Chris Gerhard
2K Club - QQ Super Nova
I have the "Machine Head" DVD-A and it plays fine in all players I have tried including the Oppo DV-980H.
Chris
HiRez Poll Deep Purple - MACHINE HEAD [DVD-A]/[SACD-JAPAN]
- Thread starter JonUrban
- Start date
Help Support QuadraphonicQuad:
I have the "Machine Head" DVD-A and it plays fine in all players I have tried including the Oppo DV-980H.
Chris
Have some time on my hands, so I went back to compare all four format groups, that being the US Quad CD-4/Q4/Q8, European/Austrailian Quad SQ,
US DVD-A, European SACD.
The two European Quad versions are identicle. The US Quad and European Quads were released around the same time. The CD-4 was first on Warners. When they decided to release it in quad in Europe, it was on EMI, an SQ label, so they decided to do a different mix to accomodate the strong points of SQ matrixing. Both are different, and personally I like them both, but give the edge to the CD-4 mix because the mix is more active.
Then came the DVD-A. And for some reason, Warner decided to remix it again, ruining the original Quad intentions, making it very front-centric. After doing a comparison, the DVD-a goes to the bottom of the pile.
Lastly came the SACD. Thank goodness it's the same as the SQ mix unaltered!
Needless to say, I won't be playing the DVD-A often.
I've notice several DVD-as from Warners remixed the Quad version, ruining them and making them front-centric. No Secrets by Carly Simon is another one that dissapoints.
US DVD-A, European SACD.
The two European Quad versions are identicle. The US Quad and European Quads were released around the same time. The CD-4 was first on Warners. When they decided to release it in quad in Europe, it was on EMI, an SQ label, so they decided to do a different mix to accomodate the strong points of SQ matrixing. Both are different, and personally I like them both, but give the edge to the CD-4 mix because the mix is more active.
Then came the DVD-A. And for some reason, Warner decided to remix it again, ruining the original Quad intentions, making it very front-centric. After doing a comparison, the DVD-a goes to the bottom of the pile.
Lastly came the SACD. Thank goodness it's the same as the SQ mix unaltered!
Needless to say, I won't be playing the DVD-A often.
I've notice several DVD-as from Warners remixed the Quad version, ruining them and making them front-centric. No Secrets by Carly Simon is another one that dissapoints.
filper
1K Club - QQ Shooting Star
I don't have the SA-CD to compare the DVD-A mix, but this disc kicks.
I played the LP to death way back when.
I guess I should have picked up the SA-CD when I found a copy a few months ago for comparison, but this disc is just fine.
I give it a 7.
I played the LP to death way back when.
I guess I should have picked up the SA-CD when I found a copy a few months ago for comparison, but this disc is just fine.
I give it a 7.
The DVD-A is fine and the sound is a bit more polished but IMO the SACD with the original quad mix blows this one away! I could be biased because this title was one of the first Q8's that I bought (in 1974) and now I just think that is the way it should sound. Perhaps if I would've had the Q8 of "Dark Side Of The Moon" back in the day I would feel the same way about it. But in that particular case I like them both equally albeit for different reasons.
Dennis
jimfisheye
2K Club - QQ Super Nova
- Joined
- Jan 8, 2010
- Messages
- 3,516
Just heard this disc. Here are the comments I posted at D about this almost certain bootleg. This just has to be a fake. If this was actually an official release then it's one of the most epic screw-ups I've ever heard in my life! This is NOT the quad mix or even anything remotely close to it. The mp3-like sound quality really gives it away. It sounds distorted - like turned up too far with a peak limiter kind of distorted. It seems mostly in stereo with the band in front instead of nicely separated like the original quad mix. Kind of reverby in back and is the center channel a mix of Lf + Rf? I can only speculate. Sounds really awful though. Could the quad master really have been lost? Here's the thing, we know the multitrack tapes still exist because when the vinyl remaster was made there was an entire 2nd lp of the whole album remixed (extra bits at the end of songs and stuff like that). I believe a 2 CD version was also made. Even if it was lost, it could have been recreated. Honestly, it would only take a few hours to remix. You could put up an existing Q8 copy to compare to and match the moves. What's on this disc isn't even close. Again, it sounds very much like the silly "CD upmix" projects you see people post sometimes. Seriously, give any good engineer only an hour with the multitracks and a Q8 copy to match and it would be a LOT closer. Turn in something sounding like this and you'd be fired instantly! Especially for such a classic album. I'm throwing this one away. Get the 24/96 transfer of the Q8 (that somebody kindly made for you as a backup copy of your Q8 tape that you purchased a long time ago because it's been out of print for many years). It rocks like crazy!
