HiRez Poll Hancock, Herbie - THRUST [SACD]

[rtbluray]

Oh.. I thought Kevin Gray did the Stereo on Spectrum and Thrust and Gus Skinas mastered the MultiCh on them both?

That's correct, Adam. Once again, the Kap'n is deriding an engineer's mastering job without getting the credits straight. What else is new?

 

[bmoura]

Unbelievably murky sound. Sounds like a 3rd or 4th generation tape...
My SQ LP's fidelity runs rings around this...

As always, it depends on your music system.

Here, the Thrust Multichannel SACD by Herbie Hancock sounds far better than a decoded SQ album or a discrete Quad 8 Track tape from the 1970s by a wide margin.
The Quad mix isn't as lively as the one on the Spectrum Multichannel SACD, but the fidelity and sound quality on Thrust is very fine indeed.

 

[kap'n krunch]

As always, it depends on your music system.

Here, the Thrust Multichannel SACD by Herbie Hancock sounds far better than a decoded SQ album or a discrete Quad 8 Track tape from the 1970s.
The Quad mix isn't as lively as the one on the Spectrum Multichannel SACD, but the fidelity and sound quality on Thrust is very fine indeed.

well , it's the same system in which the "Spectrum" SACD sounds heavenly...no EQ , no further processing...

 

[fredblue]

That's correct, Adam. Once again, the Kap'n is deriding an engineer's mastering job without getting the credits straight. What else is new?

Oh well we all make mistakes and I don't want things to get personal.. the Kap's passion is wonderful and I wouldn't want to see him change for the world.. thanks Ryan for the confirmation anyway, I like to know who to slag off so I can really sock it to em! That and the few times I've slated the wrong person I've felt so awful..! Maybe a British thing!

tbh before I go any further in this Poll thread, the Kap has raised an important issue I feel, so I want to compare this Thrust SACD to my SQ LP Surround Master decode (not for the surround sound for the sound quality and the murkiness the Kap refers to..) fwiw if anything I found the Spectrum Quad SACD to be a bit bright in Front L&R and the Thrust Quad SACD to be the opposite (detailed rears and recessed-treble fronts).. but all this stuffs kinda system dependent and my systems in a state of flux at the min., so might be best if I hold off til i'm happy with my setup again I dunno..

 

[rtbluray]

Oh well we all make mistakes and I don't want things to get personal.. the Kap's passion is wonderful and I wouldn't want to see him change for the world.. thanks Ryan for the confirmation anyway, I like to know who to slag off so I can really sock it to em! That and the few times I've slated the wrong person I've felt so awful..! Maybe a British thing!

tbh before I go any further in this Poll thread, the Kap has raised an important issue I feel, so I want to compare this Thrust SACD to my SQ LP Surround Master decode (not for the surround sound for the sound quality and the murkiness the Kap refers to..) fwiw if anything I found the Spectrum Quad SACD to be a bit bright in Front L&R and the Thrust Quad SACD to be the opposite (detailed rears and recessed-treble fronts).. but all this stuffs kinda system dependent and my systems in a state of flux at the min., so might be best if I hold off til i'm happy with my setup again I dunno..

Of course, it wasn't meant as a personal attack at all. If anything, I completely agree with the Kap'n that the fidelity is lacking on "Thurst", especially when compared against "Spectrum". All I want is for members to get their facts and credits straight before deriding an engineer's mixing and/or mastering work. As long as that's straight, their opinion is their own, and they should definitely voice it!

 

[kap'n krunch]

That's correct, Adam. Once again, the Kap'n is deriding an engineer's mastering job without getting the credits straight. What else is new?

I don't give a sh*t about WHO did this-I'm just pointing out the fact that there is a HUGE difference between Spectrum and Thrust , which, BTW , the original release date are only a year apart...

I'm just ripping a new a------- to the person IN CHARGE of overseeing this...Spectrum sounds great, how come Thrust sounds like sh+t????

It's called Quality Control....I guess there is no one listening on top , cause I'm sure somebody (and I know a bunch of folks on this Forum do QC for SH) in CHARGE did not listen...

