HiRez Poll Emerson Lake & Palmer - TARKUS [DVD-A/BDA]

[ssully]

9/10 votes are pretty common on QQ.

So are posts where people say, "I wasn't familiar with this album before, but this surround mix is excellent!!'

Coincidence?

 

[drphibes]

9/10 votes are pretty common on QQ.

So are posts where people say, "I wasn't familiar with this album before, but this surround mix is excellent!!'

Coincidence?

I genuinely appreciate your analysis of the mix, but I notice you comment on other people's number ratings without tossing in your own. Any reason you didn't vote?

Not a loaded question, I am genuinely keen to know.

 

[Marplot]

2001 DVD-A mix, FTW. One of my desert island discs...

Is that the one remixed and engineered by Paul Klingberg?

 

[edisonbaggins]

Is that the one remixed and engineered by Paul Klingberg?

That is, indeed, what my booklet says.

 

[Marplot]

cool, picked it up used today with a 40% coupon at half price books. thanks for the direction.

 

[Matt Wilson]

I'm giving it a 9. I dunno, it's great (I'm not sure if I've rated a Steven Wilson mix less than a 9), but it's not blowing me away either. At least you get the complete album on the surround disc and it's not missing a couple of tracks like the Emerson Lake and Palmer DVD. My go-to disc in stereo for this title might still be the Mobile Fidelity one, but when I want to hear it in 5.1 this will be it.

 

[artwwweb]

Mix: 5/5: The mix is excellent, so many things happening from each speaker, but still not OTT in comparison to the overblown music.

Sound: 5/5: Some bits seem a bit muffled but other bits sound really good - e.g. some vocals and drum bits. So probably it's the original synth sound that is slightly lo fi. The deep notes on piano and keyboard have got a real bite and things like tambourines sound so real.

Music: 4/5: It does use virtuosity as a replacement for emotion, so is easily dismissed as pretentious, but it's great fun if you're in the mood.

Weighted score: 3x5+2x5+1x4=15+10+4=29/30=9.66=10.

 

[ssully]

Were you familiar with the original Offord mix before you heard Wilson's surround remix?

 

[H.A.L.]

I gave it an 8. That's actually pretty high since I'm reserving 9s and 10s for special things (i.e. like
the ABBEY ROAD Dolby Atmos, or, hopefully, the upcoming WHO'S NEXT).

Certainly makes the stereo version obsolete! The lively music deserved the lively mix, as well.

 

[ssully]

The better original stereo masterings* I have of Tarkus , played with a decent upmixer (I'm loving the foobar plugin currently), certainly make the Wilson 5.1 mix completely 'obsolete' to me.

He vastly changed the timbre of Keith's hammond parts, which matters quite a bit to me on this one.



*They mainly differ in how much bass there is

 

[JohnA]

Btw tarkusnj's complaint on this thread wasn't 'lack of bass' per se -- it's was lack of *punch* in the low bass and bass. That's a different thing. You can a have plenty of bass in a mix, with it sounding loud but indistinct, or you can have a lot of bass, but also have upper bass/treble bite to give it 'punch' (definition).

not sure if this missing *punch* is the slightly muddy bass for others - hard to compare an LP from 40 years ago in a totally different HiFi in a different room to an all-digital system today. All I've got is hazy memories and probable perceptions - but the feeling must be still alive, hard to measure that though

Just think of the extreme technical difficulties with bass notes on LPs, it was a nightmare and a half to get it right back then without the needle jumping out of the groove (and it was mono of course)
Today it should be much easier to get it right, yet it's not happening. WTF eh..

 

[artwwweb]

Were you familiar with the original Offord mix before you heard Wilson's surround remix?

No, I wasn't, which is lucky I suppose. I know how much effort Wilson goes to to make his mixes 'the same but in surround' so I'm surprised to hear that he has disappointed you. On the other hand, I was disappointed to hear a guitar part mixed too low in a mix I did know (Tears For Fears - Mother's Talk) so I also know how it can be jarring to hear things different to what you know.

 

[ssully]

not sure if this missing *punch* is the slightly muddy bass for others - hard to compare an LP from 40 years ago in a totally different HiFi in a different room to an all-digital system today. All I've got is hazy memories and probable perceptions - but the feeling must be still alive, hard to measure that though

You don't need to compare it to a 40 year old LP. Just compare the remix to CD versions of the original mix.

 

[thebarnman]

If the bass is muddy like that, I have a strong feeling it's probably because it was the way it was originally recorded.

 

[ssully]

given the vagaries of mastering, why would you feel that?

 

[thebarnman]

given the vagaries of mastering, why would you feel that?

I'm glad you asked! I happen to have the Kiss Destroyer box set with the Atmos remix by Steven Wilson. Even with Steven Wilson working his magic on the remix, the bass if flat, has no punch and is not up to the level as you would expect to hear in modern recordings. The bass pretty much sounds the same as it always has since it's original release from 1976. If there was something Seven Wilson could do to get those bass levels higher and to allow some punch in the bass notes, I'm sure he would have done so. So what we are left with is a lackluster low end on the album (including Steven Wilson's recent Atmos remix) assumingly because that's simply the way it was originally captured and no more could be retrieved from those master tapes.

Of course bass levels can be increased independently from other frequencies but in the case of Kiss Destroyer it may not have sounded good since it really does lack definition and punch so a decision could have been made to just leave it the same.

Also, if you listen to older rock recordings from the 60s and into the mid 70s or so, many of them really don't have deep punchy bass. Now of course there are exceptions such as Dark Side of the Moon (1973) and some others, but I don't think Kiss was getting the royal treatment (not much care was taken...or being overly careful for a final LP release) at the time their recordings were being created.

 

[ssully]

The point you missed is that the bass on the Tarkus original mix is 'punchy', and the complaint was that the punchiness is lost in the remix. It could also be 'lost' by bad remastering.

Comparing Eddy Offord's work to a garbage KISS recording is beside the point

 

[thebarnman]

The point you missed is that the bass on the Tarkus original mix is 'punchy', and the complaint was that the punchiness is lost in the remix. It could also be 'lost' by bad remastering.

Comparing Eddy Offord's work to a garbage KISS recording is beside the point

Your right, I did totally miss the part where it was originally punchy. Also, I felt that the Kiss example is good; the bass wasn't recorded well in the first place, so Steven Wilson couldn't do much with it.

It sounds like to me the person who did the new mix on Tarkus really messed up and everyone in quality control (if there was any at all) dropped the ball.