More proof:
Look at this DVDA content. Notice how each track is in it's own chapter instead of one chapter with all the album tracks (so they don't have that extra pause glitch when played on a hardware DVD player). That likely comes from using Discwelder and not knowing how to put all the tracks in one chapter. More than that, if this were an official release, there would be 24/96 copies of the stereo mixes in another chapter in the audio folder. There'd likely also be a chapter for the stereo remixes as well. Nope, this is a fake. Don't waste your time with this one folks. The real quad mix is available.
Well, that's what I wrote. It sure looks real though. Now I know about the scenario where a DVDA gets a surround remix when originally it was only released in stereo. Can't have a DVDA without a surround mix right? So some intern turns out a really awful remix to throw on the disc for bonus tracks. Yes Fragile DVDA comes to mind. The difference is that album never had a surround mix and the main focus of the disc is the 24/96 stereo master. A Machine Head DVDA release would certainly have the stereo master in 24/96 and certainly have the original quad mix in 24/96 as well.
More proof:
Look at this DVDA content. Notice how each track is in it's own chapter instead of one chapter with all the album tracks (so they don't have that extra pause glitch when played on a hardware DVD player). That likely comes from using Discwelder and not knowing how to put all the tracks in one chapter. More than that, if this were an official release, there would be 24/96 copies of the stereo mixes in another chapter in the audio folder. There'd likely also be a chapter for the stereo remixes as well. Nope, this is a fake. Don't waste your time with this one folks. The real quad mix is available.
Well, that's what I wrote. It sure looks real though. Now I know about the scenario where a DVDA gets a surround remix when originally it was only released in stereo. Can't have a DVDA without a surround mix right? So some intern turns out a really awful remix to throw on the disc for bonus tracks. Yes Fragile DVDA comes to mind. The difference is that album never had a surround mix and the main focus of the disc is the 24/96 stereo master. A Machine Head DVDA release would certainly have the stereo master in 24/96 and certainly have the original quad mix in 24/96 as well.
the dvda was not a bootleg...
the quad tapes have not been lost...they got reissued later as an sacd
the quad tapes have not been lost...they got reissued later as an sacd
Jimfisheye,
I wonder if you did indeed get a boot. Machine Head was one of the first DVD-A's issued, in fact it originally was sold in a jewel box (!!), and although I have not played it in a while, I seem to recall that it sounded pretty damn good! (Being an old quad freak, I still prefer the SACD)
These days, people with inkjet printers can make a disc graphic that looks professional.
I wonder if it has a watermark? You could copy it and see if the copy plays.
I wonder if you did indeed get a boot. Machine Head was one of the first DVD-A's issued, in fact it originally was sold in a jewel box (!!), and although I have not played it in a while, I seem to recall that it sounded pretty damn good! (Being an old quad freak, I still prefer the SACD)
These days, people with inkjet printers can make a disc graphic that looks professional.
I wonder if it has a watermark? You could copy it and see if the copy plays.
Chris Gerhard
2K Club - QQ Super Nova
I would prefer you wait until it is determined whether or not your disc is a bootleg before voting a 1. I have the proper release, in a jewel case with slipcover and I gave it an 8. If I recall correctly an official release in a super jewel case was issued as well. I wouldn't have thought a bootleg of this title would be available but we are seeing many bootlegs so it would not surprise me if it is, especially in light of your description.
Just to confirm the copy I have is in one of those cool but highly impractical (especially if you need to replace it) Super jewel cases and its no Boot.
