"Fleetwood Mac" (1975 S/T Album) Deluxe Edition with 5.1 surround DVD!

[marpow]

Tango In The Night and Heart self titled have tha same feeling, check it out. I’m listening to both via FLAC JRiver software and my big Viking rig.

 

[rtbluray]

I would definitely purchase a Quadio-style Blu-Ray box set that contained "Fleetwood Mac", "Rumours", "Tusk", and "Mirage".
(No point in including "Tango in the Night" since no 5.1 surround mix exists for it, plus the stereo mix can already be purchased in high-res in several different ways.)

I think the upcoming reissue of "How the West Was Won" on Blu-Ray audio shows that Rhino are still willing to release great high-res surround products. I just wish they were more consistent about this, but then again, no major label's really been consistent about any of this, so more frustrations are sure to come, but there should be just as many good things to come as well.

 

[marpow]

I would definitely purchase a Quadio-style Blu-Ray box set that contained "Fleetwood Mac", "Rumours", "Tusk", and "Mirage".
(No point in including "Tango in the Night" since no 5.1 surround mix exists for it, plus the stereo mix can already be purchased in high-res in several different ways.)

I think the upcoming reissue of "How the West Was Won" on Blu-Ray audio shows that Rhino are still willing to release great high-res surround products. I just wish they were more consistent about this, but then again, no major label's really been consistent about any of this, so more frustrations are sure to come, but there should be just as many good things to come as well.

Question RT: if there was never a MCH mix known does that mean there will never be a surround new release ? Rhino is great.
I am assuming that if somebody wanted to mix any original studio whatever it could be turned into surround if somebody wanted ?

 

[rtbluray]

Question RT: if there was never a MCH mix known does that mean there will never be a surround new release ? Rhino is great.
I am assuming that if somebody wanted to mix any original studio whatever it could be turned into surround if somebody wanted ?

They looked into mixing "Tango in the Night" in surround sound for the recent box set release, but it proved to be an insurmountable task.
See below quote from Steve Woolard (ForagingRhino):

Normally/usually the take deemed to be the master is pulled from the multitrack session reel and comped to its own reel of "Masters" and mixed down or having overdubs added or whatever.
For whatever reason, there is no set of reels marked as multitrack masters. And there are hundreds of reels for Tango.

So without knowing what the final takes are one could go nuts trying to find them.

 

[salsdali]

My problem with this release is that there appears (at least to me) that there was a full 96/24 mlp done by Ken back around 2003(??) so why wouldn't they release that in another high rez format instead of DD? Even if they chose not to release as mlp as not being relevant today there are other high rez formats that are still relevant today that aren't DD.

Someone mentioned that the mlp of Monday Morning on the acura disc may have been "upsampled" but that doesn't seem right because some of the other mixes on that acura disc are "downsampled" from 96 to 48 so why would they reverse course and upsample Monday Morning from 48 to 96?

IOW is there definitive proof that a 96/24 was created in full by Ken for this album when he did the mix for the acura disc?

I just feel it's "fraudulent" to release a lesser quality mix than one that already exists and call it a "super deluxe edition".

What's "deluxe" about a lower quality format?

I get it, Warner feels like if they release the best quality mix then they are giving away the cow so why would us consumers buy the milk in the future but that is such a poor way to do business.

It's profitable for Warner but jips the customer.

There aren't many business that can jip the customer over 30 or 40 years and not expect to go out of business unless they are a monolopy and that it the problem, they had exclusive contracts with names like FM that they can milk forever.

 

[4-earredwonder]

My problem with this release is that there appears (at least to me) that there was a full 96/24 mlp done by Ken back around 2003(??) so why wouldn't they release that in another high rez format instead of DD? Even if they chose not to release as mlp as not being relevant today there are other high rez formats that are still relevant today that aren't DD.

Someone mentioned that the mlp of Monday Morning on the acura disc may have been "upsampled" but that doesn't seem right because some of the other mixes on that acura disc are "downsampled" from 96 to 48 so why would they reverse course and upsample Monday Morning from 48 to 96?

IOW is there definitive proof that a 96/24 was created in full by Ken for this album when he did the mix for the acura disc?

I just feel it's "fraudulent" to release a lesser quality mix than one that already exists and call it a "super deluxe edition".

What's "deluxe" about a lower quality format?

I get it, Warner feels like if they release the best quality mix then they are giving away the cow so why would us consumers buy the milk in the future but that is such a poor way to do business.

