ELP Emerson Lake & Palmer Cataloge in 5.1 Surround

[LuvMyQuad]

I don't have this disc, and have no plans to buy it (especially in light of the comments I'm reading here). I do have the 2000 Rhino BSS DVD-A, which I like very much. In fact I consider it demo material for several reasons. So, no review from me, but I do have my two cents to add on a couple of issues.

1. The Jakko mixing setup: I believe his 5.1 setup consists of 5 identical monitors, all hanging (the left front is not shown in the pic), all angled, equal distanced, and all probably optimized to converge their on-axis sound fields directly on the mixing chair. I use 5 identical monitors in my system and IMHO this (small near field monitors and a well placed sub) is the best way to produce a great 5.1 surround field in a smaller room. I love my setup, but I drool over his. Less reflections, no height mismatch problems, drool, drool, drool. Don't for a second think the man is working with a flawed setup. I also have Homo Erraticus which I also think is mixed superbly (FYI: he appears with Ian Anderson in the "making of" video).

2. The reason for a remix: I guess my real comment here is, given what is universally regarded as a fine 5.1 effort on the original 2000 BSS DVD-A, why even try to remix it. Will we really be looking forward to a new The Yes Album mix in a few years, only to be disappointed? All considered, this release seems so unnecessary, and doomed to fail. Can you blame Steven Wilson for bowing out if he got any indication of how the release was going to be handled?

 

[DennisMoore Jr.]

Mr Kellogg employed some very cool subtle sub-harmonic bass synthesis that gave the Rhino DVD-A a lovely enhanced bass foundation that I still enjoy very much.

Very nice tech tid-bit. This makes perfect sense. I've been playing the 2000 Rhino DVD-A of BSS for compare and I noticed that immediately. Even though the bass is distorted at the beginning of KE9 3rd(which will cause a loss of low frequencies) there is a great warm low frequency component to it in addition. So the distorted beginning part doesn't overpower the mix. In addition when the clean bass sound comes in, the Rhino DVD-A still mantains a low frequency component as well. The result is a solid foundation on the low end for the whole tune, which anchors it.

Jakko's mix doesn't have that extra low end so the bass(aside from being way too loud) has a one dimensional feel to it and the track suffers. It really does feel like a "practice take"

From what I can gather here and there, it seems the multitracks for this album are a bit of a mess, and thus it may be more difficult to faithfully reproduce the original mix...

Many of us have done some multi-track recording & signal processing & mixing(me at a college & amateur level). I can't imagine trying to mix such a complex mix like BSS. What's more is: The "new" mixer doesn't get any cheat sheets that the original mixer used. Without a doubt BSS would be a mix strictly for the best of the professional sound men. Having said that. I spent around 100dollars U.S. for this 5.1. And I guess as a customer I will be a little more frank in my reviews than others who are connected to in some way, the production.

I thought timbre made a fantastic post and since the 5.1 world is here to stay, yes there is always a chance of a new BluRay or other BSS release with a better mix than what we got, but there still is the matter of the $100. They don't give away this stuff for free, at least not to me.

I did learn a lot more about a 5.1 mix with all these great comments here, so that gives me a better appreciation for a really fine mix when we do get one.

Like I intimated in a prior post, I hope the 5.1 remix of Trilogy(if it has been done) gets a little look-over just to make sure its the best we can get. I'm sure any ELP recording would be most difficult to remix in 5.1.

 

[ssully]

I'm curious about his setup as well. Based on pictures of his studio found here, it's certainly not the way I would have my monitors setup for mixing in 5.1 surround, nor does it follow the NARAS guidelines for surround mixing.
But then I wonder how well each of our listening systems are setup and if they are setup properly or not.

For example, on my home listening system, while playing a test tone through each speaker individually, I noticed that when all of the speakers were set to an even level, the tone was significantly louder coming out the center speaker than it was coming out of the other 4. Then when I dropped the level about 7 notches on the Center channel, the tone level was now more consistent with the other channels.
Then, when I started listening to some mixes again (like this BSS Mix), suddenly the center channel sat better in the mix with the other channels. Before, it was like whatever was coming out of the center channel was really poking out in front of the rest of the mix. Now it sounds better overall.
This is also the way it sounds in the main studios I use for 5.1 mixing on MTSU's campus.

Because my Master's Final Project is all about mixing for 5.1 surround, I'm really trying to make my listening environments as consistent as possible.

This is why virtually all modern AVRs have at minimum an automatic 'Speaker Level' function which, along with 'Speaker Distance', calibrate the speakers to a microphone placed at the main listening position. If people are NOT using this (or aren't doing it manually,somehow), then *of course* surround mixes won't sound 'balanced'. (Actually if speaker levels and distances aren't accounted for in for 2-channel, that won't sound its best either.)

Room EQ goes on top of these basic calibrations.

