HiRez Poll Doors - LA WOMAN [DVD-A/SACD]

[JonUrban]

Please post your comments, thoughts and observations on this title released in 2000 as one of the very first DVD-Audio discs, sold in a standard CD Sized jewel case, then restocked in the newer large DVD-A sized "Super Jewel Box", then in a cardboard case as part of the "Perception" Box set in the DVD-Audio format, then in 2014 as a single US SACD (Made in Austria) or as part of the Limited Numbered Edition "Infinite" Box from Analog Productions.

Got that? @:

 

[sspsandy]

Over time I've grown to really like this disc, it makes great use of the 5.1 mix, especially considering how ancient the technology was when it was recorded. While I still prefer the mix on the CD-4 Best Of The Doors for the two tracks from this album, the treatment of the material is quite imaginative. This was never my favorite Doors album, although it does have some great tracks on it. Now if they would do the 1st album, Strange Days, or Waiting For The Sun with the full version of The Celebration Of The Lizard, then we'd be cookin' with gas!

 

[dprokopy]

Far from one of my favorites, and not one I listen to very often. It suffers (greatly) from what I've discussed in other threads, and that is the curse of the surround mixer (in this case, original producer/engineer Bruce Botnick) taking it upon himself to "restore" missing elements from the original multitracks. (Another obnoxious example is the drum track on Fleetwood Mac's "Never Going Back Again.")

In the case of "L.A. Woman," Botnick has added a few "yelps" (for lack of a better term) from Morrison in "Cars Hiss By My Window," along with an additional verse. A fuzzed-out guitar intro to the title track is also restored. While these things are certainly interesting curios, my ultimate feeling is that a surround mix should, in the end, try to replicate the "feel" of the original stereo release, while still taking advantage of the surround soundstage as much as possible. If it's a question of restoring, say, a song that was originally left off an album for one reason or another, I'm not as upset. (Adding "Silver Springs" to "Rumours" was a good idea, in my mind - although they put it in an entirely inappropriate slot, and shuffled another song to the end in doing so!) But I found the added "bonus" snippets on "L.A. Woman" to be distracting, and it's kept me from listening to it very often. I wouldn't be opposed to these "alternate" mixes being included as, say, bonus tracks. But the album itself should be as close to the original intent as possible. (Botnick similarly ruined the most recent CD remastering of the group's debut by reinstating the "she get high" line in "Break On Through," and Morrison's f-bomb tirade in "The End." Again, these would have worked better as seperate bonus tracks; but included with the album proper, it's distracting beyond belief.)

Likewise, Botnick's surround mix reveals the limitations of the original, limited technology under which the album was recorded. Having only 8 tracks to work with, he's forced to resort to surround "tricks" to keep things interesting (witness the "bouncing" drum track in "Love Her Madly"). This doesn't bode well for the group's earlier releases (the first two of which were done on 4-track - not much you can comfortably or interestingly do with that, when it comes to creating surround mixes). Granted, the quad mixes of the group's material that exists already (on a quad-only "best of" album released in the seventies) aren't awful... but they're far from anything you'd want to use to impress your friends with. (My recollection of the mixes for the early material were that Morrison's vocals were front and center, with the two tracks used for the instrumentation spread DIAGONALLY across the rear/left and front/right speakers, with the forth overdub track placed somewhere else.)

At any rate... great album, musically. But not the most spectacular example of surround mixing, in my opinion...

 

[Eggplant]

Mixed feelings on this mix.

As to the extended tracks, e.g., L.A. Woman, I'm okay with the concept. I'm much more put off by anything that changes the actual sound or balance of the original. I disagree that the original Best of quad mix is unspectacular -- there's no gimmickry like the bouncing drums in Love Her Madly, but I used Riders on the Storm as a demo back in the day. Frankly, many of the best surround mixes just separate the instruments well and let the music do the rest. I loved the original Best of mix for this reason and one other: it was extremely faithful to the original stereo. Not surprising, since it was mixed 1) by the original engineer 2) back in the day. Ever notice how live performances of hit records change more and more as years go by? Musicians, understandably, get tired of doing the same old arrangements year after year and want to update things. Often, engineers seem to shy away from effects that gave the original a unique twist, thinking them too gimmicky or over-the-top (heavy reverb, for example). But guess what? That's pop music. A similar restlessness in engineers drives them to "update" their mixes. But is that what buyers want?

