a multichannel SACD and blu~ray.com only reviews blu ray discs!

 

[Dynamic Editor]

Probably because it was on a multichannel SACD and blu~ray.com only reviews blu ray discs!

No, I'm referring to comparing the original mix of the album on the Blu Ray and the 2024 mixes of the album on the same Blu Ray. Not the 5.1 mix or that other stereo remix I believe it accompanied.

 

[4-earredwonder]

No, I'm referring to comparing the original mix of the album on the Blu Ray and the 2024 mixes of the album on the same Blu Ray. Not the 5.1 mix or that other stereo remix I believe it accompanied.

Gotcha! It seems they were more focused on the new ATMOS remix. My copy will be arriving Friday from AmazonUS and there'll be plenty of time to compare both stereo mixes and of course the ATMOS!

MORE Bowie, Please?

 

[4-earredwonder]

Since The Rise and Fall of Ziggy Stardust and the Spiders From Mars was a joint release from Parlophone/RHINO, wonder if they'll ever tackle Bowie's Berlin Trilogy consisting of LOW, HEROES and LODGER. ALL WOULD SOUND EXCEPTIONAL REMIXED INTO ATMOS. Found this documentary on you tube describing Bowie's Berlin Trilogy

https://www.bing.com/videos/rivervi...A3E25E04F00B4EBABD59A3E25E04F00B4EB&FORM=VIRE

 

[Klaus Rosenthal]

My Amazon order page says it will be delivered Monday , I thought the point of pre-ordering was so it would be delivered on release day. Come on Amazon.

 

[coolerking101]

This is certainly one of my top 5 albums of all time. I didn't hate the 5.1 mix as much as others (it certainly has some boom/bust moments), but reading that blu ray review certainly gives me hope. Planning on heading to my basement Friday evening, turning the system up to maximum volume and hoping for the best.

 

[Atomic Punk]

eager to find out how it sounds on a 5.1 system as i'm not rigged up with atmos but would love to have a good surround mix of this album

 

[madscot]

My Amazon order page says it will be delivered Monday , I thought the point of pre-ordering was so it would be delivered on release day. Come on Amazon.

My amazon says next Tuesday but they said my Jethro tull War child would arrive yesterday but it arrived on Sunday, I guess it depends when they get their supply

 

[srbjab]

I'm tempted to get this even though the earlier 5.1 mix on sacd was disappointing. I read a recent article in soundonsound where Ken Scott acknowledges the deficiencies of the earlier 5.1 mix. He refers to it as a missed opportunity and blames the label. He offered them 2 mixes - one very conservative and not really immersive, the other one would be a total re-imagining of the album and more immersive. The label only wanted to pay for one mix and told him it needed to be very conservative - mostly like the original stereo. He goes on to say the new atmos mix is a complete re-working of the material with no constraints.

That sounds great but I wish there were some reviews out there. It's not very expensive, but why bother if it's just another tame mix?

 

[PurpleMoustache]

My amazon says next Tuesday but they said my Jethro tull War child would arrive yesterday but it arrived on Sunday, I guess it depends when they get their supply

Mine says Friday (along with Gilmour’s Luck and Strange) though that being said I’m less than 3 miles away from an Amazon warehouse so presumably that warehouse got its stock

 

[Mcallister]

I'm tempted to get this even though the earlier 5.1 mix on sacd was disappointing. I read a recent article in soundonsound where Ken Scott acknowledges the deficiencies of the earlier 5.1 mix. He refers to it as a missed opportunity and blames the label. He offered them 2 mixes - one very conservative and not really immersive, the other one would be a total re-imagining of the album and more immersive. The label only wanted to pay for one mix and told him it needed to be very conservative - mostly like the original stereo. He goes on to say the new atmos mix is a complete re-working of the material with no constraints.

That sounds great but I wish there were some reviews out there. It's not very expensive, but why bother if it's just another tame mix?

No brainer for me, instant buy

 

[Dynamic Editor]

I'm tempted to get this even though the earlier 5.1 mix on sacd was disappointing. I read a recent article in soundonsound where Ken Scott acknowledges the deficiencies of the earlier 5.1 mix. He refers to it as a missed opportunity and blames the label. He offered them 2 mixes - one very conservative and not really immersive, the other one would be a total re-imagining of the album and more immersive. The label only wanted to pay for one mix and told him it needed to be very conservative - mostly like the original stereo. He goes on to say the new atmos mix is a complete re-working of the material with no constraints.

That sounds great but I wish there were some reviews out there. It's not very expensive, but why bother if it's just another tame mix?

