Deep Purple "Machine Head 50 (Deluxe)" 3CD+LP+BD-A w/ Atmos, US quad and 5.1 bonus (3/29/2024 -Universal)

[JediJoker]

Not a Quadio release anywhere!

Marketed as including a "Quadio mix."

 

[quicksrt]

Marketed as including a "Quadio mix."

Not sure I’d call that “marketed” more like it’s “credited” in the notes.

But I personally think of it as a Quadio because it’s US Quad is all I bought the damn box for. I wanted nothing else out if the deal. Now if I can sell off all the other contents and recoup 100%, I’ll be a very happy listener.

 

[Blackwood]

Since this set arrived in the mail, I’ve become less hostile to the Atmos mix.

Thinking about this during moments of procrastination when I should have been doing something worthwhile with my life, I remembered back to when I first heard Atmos. I was blown away. It was new and as long as things were in all the speakers and doing something cool, it seemed like a good mix to me.

But as time goes on, you start to develop preferences for what you admire in a mix. If I had heard this mix when I first got Atmos, I would have possibly had a better initial impression. And I’m sure the importance I place on this album and band affects my impressions, too.

But the other thing (mentioned by others) is that we are blessed with surround options for this album... 5.1, two(!!!) quads and Atmos. If we only had Atmos, maybe I would have worked up more enthusiasm.

As I listened to all four in a row over the weekend, the two that stood out to me were the 5.1 and the U.K. quad. Hadn’t listened to either in a while. For just a basic listening enjoyment, I like the 5.1. But as a fan big fan of Ritchie Blackmore and Jon Lord, the quad is enjoyable to better appreciate their playing, especially their rhythm playing.

And this time with the quad, I enjoyed Jon’s parts all the more... so simple (when not soloing) but powerful. It almost gives us wanna-be musicians the impression we could pull it off. (Then the solos come in and reality slaps us in the face.)

I do really enjoy the U.S. quad, too. Just haven’t spent a lot of time with it yet.

Atmos still ranks 4th for me, but as I mentioned earlier, I think Smoke on the Water (which was our first streaming experience with the mix) is not completely indicative of the whole album. I think Dweezil went a bit crazier on that song than the others.

Still don’t regret buying it even if the Atmos didn’t tick all the boxes for me.

This is the 50th anniversary of Burn and Stormbringer. I don’t imagine they’ll get the box set treatment, but my credit card stands ready if called upon.

 

[Sal1950]

But I had to get the lowest price on this because all I wanted was basically the US quad mix and that’s it.

I fully understand your POV, ain't it a bit-h.

 

[quicksrt]

I fully understand your POV, ain't it a bit-h.

It would seem so yes.
But I’m flipping all the parts of the box I don’t really want. I have a buyer for the LP already lined up. The three CDs will sell like hotcakes, the big box with book… I may hold on to, or that might go as well.
If my math works out I’ll end up paying $15 for MH on BluRay.

 

[quicksrt]

Tracking says Monday 4/15 expected arrival, but that it arrived in Highland, CA today - which means it’s really arriving this Friday or Sat I think.

Just keeping everyone up to date on my package.

 

[steelydave]

I think Machine Head is supposed to have some murkiness to the overall sound. It's a "sludgy metal" album that obviously has commercial leanings.

But what I want out of the US quad mix is the clarity of the drums. So that the sum of it all is the best of both worlds. Plus some alt. parts, a tad of analog reverb where they may not have been as much in the stereo mix. Sludgy murk with a tad more detail, and then that clarity to the drums.

If 'sludgy' or 'murky' is what you're hoping for with the US quad mix, this ain't the mastering for you.

I've spent some time with it over the last couple of days, and compared to the original QuadraDisc LP (which was presumably cut under the supervision of the people who did the quad mix) this digital mastering is considerably brighter. There's an escalating treble boost that starts around 1kHz and maxes out around +8dB at 10kHz, and the bass frequencies below 600Hz are cut by -2dB. The net result is that there isn't much low end power, and the vocals and lead instruments sound veiled behind a wash of cymbals and hi hats, especially compared to the SACD mastering of the UK quad mix (I know, and apples vs. another kind of apples comparison, but still) which has a fantastic bottom end and excellent phantom center imaging.