If some people here are using these tools, and others aren't, it might explain the wild variations in perceived quality and impact (e.. bass) in reports here on the same release.

 

[ssully]

I just gave the new 5.1 mix a listen. It's a mixed bag to be sure. On the plus side it's an active and discrete mix (which is appropriate) but it appears that Jakko's goal was not simply to expand the soundstage of the original but rather to re-interpret it. There are loads of bits that were either buried or muted in the original that pop up throughout. This isn't necessarily a bad thing but I did find it distracting at times.

There are some fine moments but much of it suffers from a lack of good balance. Keith, Greg and Carl each are all too faint at various times. The lead vocal is placed in the center speaker but with virtually no support in the other channels (save for occasional light reverb). This is an odd approach that leaves the vocal sounding somewhat disconnected. Plus the vocal often shares the center channel with other instruments. And, yes, the bass is FAR TOO LOUD in the 3rd Impression! When that distortion pedal kicks in run for the hills. It absolutely buries the keyboards in the intro.

I prefer the older Kellogg mix but I’ll check out the rest of the set and give the 5.1 mix a few more listens before voting.

Lead vocal is almost entirely in the center channel on the Kellogg mix too. Along with bass.

 

[ssully]

Been buried with work, took some time to listen as a consumer this morning after not playing this DVD-A for 2-3 weeks. I'll answer the main question first and then qualify it as best I can. The bass is indeed louder on KE9 3rd Impression.

Qualifiers: I play bass because of Greg Lake and John Wetton, having seen them both live in 1974; I understand the role of bass guitar, I know where Moog bass is employed. This album is burned into my senses from hundreds of chrome cassette with undecoded Dolby B brightness and then good and bad CDs after that and of course John Kellogg's 2000 jewel that I lusted for so badly I bought the $500 JVC lemon DVD-A player just to have ELP BSS in 5.1 surround. Mr Kellogg employed some very cool subtle sub-harmonic bass synthesis that gave the Rhino DVD-A a lovely enhanced bass foundation that I still enjoy very much.

Where in particular? I ask because there is one place where I always *expect* lower-octave tracking, based on the old 2-channel mix, but it seems to have been de-emphasized on Kellogg's 5.1 mix : at the line 'No man yields who flies in my ship' on KE9 Pt 3.

 

[ssully]

It is true that Jakko emphasizes certain elements and unmutes things previously buried that we'd never heard in the original mix and I really like that aspect. It's what I think I know with a few left turns applied. The vocal is almost always very clear and up front isolated (featured prominently) in the center. The previous reverb philosophy (created by producer Greg Lake) was tossed out and the vocals seem more direct as a result.

Fwiw, there's bit of this on the Kellogg mix too -- a stray piano chord on the quiet part of 'Toccatta' that i certainly never heard on the record...

And of course the use of an alternate vocal take on 'Jerusalem' and "Benny"

 

[d0zer]

My exemplar arrived yesterdy. Did listen to the dvd-a once, so I won't commend on the sound. But I'm pretty disappointed with the package itself. Not only didn't they bother to recreate the original artwork, the booklet is a thin flimsy thing printed on cheap paper with no not common-known information in it. The fifth disc has no individual space in the package and is thrown in the small slipcase. For that much money I really expected more. Look at "Aqualung" or "Quadrophenia" (okay, here they found another way to get more money from us), here at least you get some value for your dollars.

 

[Robert van Diggele]

1st Impression part 1.

The set arrived yesterday from Amazon DE. Decently packed in an LP mailer and places within an outer box as well. The box itself looks nice. Although a bit flimpsy on the outside , it feels strong enough to last a long time. The 5th disc tucked away in the LP sleeve is a bit ackward. A placeholder on the left part of the gatefold sleeve would have been better. On the other hand, the dvda will be played the most of all discs, so that one will be put on the cd shelf, while the rest can stay inside the box. With probably the alternate album being played now and then.

As I am not that familiar with the music, I listened two times to the stereo yesterday. The songs are very good and the sound is great. Good work done by the archive personel to bake the tapes and give Jakko the digital files to work with.

1st Impression Part 2

Today I listened to the 5.1 two times as well. I was not sure what to expct from Jakko. His 5.1 output is still a bit of a mixed bag to me. While I like his Scarcity of Miracles and the Homo Erracticus mixes, his Weather Systems 5.1 does not really match the stereo feeling. This BSS 5.1 is more to my liking, so that is three out of four, not a bad score.

To start with the base yes the bass at the beginning of the 3rd Impression is loud and a bit overwhelming. It minimises the keyboards but the loud bass is a great effect. I do not find this disturbing. During the remainder of the track, the bass is in all of the speakers, in balance with the rest of the instruments.