Have a link to that article, perchance?

 

[srbjab]

Have a link to that article, perchance?

https://www.soundonsound.com/people/ziggy-stardust-atmos
The comments about the old mix are at the very end of the article. Apparently there is more detail, but the bulk of the article is behind a pay wall and I wasn't interested enough to pay to finish it.

 

[Dynamic Editor]

https://www.soundonsound.com/people/ziggy-stardust-atmos
The comments about the old mix are at the very end of the article. Apparently there is more detail, but the bulk of the article is behind a pay wall and I wasn't interested enough to pay to finish it.

From the article:

Ken Scott carried out the 5.1 remix of Ziggy Stardust in 2003 and, in retrospect, sees it as something of a missed opportunity. “I said to the label, ‘OK, there are two ways I can do this. I can modernise it. Or I can just do that as it was originally, just putting things in different places. Which would you prefer?’ And they said ‘We’d love both versions, but we can only afford the one version — which has to be the same as the original.’”

Ok, so your previous message got me thinking there was an extra 5.1 mix made that never saw the light of day. But it was actually just not created.

 

[srbjab]

From the article:

Ok, so your previous message got me thinking there was an extra 5.1 mix made that never saw the light of day. But it was actually just not created.

No, he was referring to the 2003 5.1 mix. The SDE site has more detail from what appears to be the same interview. Here's a relevant excerpt:

...​

Now you’ve obviously revisited this album in the past. In 2003 you did a 5.1 mix and a new stereo mix​

No, no, no. Hang on. Let’s get that bit straight. The record company made the stereo from the 5.1. I wanted my name taken off it because the stereo that was made from that was so bad. It was never meant to be folded down to stereo.

So it was just a fold down version from the 5.1?​

Absolutely. And it’s awful! The 5.1 is not great either, but…

Well tell me a little bit about the 5.1 then, because that would have been the first time anyone was trying to do a surround sound mix with this particular record, so you would have been going back to multi-track tapes, dusting them down, baking them and all that kind of stuff.​

Actually, the tapes didn’t have to be baked from that period.

It would have been just over 30 years later at the time you did the 5.1 mix [2003], did you choose to try and fix anything or change anything, or did you keep strictly to the whole EQ and the vibe of the original record?​

We kept to the original, and one of the main reasons for that was when I was approached to do it by the label, I said, “Look, there are two ways we can do this. I can either modernise it a bit, change things, or keep it the same as it was”. They said “We’d love to have both, but we can only afford one, so keep it the same as the original”. So that’s what it was. It was the original, just [with elements] put in different places [channels].
...

To me, it just sounds like they did a lazy, half-assed 5.1 mix mostly because the label didn't want anything too radical or different sounding.The label then took the tame 5.1 mix from Scott and folded it down to stereo without his involvement, and he basically disowns it.

 

[Dynamic Editor]

To me, it just sounds like they did a lazy, half-assed 5.1 mix mostly because the label didn't want anything too radical or different sounding.The label then took the tame 5.1 mix from Scott and folded it down to stereo without his involvement, and he basically disowns it.

I get that. It's just an earlier comment you made made me think there were two 5.1 mixes made for that project:

As you said:

He offered them 2 mixes - one very conservative and not really immersive, the other one would be a total re-imagining of the album and more immersive.

This made me think there were two 5.1 mixes made for the project, but you meant that he proposed two different ideas to them. Just a misunderstanding of your words on my part.

 

[colsky]

Listening to the new bluray now, the Atmos mix but on my 5.1 system. Not quite finished yet, but its sounding really good to me. Surround put to good use. Starman has nice acoustic guitars from the rears, which are then also used for keyboards and orchestra.

One typo moan. Its not been a good week for drummer listings in new releases! First the new Hawkwind set X In Search Of Space - in the book, where it gives the band credits it doesn't list the drummer at all! With this new Ziggy release, in the booklet it gives credits for each song. It names the drummer as Mick Woodmansey all the way through, except for 2 songs in the middle where its Woody Woodmansey, before resorting to Mick again for the last 3 credits!! I know his name is Mick, and he's normally known by his nickname Woody, but some consistency please! Unless someone can correct me to tell me that's what the credits are in the original release?

 

[srbjab]

Sounds encouraging but I'm still gonna wait for a full review of the Atmos mix before buying. Bowie in surround has been pretty disappointing so far, and I've bought most of it . Still, I'm hoping it's a good mix and is successful - any of the studio albums from 1970 - 1980 would be a treat in atmos if well done.