I have many overly bright CD-4s that would contest this hypothesis, but you could suggest that maybe the original Quadradisc was cut a bit murky with the treble rolled off due to the limitations of CD-4 mastering. Perhaps they didn't want to interfere with the carrier signal, I dunno. But I also compared it to some other well-regarded masterings of the stereo mix - the Audio Fidelity Gold CD, the 96/24 hirez transfer on the DVD-A, as well as the aforementioned UK quad mix on SACD and none of them have the amount of treble energy that this new mastering of the US quad mix has. In comparison the AF CD the US Quadio is 5dB brighter at 10kHz, in comparison to the 96/24 hirez from the DVD-A it's 4dB brighter, and in comparison to the UK quad mix on SACD it's in excess of 7dB brighter.

It's also interesting to note that the EQ profile from track to track across all seven tracks is identical compared to the CD-4, which suggests that either a simple "high shelf" treble boost was applied uniformly to the entire album in post, or that the playback deck was calibrated to deliver a similarly sensitive treble response on playback. I have no idea what kind of financial or logistical constraints the people putting this set together were under so maybe this was the most they could do, but it's disappointing from a consumer perspective that a box set that retails for in excess of $100 in Canada doesn't feature a more tailored approach to the audio contents inside.

 

[jimfisheye]

If 'sludgy' or 'murky' is what you're hoping for with the US quad mix, this ain't the mastering for you.
...

It really is bright and thin in the bottom compared to the copy of the Q4 I've been listening to. It's not compressed. Not any digital brick wall anyway. The point of mentioning that is brick wall and inappropriate treble boosts often go together. So... treble boost alone here? I'd guess not but there's no way to know without the master in front of me. The low end on the Q4 doesn't sound like just 100Hz tape bass bump either. Sounds like intentional low end delivery. (And sounds freakin great!) Now... this tape copy has been through consumer delivery and then at least a couple hands. Who the hell knows! Sounds intentional though. I've heard muddy copies of this as well. This copy was a welcome upgrade with actual high end and fidelity vs previous copies when I got it. It has the vibe of the original stereo mix but more dynamic and hi-fi. A quad mix that might not be award winning but it's very good and a lot more than the stereo.

I just might be praising the original mastering on the US quad mix along with the mix. This new digital copy is sure clean and obviously lower generation than that Q4 in a lot of ways. It probably could be mastered up in the same way. Maybe it was a little underwhelming in delivery out of the box. Maybe it's even someone's mistake. Even then it's in amazing shape here. Would make for a good rainy day remastering project.

Getting spoiled with the Quadio mastering perhaps? That Ten Years After quad remaster was much like this too. Thin where the Q4 was fat.

 

[quicksrt]

If 'sludgy' or 'murky' is what you're hoping for with the US quad mix, this ain't the mastering for you.

I've spent some time with it over the last couple of days, and compared to the original QuadraDisc LP (which was presumably cut under the supervision of the people who did the quad mix) this digital mastering is considerably brighter. There's an escalating treble boost that starts around 1kHz and maxes out around +8dB at 10kHz, and the bass frequencies below 600Hz are cut by -2dB. The net result is that there isn't much low end power, and the vocals and lead instruments sound veiled behind a wash of cymbals and hi hats, especially compared to the SACD mastering of the UK quad mix (I know, and apples vs. another kind of apples comparison, but still) which has a fantastic bottom end and excellent phantom center imaging.

I have many overly bright CD-4s that would contest this hypothesis, but you could suggest that maybe the original Quadradisc was cut a bit murky with the treble rolled off due to the limitations of CD-4 mastering. Perhaps they didn't want to interfere with the carrier signal, I dunno. But I also compared it to some other well-regarded masterings of the stereo mix - the Audio Fidelity Gold CD, the 96/24 hirez transfer on the DVD-A, as well as the aforementioned UK quad mix on SACD and none of them have the amount of treble energy that this new mastering of the US quad mix has. In comparison the AF CD the US Quadio is 5dB brighter at 10kHz, in comparison to the 96/24 hirez from the DVD-A it's 4dB brighter, and in comparison to the UK quad mix on SACD it's in excess of 7dB brighter.