It's profitable for Warner but jips the customer.

There aren't many business that can jip the customer over 30 or 40 years and not expect to go out of business unless they are a monolopy and that it the problem, they had exclusive contracts with names like FM that they can milk forever.

Like myself, make YOUR opinions known regarding this release by contacting RHINO directly: https://rhinostore.warnermusic.com/contacts

We [at least I] waited 45 years for this much anticipated 5.1 remaster and feel somewhat betrayed that they would release it in DD 5.1 when Rhino has been known to release exceptional BD~A 5.1 remasters.

 

[markshan]

Someone mentioned that the mlp of Monday Morning on the acura disc may have been "upsampled" but that doesn't seem right because some of the other mixes on that acura disc are "downsampled" from 96 to 48 so why would they reverse course and upsample Monday Morning from 48 to 96?

Actually, I think he was saying that the Steve Miller track on the sampler was upsampled.

 

[timbre4]

The fact that no 5.1 exists for “Tango” would be the only reason.

eDIT: 4 it is.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[sjcorne]

Hey folks- just got my set and I'm ripping the DVD now. First thing I'll do is put up spectral analysis and waveform comparisons between the two versions of "Monday Morning". I'll do the same thing with "Fly Like An Eagle"- though that would go in another thread.

Actually, I think he was saying that the Steve Miller track on the sampler was upsampled.

Yes- since it is still 48khz. So is the Eagles track from the Melbourne Concert Video.

 

[sjcorne]

First impressions- WOW

This is one of those ultra-revisionist mixes that uses components punched out of the stereo mix. My favorite track "Say You Love Me" has a guitar part in the rears that is entirely missing from the stereo! The purists may not love this (TBH it sounds like this release is already dead in the eyes of many who haven't even heard it), but I think it's awesome. "Mirage" in 5.1 has a very different feel as well, but this seems to deviate even further.

The "Monday Morning" comparison as promised- yes, the DD version is mastered louder and cuts off sharply around 16-18 khz, confirming what we already knew- there is a lossless master of this disc Rhino neglected to offer us.

Put me in the camp that says it's better than nothing at all- and what I've heard of the mix so far is quite enjoyable. Look for my full review in the coming days.

Acura DVD-A:


2018 DD DVD:

 

[ar surround]

Thanks for the analysis sjcorne. The guitar part in the 5.1 of Say You Love Me that is absent in the stereo album appears to be similar to that used in the stereo single version.

The DD cuts out above 16kHz. Maybe that's why it doesn't bother me that it is not high-res? I know that I don't hear above 11kHz anymore. (So maybe there IS an advantage to getting old...can't gripe about something not being there that you can't hear anymore anyway!) @:

 

[lennon fan]

well it's on the way in the post along with the Garfunkel discs from UK and I'm very encouraged by what I'm reading. Yes, I too don't like the DD only option when a super deluxe of this great work begs for more, but IMO there will be yet another hi rez version in the future and may I be first to say they could do every Mac album up to Tango and I'd be in for them all. I'd love to hear Then Play On multi channel...the music is so 3 D in stereo you just know with a good remix.....and I know there would be something of an audience for it as well.

 

[markshan]

The "Monday Morning" comparison as promised- yes, the DD version is mastered louder and cuts off sharply around 16-18 khz, confirming what we already knew- there is a lossless master of this disc Rhino neglected to offer us.

It doesn't appear to me that it is mastered louder at all. You noted the top end roll off, which we all knew would be there. What jumps out at me is the difference in the 20-100Hz area. A bit of bass boost will certainly make the loudness stats change as most of the musical energy is in that region. But then, if you look at the individual channel WAVs, they all look about the same except the LFE looks like it was turned up a bit. My guess is that was a good thing and should have no real effect on the disc "sounding louder". Based on this, I think those people who say this sounds good should go ahead and trust their ears. Those who need stats and analysis to determine how something sounds (just for clarity, I'm not pointing at sjcorne here, he said this sounds good and I appreciate his efforts) better understand how to properly interpret those stats.

 

[markshan]

The DD cuts out above 16kHz. Maybe that's why it doesn't bother me that it is not high-res? I know that I don't hear above 11kHz anymore.

There is more to high res than just extended frequency response. I didn't want to believe it, but (for example), I hear a difference between the "Sea Change" DVD-A and the Blu-Ray, and I also roll of sharply around 11k.

