HiRez Poll Deep Purple - MACHINE HEAD [DVD-A]/[SACD-JAPAN]

[fredblue]

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!

I'd only do it if for investment purposes as the Japanese SACDs will appreciate in value quite significantly I reckon.

Or if you prefer instant access to playback rather than all the potential of having to switch the TV on & added menu navigating/remote-fiddling of (some) DVDA's.

Oh and they're the same mixes. I can't see how the SACD's would sound any better than the original DVDA's.. in fact some might argue they'll sound worse (potential for strange stuff to creep in when going from PCM source to DSD etc.. and all the arguments about the high-res PCM of DVDA sounding closer to the master tapes than noise-shaped DSD/SACD.

If I were in your shoes I'd save your money.. Oh and keep your Peter Gabriel's etc..! hehe..

 

[leevitalone1]

real classic! I bought the LP the same day it was released, after work on payday in the record store and they had Lazy playing, so I'm looking for something new and bingo! me and My friends went nuts that night listening to it. Really glad it got on HR
I gave it a 9

 

[strat54]

Machine Head DVD-A sounds really good, a classic.

 

[Quad Linda]

A/B'ing the DVD-A to the DVD-V Quad (SQ) mix in DTS. Advanced res is sooo much more open and immediate. Still, I prefer the original mix. The compression on the DVD-V gives it a more solid feel, which I kind of like. Don't squawk about DTS's compression, or lack thereof, this sounds much more compressed than the DVD-A. Perhaps that's because the DVD-A is a 2000 mix, going back to the master tapes. The DVD-V goes back to the 1972 Quad mix. The dynamic range and clarity of advanced res is most alluring. I also like the warm midrange and enhanced high end of the SQ LP through my moving coil cartridge. Although I haven't heard the EMI SACD, it is very probable that it combines many of the things I like about the various versions. Then again, the EMI SACD may sound just as compressed as the DTS. I have yet to play the SQ CD.

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.

 

[Bill Houston]

Mix/Sonics: 8
Music: 6.5

 

[edisonbaggins]

Don't know what all the hubbub is about this disc. I'd love to hear the quad sometime, but the Japanese SACD is awesome.

 

[Simon A]

Don't know what all the hubbub is about this disc. I'd love to hear the quad sometime, but the Japanese SACD is awesome.

It's not that there's anything wrong about this disc or the mix. It's just that once I've heard the Quad, I just felt that the mix felt "right" and more organic compared to the 5.1. It may just be a matter of taste. The Quad is fully immersive and lively.

 

[edisonbaggins]

It's not that there's anything wrong about this disc or the mix. It's just that once I've heard the Quad, I just felt that the mix felt "right" and more organic compared to the 5.1. It may just be a matter of taste. The Quad is fully immersive and lively.

Totally understandable. Yet, the 5.1 mix is pretty discrete and immersive, with great sonics. If the quad is better it must be very good indeed!

 

[fredblue]

Totally understandable. Yet, the 5.1 mix is pretty discrete and immersive, with great sonics. If the quad is better it must be very good indeed!

Please check your PMs in 8 minutes...

Ps. See what you think but one of my main bugbears with the SQ Quad mix is the drums sound like crisp packets being scrunched for the most part, drums are totally given a shot in the arm with the newer 5.1 remix (though I'm a drum nut freakazoid so the drum sound is v.important to me, it might not be such a big deal to others :upthumb )

 

[ssully]

It's not that there's anything wrong about this disc or the mix. It's just that once I've heard the Quad, I just felt that the mix felt "right" and more organic compared to the 5.1. It may just be a matter of taste. The Quad is fully immersive and lively.

There's two different quad mixes: UK and US.

So AFAIK overall there's three surround mixes:
1970s US quad (later released on SACD)
1970s UK quad
2001 DVD-A 5.1 (re-released on SACD)

IIRC difference between US and UK quad is quite notable during the guitar solo of 'Lazy'. Different edits.

 

[Philip Spinner]

The US quad from reel to reel is the best hands down as far as I'm concerned.

 

[timbre4]

Would've thought somebody would comment that the SACD (EMI 07243 5386012) includes the "1972" great quad mix and not the complete DVD-A 5.1 mix of the album itself. I believe this to be the same as the UK quad mix but would have to compare it to the US version. It also includes 3 additional tracks - Maybe I'm a Leo (alternate mix), Lazy (alternate mix), When a Blind Man (definitely 5.1 from DVD-A version)

 

[kap'n krunch]

Would've thought somebody would comment that the SACD (EMI 07243 5386012) includes the "1972" great quad mix and not the complete DVD-A 5.1 mix of the album itself. I believe this to be the same as the UK quad mix but would have to compare it to the US version. It also includes 3 additional tracks - Maybe I'm a Leo (alternate mix), Lazy (alternate mix), When a Blind Man (definitely 5.1 from DVD-A version)

AFAIK the "Great" Quad mix (the one released in the UK in SQ LP) was never released on DVD-A, only on SACD.

The 5.1 "modern" mix was released on DVD-A..

 

[rusinurbe]

AFAIK the "Great" Quad mix (the one released in the UK in SQ LP) was never released on DVD-A, only on SACD.

The 5.1 "modern" mix was released on DVD-A..

Wasn't the quad mix also available in the 40th anniversary box set on DVD DTS as well ?

 

[fredblue]

Wasn't the quad mix also available in the 40th anniversary box set on DVD DTS as well ?

Yes! :upthumb
(I should clarify, the UK Quad as found on the EMI Hybrid SACD is also in DTS and Dolby Digital DVD-V in the 40th Anniversary box set )

 

[fredblue]

:banana:

 

[JanBakker]

This is a MCh Flac sample from the 40th Anniv. DVD-V...

https://www.dropbox.com/s/gi7n7aythks0wpd/05 - Smoke On The Water UK QUAD.flac?dl=0

(See if you like the crisp packet drums? )
Everything else about it I love love LOVE... however, the drums, baby.. those drums...

Do you like the drums on the 5.1 SACD more? I ask this because I have that one and I think the drumsound is good on that one although I have the feeling that most members here prefer the quad mixes.

 

[fredblue]

Do you like the drums on the 5.1 SACD more? I ask this because I have that one and I think the drumsound is good on that one although I have the feeling that most members here prefer the quad mixes.

Yes I do prefer the drum sound on the 5.1 SACD, various other aspects I prefer of the Quad by comparison.. its a bit like the Layla situation = if I could take aspects of Climie's mixes and combine them with aspects of Scheiners' mixes that for me would be the perfect Layla in surround, as it is, well, I enjoy bits of both sets of remixes and am thankful such a classic album received not one but two surround remixes!

 

[Philip Spinner]

If Audio Fidelity ever managed to release the U.S. quad mix that was only available on cd-4, Q8 and Q4 this whole debate on which has a better surround mix would finally be put to rest. The U.S. quad mix blows away all of the others, absolutely. Just my humble opinion though.

 

[kap'n krunch]

If Audio Fidelity ever managed to release the U.S. quad mix that was only available on cd-4, Q8 and Q4 this whole debate on which has a better surround mix would finally be put to rest. The U.S. quad mix blows away all of the others, absolutely. Just my humble opinion though.

UK SQ LP mix fan here though!!!!

:slap::smack:

well, to each their own....





OK , no, no way is the CD-4 version better in a million years!!!!(OK, well, it's not that bad..I just prefer the UK one...)