Sits on the shelf next to the 'Concerto for Group and Orchestra' DVDA
Rhino might occaisionally go off the rails by using brick wall digital compression on most of their stereo cd's released in the 21st century...but one thing they don't do is make crappy bootlegs.
deep purple dvda is not the only dvda or sacd or dvd that has a new 5.1 remix ,instead of using the old quad mix...even though the quad mixes could have been used....and in deep purple's case the quad mix has been used on an sacd release.
I can't think of a surround title that has 2 different surround mixes in the same package (but there probably is somewhere)....
however with DVDA ,such an extravagence would make it a 2 disc set anyway..
Some examples of other surround 5.1 titles that used a new 5.1 remix instead of the available quad mix (that i can think of) are..
alice cooper billion dollar babies.
the carpenters greatest hits
chicago 2
chicago 5
Marvin Gaye What's going On
The Doors L.A.Woman ( I prefer Love her madly on the dvda 5.1 and Riders on the storm on theold quad mix)
The Beatles Sgt Pepper songs that have been released on the Yellow Submarine dvd
John Lennon's stuff from Imagine and Walls and Bridges
and the box set of The Doors have different mixes to anything that was released on the greatest hits Cd4/Quad reel
and none of these are bootlegs ..just different mixes
there are alot of surround mixes that have the music centered towards the front with a more ambient rear...George Benson Breezin' dvda is one such disc...personally it annoys me there is so much extra reverb... but it is discrete...it is not an upmix
and then there is the Britney Spears mix which sounds really discrete...and it is...a 5.1 mix from dozens of channels on a computer harddrive ... but if you read the engineers article on it, you'll find he also very gently used TC unrap as well. underneath the whole mix .so that there were no dead channels while the very complicated 5.1 mix was going on...which sort of makes it a discrete 5.1 mix mixed in with a lower level upmix
and then there are the releases that have had more than one new 5.1 mix...Queen night at the Opera and the (soon to be released) "Layla"
and not to mention the rather unusual 2 different Quad mixes of Wings Venus and Mars(one on a Q8 and the other on a dts cd) with multichannel cross fading into completely different songs , because of a completely altered track ordering system, that in both cases are still different to the stereo version.
and how many surround mixes are there of Mike Oldfields Tubular Bells..I loose track on the total number of that title....not to mention the different endings.
deep purple dvda is not the only dvda or sacd or dvd that has a new 5.1 remix ,instead of using the old quad mix...even though the quad mixes could have been used....and in deep purple's case the quad mix has been used on an sacd release.
I can't think of a surround title that has 2 different surround mixes in the same package (but there probably is somewhere)....
however with DVDA ,such an extravagence would make it a 2 disc set anyway..
Some examples of other surround 5.1 titles that used a new 5.1 remix instead of the available quad mix (that i can think of) are..
alice cooper billion dollar babies.
the carpenters greatest hits
chicago 2
chicago 5
Marvin Gaye What's going On
The Doors L.A.Woman ( I prefer Love her madly on the dvda 5.1 and Riders on the storm on theold quad mix)
The Beatles Sgt Pepper songs that have been released on the Yellow Submarine dvd
John Lennon's stuff from Imagine and Walls and Bridges
and the box set of The Doors have different mixes to anything that was released on the greatest hits Cd4/Quad reel
and none of these are bootlegs ..just different mixes
there are alot of surround mixes that have the music centered towards the front with a more ambient rear...George Benson Breezin' dvda is one such disc...personally it annoys me there is so much extra reverb... but it is discrete...it is not an upmix
and then there is the Britney Spears mix which sounds really discrete...and it is...a 5.1 mix from dozens of channels on a computer harddrive ... but if you read the engineers article on it, you'll find he also very gently used TC unrap as well. underneath the whole mix .so that there were no dead channels while the very complicated 5.1 mix was going on...which sort of makes it a discrete 5.1 mix mixed in with a lower level upmix
and then there are the releases that have had more than one new 5.1 mix...Queen night at the Opera and the (soon to be released) "Layla"
and not to mention the rather unusual 2 different Quad mixes of Wings Venus and Mars(one on a Q8 and the other on a dts cd) with multichannel cross fading into completely different songs , because of a completely altered track ordering system, that in both cases are still different to the stereo version.
and how many surround mixes are there of Mike Oldfields Tubular Bells..I loose track on the total number of that title....not to mention the different endings.