In regards to pure sound quality -- not instrument placement or other surround issues -- I love the way the DVD-A's, esp the Rhino titles, have brought the sound of classic titles into the new century. The first release, Brain Salad Surgery, made my jaw drop. L.A. Woman is similarly impressive in this regard. This clearly can be done without losing the flavor of the original release.

But listen carefully to the opening of my favorite track, Love Her Madly. Hear the back strums (DAH DAH duh DAH duh DAH duh DUH DAH DAH ....)? Now listen to either the stereo or the original quad for comparison. In the originals, the guitar sound is electric and bright -- no backstrum is audible. This one "subtle" change reduces a unique, instantly recognizable opening to a dull, undistinguished strum. For me, it kills the track. Is this necessary?

 

[dprokopy]

I disagree that the original Best of quad mix is unspectacular -- there's no gimmickry like the bouncing drums in Love Her Madly, but I used Riders on the Storm as a demo back in the day.?

Sorry, didn't mean to come across as harsh as I did about the Quad mixes - I actually quite enjoy them, particularly the later stuff (the track from "Absolutely Live" is surprisingly excellent). And of course, "Riders" sounds very similar in the Quad mix as it does on the newer DVD-A release. (I guess it's sort of a no-brainer mix - spread the band around up front, throw the rain noises in the rears...)

Frankly, many of the best surround mixes just separate the instruments well and let the music do the rest. I loved the original Best of mix for this reason and one other: it was extremely faithful to the original stereo. Not surprising, since it was mixed 1) by the original engineer 2) back in the day.

I agree 100% here. My favorite surround mixes are essentially identical to the stereo mixes, but "pulled apart" with some instruments thrown in the back (or around to the sides, etc.). And not in a "fake surround" sense, either. I love discreteness, where appropriate. But I don't need things bouncing around the room to remind me that it's in surround sound. (Reminds me of those mid-sixties early stereo mixes where engineers felt the need to swoop things back and forth... think The Rascals' "Good Lovin'" or a lot of the Mamas & Papas stuff, especially "I Saw Her Again Last Night".)

 

[Jesper]

I like this album a lot! It use surround channels very well. 10 from me...

 

[MIDIQ]

I had to get this one out of the collection and listen to it again, again, glad i did. I don't remember it being very good, and haven't listened to it in almost a year,but i liked it quite a bit. Not great but good. I give it an 8.

 

[zabble]

I had to get this one out of the collection and listen to it again, again, glad i did. I don't remember it being very good

Same here. Upon revisiting this one, I discovered what it was that turned me away before. Has anyone else noticed that whoever did the mastering was asleep at the switch? When I play this disc, I find it essential to crank up the surrounds. In fact, the best way to get the front-to-back balance right is to turn on the song "L.A. Woman" and forward to about 5:00 minutes in at the "mojo rising" bit. Turn up the rears so that when the voice circles around, it is equal in all speakers. Once you get this balance right, the album mostly sounds good

...listen carefully to the opening of my favorite track, Love Her Madly. Hear the back strums (DAH DAH duh DAH duh DAH duh DUH DAH DAH ....)? Now listen to either the stereo or the original quad for comparison. In the originals, the guitar sound is electric and bright -- no backstrum is audible. This one "subtle" change reduces a unique, instantly recognizable opening to a dull, undistinguished strum. For me, it kills the track.

I agree. Apparently, Bruce Botnick loaded up the master 8 tracks and mixed them without regard for which and where certain overdubs were originally trimmed. That opening electric guitar line is such a signature sound, that adding in the doubled acoustic strumming takes away more than it adds. I believe Botnick mixed the quad version as well, and if you listen to that version of this track, you'll notice that the acoustic guitar doesn't come in until right after the drums kick in---as it should be IMHO. Perhaps the band members originally guided BB as to what bits to leave in and what to leave out. I also noticed some spots on the song "L.A. Woman" had extra acoustic guitar bits, that were wisely left off the original.