I do not own any of the previous dvda or sacd mixes, so I cannot compare with those. The Jakko mix is great. Being a fan of keyboards and synths in the rear speakers, this mix is a joy. Also the way keyboard solos are mix is very well done. Sometimes in the fronts , other times in the rears or going from rear left to front right. Excellent.

After a few spins, I think the mix is great and I do not share the negative feelings towards this mix, as expressed by some. Of course it al comes down the personal taste, and some things could have been done different. But that can be said of any mix, being done by masters like Scheiner or Wilson, or the up and coming mixers like Jakszyk or Erra to name a few.

I am glad I did not cancel the set, as it will stay in rotation on my set for a while.

 

[rontoon]

Thanks Robert for your review. I was having some serious buyer's remorse and even considered turning around and selling my box upon arrival, especially since I can easily get copies of all the discs, including the 5.1 DVD-A. This is something I don't usually do but I don't mind the producers taking a loss after the bait-and-switch that was pulled with this release (I originally had the 3-disc set ordered). It's a great album and deserves the super deluxe treatment so it's good to read that it lived up to your standards.

 

[blue.monk]

Lead vocal is almost entirely in the center channel on the Kellogg mix too. Along with bass.

True, but the Kellogg mix also distributes lead vocal prominently to the front L & R speakers. My point was the new mix mostly isolates lead vocal exclusively to the center channel, which is an unusual approach and not a particularly effective one IMO.

 

[ssully]

Lead vocal isolated to center is not that unusual. There's even been commentary in the press, since the early days of SACD/DVD-A about how potentially embarrassing it can be for artists.

 

[rontoon]

I must say that I really do like the new stereo mix. Just gave it a spin with my good headphones. Great clarity and separation.

 

[blue.monk]

Lead vocal isolated to center is not that unusual. There's even been commentary in the press, since the early days of SACD/DVD-A about how potentially embarrassing it can be for artists.

One can solo the center channel and hear an isolated vocal but most surround mixes reinforce the lead vocal in other channels - that is, in addition to the center. This is the approach employed by many engineers including Elliot Scheiner, Steven Wilson, Greg Penny, Nick Davis and James Guthrie. I'd be interested to learn of mixes where the lead vocal is only placed in center channel, as I'm sure there must be others besides this new mix, but I can think of none offhand.

 

[bmoura]

One can solo the center channel and hear an isolated vocal but most surround mixes reinforce the lead vocal in other channels - that is, in addition to the center. This is the approach employed by many engineers including Elliot Scheiner, Steven Wilson, Greg Penny, Nick Davis and James Guthrie. I'd be interested to learn of mixes where the lead vocal is only placed in center channel, as I'm sure there must be others besides this new mix, but I can think of none offhand.

Check out James Taylor's "Hourglass" Multichannel SACD. It has his vocals in the Center Channel.

Elliot Scheiner says he doesn't put solo vocals in the Center Channel in 5.1 mixes anymore after the negative feedback from Don Henley of the Eagles.

 

[DuncanS]

I've the BSS LP, remastered CD (about 3 CD versions bought over the years!), the DVD-A, the SACD, and now this version. I like the new mix, its definitely not the same as the earlier versions. I decided to buy it as I was hoping for a different take on things, which I got, so I'm happy. But its a great album anyway. Maybe when we get "Trilogy" (soon please!) as we've nothing surround-wise to compare it to we won't see it quite so negatively. I bought it originally on cassette when it came out, then LP, then the CDs, so I'm looking forward to Jakko's take on the mix.

 

[blue.monk]

I must say that I really do like the new stereo mix. Just gave it a spin with my good headphones. Great clarity and separation.

I agree. It's very good and I prefer it to the surround mix.

 

[rontoon]

I agree. It's very good and I prefer it to the surround mix.

Well maybe the 3-disc set is the way to go after all...

 

[user 1679]

The stereo mix Jakko did is superb I think - better than what I've been so familiar with all these years. The 5.1 may just take some ear and head adjustment. For the most part I did quite like it, and with an album that I like a lot I'm actually quite open to a different take on it - makes me appreciate the music more when I hear different things emphasized....not one of those that thinks "hey, that's not a clone of the original so I hate it" things....great albums/music should be open to a new interpretation and I think some people forget that (ahem, certain Hoffmanites...ahem).

 

[mam]

I`ve also canceled my 3 Disc order. And NO I never never need an edition with Vinyl. :howl

 

[quattroatl]

Thanks to a friend, I was able to listen to this new 5.1 mix. Disappointed doesn't begin to describe my take on this mix. As others have mentioned, the main vocals are dead center and gets overwhelmed by all the music. I much prefer the original 5.1 mix as it sounds large and grandiose in comparison. There seems to be much less reverb in this mix, but not in good way. The sound seems neutered in comparison to the original 5.1 mix.

I hate to say it, but the fiasco with the 5.1 mix not being part of the 3 disc set saved me money and disappointment. Things happen for a reason....