Maybe your copy is fake, since I don't know where you got it. But I doubt it. It matches the description of mine (though I like the surround mix) and mine's definitely authentic. I bought it at Best Buy, back in 2001, when DVD-A was the brand new thing; Machine Head was a new release. It's in a large 'super' jewel case, like most early DVD-A were. The authoring, as on many early DVD-As, is peculiar, which explains the folder architecture. And it's a new 5.1 surround mix...I believe it says so right in the credits. There was no intent to 'match' the old quad mix (which itself was used later, on the SACD.)
neil wilkes
2K Club - QQ Super Nova
It certainly does.
Early DVD-A, before Sonic bought the MEI authoring package, was a command line affair with no way to preview anything at all until a test mould had been made.
Then we got authoring grade blank discs, which were undersized & required a Pioneer SCSI burner to make and were a huge step forward.
Then we got the MEI/Sonic partnership & got a sort of GUI going that culminated in 6 separate applets being used to create the Audio_TS and a little tool from Panasonic to make an ISO image. By then the labels had in general lost their nerve though, trying instead to somehow "monetarize" the internet (talk about a thankless & almost herculean task.
No - cancel the herculean, much more reminiscent of the punishment of Sisyphus) and it was all but relegated to what we have now - a niche format.
The DVD-A mix is more an SQ matrix Lp mix--instruments/voices obvious in each channel, a bit of bleed in the others; it's quad, but not truly discrete to each channel as you would have expected back in the day. The old quad wasn't perfect but an entirely different mix, different approach, and one I still prefer. I think the newer mix is harsher, less forgiving, but tougher and gives some of what is IMO a rather basic, even banal rock album, some teeth. The old quad mix gives us better isolation but also reveals many of the limitations of a very basic and limited rock group. They really weren't that good (though their '73 Live Lp caught them at some kind of peak), they just hung around a long time.
ED
ED
I prefer the much more ambitious quad mix on the SACD of Machine Head but the fidelity of the DVD-A from the original multi track master totally outshines it, imho and makes it a much easier listen.
Similarly I find the remixed bonus tracks on the cd's of all the Deep Purple back catalogue are of superior sound quality to the remasters of the original stereo mixes that comprise the remastered cd's main album tracks.
Similarly I find the remixed bonus tracks on the cd's of all the Deep Purple back catalogue are of superior sound quality to the remasters of the original stereo mixes that comprise the remastered cd's main album tracks.
oops! sorry, I misread! You said you've got the Japanese SACD clone and the original DVD-A!
Well obviously for collecting purposes you may as well hang onto both.. they'll both go up (& up!) in value I guess.. but from a sound quality perspective the DVD-A with none of the noise-shaping/ultrasonic DSD quirks (etc..!) of SACD would be the way to go, I imagine?!?
Well obviously for collecting purposes you may as well hang onto both.. they'll both go up (& up!) in value I guess.. but from a sound quality perspective the DVD-A with none of the noise-shaping/ultrasonic DSD quirks (etc..!) of SACD would be the way to go, I imagine?!?
9. I got this when the DVD-A first hit and have it in a std jewel box. Mix is good, although I do prefer the SQ UK LP, which I also bought when it hit. Musically, it's a classic.
Chris-in-CT
Member
- Joined
- Jun 28, 2009
- Messages
- 27
I am considering updating my collection with some of the new Japanese SACD releases....does anyone know if there's any difference between the new Fleetwood Mac SACD and the original DVD-A? Are the mixes the same or different? I love the DVD-A mix and don't want to part with it if the Japanese SACD is different...thanks!
Chris,
All 10 Japanese WB SACDs were created using the US DVD-A 5.1 masters. There is no difference in the audio streams between the discs. You may notice a difference if your system has better playback of one or the other formats, but the source material is the same.
Similar threads
- Poll