A few other observations:

Love Her Madly The first drum swirl panning works for me. The panning on the organ swell at the end of the organ solo sounds sloppy, as does the 2nd circular speaker drum panning. Don't get me wrong, I like motion. But only when it's done carefully.

L'America I love special effects, but when they are constant like the guitar panning on this one, they lose their "special"ness. I get dizzy listening to this track (perhaps that is the intention?).

Crawling King Snake Though I don't have my subwoofer hooked up, the bass comes through loud and clear on all tracks BUT this one.

Riders on the Storm It seems the center channel should have been raised a hair in the mastering process, just enough to give the drums and lead vocal a bit more clarity.

Save for a few bad engineering decisions and easily fixed mastering problems, this disc does have many good moments. I'm glad I gave it a second chance.

 

[ChristopherLees]

I always felt that the quad mix of Riders on the storm is much better than this dvda mix.....Jim Morrisons voice is all around you through the 4 speakers on the quad mix (much more frightening to listen to)whereas on the dvda it's really just the front centre...
On the other hand I prefer love her madly on the dvda to the quad mix...
and where else are you going to get the rest of the album in surround???

So if you like the doors you should get this one...

 

[EMB]

I rate in a 7....some wonky aspects, some highly enjoyable things going on, and always reminds us it's 5.1, and at times, at its best, even playful. All of it is very open...perhaps, at times, too open, since we hear things that tend to mix with or obfuscate what was magical to us about the original stereo(and Quad for a few songs).

"Love Her Madly" is fun, but sounds kind of odd, even now as I replay it tonight after the Sox sweep of the Angels; it seems dispersed, somehow, lacking the impact of the original, even as I remember the big thrill of first hearing it, without reviews or any other guidance, with the longer end. Cool, but now, a bit maddening.

"Riders" is still great, but the 'whisper vocal' is subdued(to my ears)compared to the BOTD mix....pity, it really took me by surprise back in the day....otherwise, the golden rain falling is still cool to hear....

And I thought by now we would have at least one or two more Doors DVD-A's...that's what's so sad to this fan. We should have gotten more than token titles.


ED

 

[neil wilkes]

Only just bought this one last week - I had to, as I got the Quad version, and wanted to hear the differences.

All in all, I only gave this one a 6 - I just don't know what to make of it overall.
Seems almost a disappointment, yet at the same time almost a must buy.
But the fact remains for me that the Quad version is better.

Worth a buy for certain, but don't expect too much.

 

[Kazaam]

I actually would've done 5-1/2 if that were an option, but I dropped it down to just a 5. (That's just my little way of showing my dislike for mixing vocals hard into the center channel, I guess.)

That said, I liked the surround element at times; but I doubt I'll listen to this very often.

 

[sam77aus]

This is definitely one of my favorite albums, one thing I noticed about this release is that the stereo mix (the original it sounds like) on this DVD-A is 24bit/88KHz, why 88KHz?, has it just been up-sampled from the original stereo CD release. The surround mix has new bits added to it, which is interesting sometimes and other times a bit annoying, but overall a good mix.

 

[timbre4]

Not my favorite Doors album either; I get more out of Soft parade that this overall. When you stand back and look at them all, the 1st, Strange Days and Morrison Hotel tower over L.A. Woman, IMHO.

The quad mixes are great, astonishing back in the day and still nice today. The DVD-A mix seems uneven to me. Parts jump out as very good and others are stabs at something, I'm just not sure what that intention is. Okay, you've got a fancy DAW and you're showing us some panning tricks you couldn't do before, but it can be distracting.

Feels like a practice round and then they ended the game before getting on to the real stuff. Let us hope this is reversed in the next year or so...

 

[analogdemon]

I really like the mix on this. To me, the center is where all lead vocals belong. Good stuff. No, this isn't the Doors' best album, but it's still great. And frankly, I'd take this over nothing. I give it a 9.

 

[filper]

I'm lovin' it !

The surround mix opens up the master tracks beautifully.

