Debating a 5.1 mix - "discrete" or "ambient" (and other musings)

[DKA]

Judging from the SACD...
I personally think the 5.1 mix of WYWH is more like an "expanded stereo" mix than a surround mix.
I rather liked the quad mix that I have from the LP (we did the "Quadumvirate" DVD-A from it).
I have yet to receive my copy of the box so I'm looking forward to hearing the 4.0 from the BD.
I just think the 5.1 is very tentative almost as if JG was afraid to experiment with it a little.

My lousy 2 cents.

-B

Very tentative. I also don't know how the quad you did sounds, but I wasn't a fan of the one presented in the set either. Rears drown out vocals. The power of some songs is really lost, with some instruments buried int he mix.

The only Guthrie mixes I've heard are the two PF mixes. Perhaps this is the guy's style. If so, it would make me pause with anything else he does in the future. That's just not my style.

 

[DKA]

I'd rather have a great sounding 5.1 channel mix that is more ambient than discreet than a great discreet mix with lousy sound quality. Don't forget that one is getting a high resolution product in the WYWH SACD. I have the three Alan Parson's DVD-A's (Eye in the Sky, Turn of a Friendly Card, and I Robot) and they sound better enhanced into 7.1 using Logic 7 than some 5.1 surround sound mixes. What is important is that the flow of 5.1 material continues. Some recordings will be gems, some will be duds and most will be somewhere in the middle. Overall, I have found the high res 5.1 offerings to be superior to the red book 2-channel versions and that's what matters most to me.

I'm the opposite. I absolutely will want a mix that makes full use of the technology, no matter whether it's a DTS CD or full DTS-MA mix.

 

[Bill Houston]

Loved this reissue.


Mix/Sonics: 9
Music: 9.5