It's also interesting to note that the EQ profile from track to track across all seven tracks is identical compared to the CD-4, which suggests that either a simple "high shelf" treble boost was applied uniformly to the entire album in post, or that the playback deck was calibrated to deliver a similarly sensitive treble response on playback. I have no idea what kind of financial or logistical constraints the people putting this set together were under so maybe this was the most they could do, but it's disappointing from a consumer perspective that a box set that retails for in excess of $100 in Canada doesn't feature a more tailored approach to the audio contents inside.

I have four channels going through analog amps now and can tone down (or up) the treble / mids / bass (in analog) where it needs it. And I'd really rather have that option than trying to bring back some truncated highs or completely missing high-end. I like to think I can dial this in, but I'll soon see.

Now if the bass is just not there, and the kick drum is not kicking than that's not so good at all. Thanks for the close up examination. What would you rate this is if were a standalone, perhaps a 6.5 or 7?

 

[quicksrt]

Tracking says Monday 4/15 expected arrival, but that it arrived in Highland, CA today - which means it’s really arriving this Friday or Sat I think.

Just keeping everyone up to date on my package.

That was a joke, as nobody really gives a darn when my 50th package arrives.

But get this, my package arrived earlier today, 4 days earlier than tracking said it was expected. And I'm very much liking the US quad mix here.

I may want to give it a 10, but knock down to a 9 because of the cost/value of the big box. Tonight after 6pm I'll be able to play it at proper volume and really hear it cranked.

 

[oxenholme]

...As I listened to all four in a row over the weekend, the two that stood out to me were the 5.1 and the U.K. quad. Hadn’t listened to either in a while. For just a basic listening enjoyment, I like the 5.1. But as a fan big fan of Ritchie Blackmore and Jon Lord, the quad is enjoyable to better appreciate their playing, especially their rhythm playing...

Has the US Rhino release got the UK Quad on it? If the EU Universal release has the UK Quad on it I cannot find it. Is it on T0, T1, or T2?

 

[sjcorne]

UK quad is only on the 2003 EMI UK SACD and 2012 40th CD/DVD box.

 

[cornwall198]

UK quad is only on the 2003 EMI UK SACD and 2012 40th CD/DVD box.

And, if memory serves, lossless on the 2003, and lossy on 2012 40th.

 

[JediJoker]

And, if memory serves, lossless on the 2003, and lossy on 2012 40th.

Correct. SACDs are lossless (as a delivery format; I doubt any are sourced from lossy files), but the DVD included in the 2012 box set is DVD-Video with lossy surround.

 

[DuncanS]

Out of curiosity has anybody who ordered from Jpc.de had their copy yet? I had an email on 27th March saying its being shipped (to the UK) but nothing has arrived yet, and it didn't have a tracking no.

 

[texquad]

Maybe it's just me but the compression sounds excessive, especially on the Atmos mix.

 

[himey]

Maybe it's just me but the compression sounds excessive, especially on the Atmos mix.

The Atmos mix sounds dynamically crankable on my setup.

 

[Dynamic Editor]

The Atmos mix sounds dynamically crankable on my setup.

I think they're referring to the timbre of the instrumentation. The guitars and organ are rendered kinda muddy from the compression Zappa used. It's lacking that clearer buzziness heard in other mixes of the album.

 

[djstephan]

Out of curiosity has anybody who ordered from Jpc.de had their copy yet? I had an email on 27th March saying its being shipped (to the UK) but nothing has arrived yet, and it didn't have a tracking no.

I'm in the same exact boat Duncan , shipment notice on March 27th and nothing beyond that...Patiently waiting !

From past experiences with them they do show up out of the blue, being delivered from a third party.. no tracking is possible..and here's the notice from their website..

"Unfortunately, tracking is not available for this delivery. Deliveries that are not shipped with DHL due to size, weight or other reasons cannot be tracked online."

 

[himey]

other mixes of the album

Which mixes are that, the 5.1? I have heard people complain about compression on the quad, but not the Atmos. Again, I don't have an issue, do you?