The busy 'acid' surround mix fits perfectly on 'L.A. Woman'. It keeps your ears boppin'.

It's really cool isolating Jim's whispered vocal track on 'Riders On The Storm'.

 

[Dave Horn]

One of the first DVD-A releases.

It's also one of the few discs with a totally different verse substituted for the original in one of the songs, "Cars Hiss by my Window". The newer DVD-A in the more recent box "Perception" has both the original and "new" verse making it a longer song than that on the original LP, CD or DVD-A. This is not even commented on in the notes in either.

 

[Dave Horn]

Far from one of my favorites, and not one I listen to very often. It suffers (greatly) from what I've discussed in other threads, and that is the curse of the surround mixer (in this case, original producer/engineer Bruce Botnick) taking it upon himself to "restore" missing elements from the original multitracks. (Another obnoxious example is the drum track on Fleetwood Mac's "Never Going Back Again.")

In the case of "L.A. Woman," Botnick has added a few "yelps" (for lack of a better term) from Morrison in "Cars Hiss By My Window," along with an additional verse. A fuzzed-out guitar intro to the title track is also restored. While these things are certainly interesting curios, my ultimate feeling is that a surround mix should, in the end, try to replicate the "feel" of the original stereo release, while still taking advantage of the surround soundstage as much as possible. If it's a question of restoring, say, a song that was originally left off an album for one reason or another, I'm not as upset. (Adding "Silver Springs" to "Rumours" was a good idea, in my mind - although they put it in an entirely inappropriate slot, and shuffled another song to the end in doing so!) But I found the added "bonus" snippets on "L.A. Woman" to be distracting, and it's kept me from listening to it very often. I wouldn't be opposed to these "alternate" mixes being included as, say, bonus tracks. But the album itself should be as close to the original intent as possible. (Botnick similarly ruined the most recent CD remastering of the group's debut by reinstating the "she get high" line in "Break On Through," and Morrison's f-bomb tirade in "The End." Again, these would have worked better as seperate bonus tracks; but included with the album proper, it's distracting beyond belief.)

Likewise, Botnick's surround mix reveals the limitations of the original, limited technology under which the album was recorded. Having only 8 tracks to work with, he's forced to resort to surround "tricks" to keep things interesting (witness the "bouncing" drum track in "Love Her Madly"). This doesn't bode well for the group's earlier releases (the first two of which were done on 4-track - not much you can comfortably or interestingly do with that, when it comes to creating surround mixes). Granted, the quad mixes of the group's material that exists already (on a quad-only "best of" album released in the seventies) aren't awful... but they're far from anything you'd want to use to impress your friends with. (My recollection of the mixes for the early material were that Morrison's vocals were front and center, with the two tracks used for the instrumentation spread DIAGONALLY across the rear/left and front/right speakers, with the forth overdub track placed somewhere else.)

At any rate... great album, musically. But not the most spectacular example of surround mixing, in my opinion...

I'm afraid that I can't agree with the comments on the mixes on "LA Woman". I think they're in the main superb, especially the "new" verse in "Cars Hiss by my Window". I also like the restoration of the "high" line and all the "f'ing" on the first LP, supposedly originally mixed so far down that you couldn't hear them. I'm very happy with the few trick effects and other extras that were thrown in, like the drumming on "Love Her Madly". To be honest I can't see the point in listening to music on a fancy surround system if it doesn't sound different to the stereo mixes. Just like mono and stereo mixes were often substantially different on vinyl, had quad or 5.1/6.1 mixes been possible and released at the time those mono/stereo mixes were, then they would have been substantially different too.

 

[rusinurbe]

I like the extra bits as well it helped breath new life into an album I grew tired of. it was never my favorite doors album but I do like the additions on the whole.

I also agree with the previous poster who hit the nail on the head for me its a new mix and should be that and not a fax' of the stereo album or even the mono album, (thats best left to Silverline), the mix should reflect the extra space that you have with 5 speakers.

 

[JonUrban]

The votes for this one are all over the place. It's interesting to go back and read the comments after a disc has been out for a while and compare them to how we feel now. It also makes one want to go grab the disc and dust if off for another spin!