(So maybe there IS an advantage to getting old...can't gripe about something not being there that you can't hear anymore anyway!) @:

Again, there is no difference in the frequencies I can hear of the 96k DVD and the 192 Blu, but I can hear a difference.

 

[IMachine]

There is more to high res than just extended frequency response. I didn't want to believe it, but (for example), I hear a difference between the "Sea Change" DVD-A and the Blu-Ray, and I also roll of sharply around 11k.



Again, there is no difference in the frequencies I can hear of the 96k DVD and the 192 Blu, but I can hear a difference.

How I would love to do a blind test with you.

 

[seilerbird]

How I would love to do a blind test with you.

I have a friend of mine who has a large investment in CDs and when mp3s came out it really devalued his collection because he could now find any song online and download it quicker than he could find it in his closet. So for the last 20 years he has been trying to convince me that wav files sounded superior to mp3s. However I have done many blind A/B tests and I can't tell the difference. So I challenged him many times to a blind A/B test and to see if he could really tell the difference. He had a different excuse every time I proposed it and it never happened. The problem is once people spend a lot of money on technology they always believe that what they hear or see is better because it costs more money. Blinded by the dollar signs. Like the people who claim expensive cables sound better. They would never agree to a blind test.

 

[sjcorne]

Thanks for the analysis sjcorne. The guitar part in the 5.1 of Say You Love Me that is absent in the stereo album appears to be similar to that used in the stereo single version.

You're very welcome...always happy to help. I really appreciate all the interest my posts are getting lately...I got like 40 notifications this morning.

Regarding "Say You Love Me", that's a neat bit of info- I noticed the "Early Version" on Spotify has the same guitar licks. Wonder if it is the same as the single cut you mentioned.

I like the added guitar work- gives the song a harder edge. I had assume its presence in the 5.1 points to Lindsey influencing Ken C. during the remix process (which he has every right to do).

There is more to high res than just extended frequency response.

Absolutely true. I just figured people would be interested to see the frequency stats, and I wanted to dispel the notion that the lossless "Monday Morning" on the Acura disc might somehow be an upsampled copy of the DD. The extended range shows that there is definitely an existing lossless 5.1 master of this album

Those who need stats and analysis to determine how something sounds (just for clarity, I'm not pointing at sjcorne here, he said this sounds good and I appreciate his efforts) better understand how to properly interpret those stats.

Thanks- I think the stats are interesting, but I would never vote until I've listened from the disc without any distractions.

My opinion- If you really like this album, don't let the stats get in the way. The mix is pretty good and I think $55 is a good value for this box (I have a turntable- will be interesting to compare this new vinyl with my Original Master copy). But if you don't want it- don't buy it. No need to fight about it. I have to say I've noticed an unusual amount of negativity around here lately (absolutely not pointing fingers at anyone specific, just an overall feeling) and I don't like it. And it just doesn't make sense to me- we get a great surround mix of a high-profile album and several other great releases, yet we're fighting?

 

[fredblue]

There is more to high res than just extended frequency response. I didn't want to believe it, but (for example), I hear a difference between the "Sea Change" DVD-A and the Blu-Ray, and I also roll of sharply around 11k.



Again, there is no difference in the frequencies I can hear of the 96k DVD and the 192 Blu, but I can hear a difference.

maybe a red herring but fwiw i did a little 3-way on the MCh SACD, DVD-A & HFPA BD of Sea Change
and found the BD a bit different from the SACD & DVD-A, including the Front L&R of the BD's 5.1
having their phase inverted relative to the Front channels of the SACD & DVD-A.

 

[Snood]

Got Mine today and all was koooooooo - they said it was delayed due to external factors and Snood was thinking that meant crushed

Chatted with them today over on Amazon UK and they said it should be here by the 31st.......nope todaaaaaaay - damn hows that for lighting a fire under there ass.

Only problem Snood can not enjoy cuz Snood gotz the fluuuuuuuuu :howl

 

[IMachine]

I have a friend of mine who has a large investment in CDs and when mp3s came out it really devalued his collection because he could now find any song online and download it quicker than he could find it in his closet. So for the last 20 years he has been trying to convince me that wav files sounded superior to mp3s. However I have done many blind A/B tests and I can't tell the difference. So I challenged him many times to a blind A/B test and to see if he could really tell the difference. He had a different excuse every time I proposed it and it never happened. The problem is once people spend a lot of money on technology they always believe that what they hear or see is better because it costs more money. Blinded by the dollar signs. Like the people who claim expensive cables sound better. They would never agree to a blind test.

Yep!