BTW, my SQ LP is not THE BEST sounding LP, but , only with minor tweaking, it sounds EXCELLENT, so , I know what I'm saying...I'm not talking out of my ass...

 

[kap'n krunch]

Of course, it wasn't meant as a personal attack at all. If anything, I completely agree with the Kap'n that the fidelity is lacking on "Thurst", especially when compared against "Spectrum". All I want is for members to get their facts and credits straight before deriding an engineer's mixing and/or mastering work. As long as that's straight, their opinion is their own, and they should definitely voice it!

Heck no, I know it's nothing personal (that's why I love this Forum!!!)...we all have our opinion!!!!

Cheers!

 

[quicksrt]

I'm listening to this now, and I do think that on my second listen I am going to do the sinful smiley-faced EQ on it. It just needs better top end, and richer bottom to the sound. The mix is fab, but EQ is boxy on my system.

 

[fredblue]

I'm listening to this now, and I do think that on my second listen I am going to do the sinful smiley-faced EQ on it. It just need better top end, and richer bottom to the sound. The mix is fab, but EQ is boxy on my system.

Fronts need EQ more than the rears with this one imho..

 

[quicksrt]

I can imagine that the tape was a second generation dub, maybe made from the original master for running off Q8s, no kidding. No one would ever fess up to that one, lololol

 

[cupboy]

Well, you've scared me off. I didn't open mine and now will just sell it for whatever I can get for it.

 

[steelydave]

I don't agree that this release is 'muffled' or from a bad tape copy at all. The quad mix is perfectly balanced (levels-wise) and if it's not a flat transfer, it's close enough to it.

The front speakers are generally bass guitar, fender rhodes/clavinet, and drums. Mike Clark, The Headhunters drummer, didn't use a lot of cymbals nor open hi-hat. Which of those instruments are you expecting to have a lot of treble response?

When things that do occupy the higher end of the frequency range (analog synthesizers, flute, saxophone the various bells during the percussion breakdown on the first track) come in, they don't sound muffled at all and have plenty of that hi-rez 'magic' that never fail to make the hairs on the back of my neck stand up. Sometimes I think people have been so conditioned by modern remastering where the high end has been EQ'ed like a ski ramp and the hi-hats are sizzling like bacon in a pan that anything less sounds muffled to them.

You have to remember these albums were originally recorded with the intention of mixing in stereo, where all these instruments had to sit on top of each other in the mix. They couldn't all occupy the same part (treble area) of the frequency spectrum, each had to have it's own 'area' carved out. I recall similar complaints/observations about the Loggins & Messina quad mix, but that's what happens when you spread the instruments that occupy the upper end of the frequency spectrum (guitars, horns, hi-hats/cymbals in L&M's case, and flute/sax/analog synth, etc. in the case of this album) and put them in the rear speakers.

I've owned the original stereo vinyl of this album, the late 90's CD, and the 96/24 digital download, and I've heard the SQ LP and owned the Q8 and the tonality of this release is very faithful to the sound of the original. If you like the other Headhunters quad SACD from the early 00's, I don't see how there's any way you could be unhappy with this one, it's fantastic - maybe it just needs to be cranked up to reference volume to be fully appreciated.

 

[fredblue]

Well, you've scared me off. I didn't open mine and now will just sell it for whatever I can get for it.

Oh I wouldn't do that! Its very good for the most part (things improve front speaker wise after track 1 imho) and musically its great.

 

[fredblue]

I don't agree that this release is 'muffled' or from a bad tape copy at all. The quad mix is perfectly balanced (levels-wise) and if it's not a flat transfer, it's close enough to it.

The front speakers are generally bass guitar, fender rhodes/clavinet, and drums. Mike Clark, The Headhunters drummer, didn't use a lot of cymbals nor open hi-hat. Which of those instruments are you expecting to have a lot of treble response?

When things that do occupy the higher end of the frequency range (analog synthesizers, flute, saxophone the various bells during the percussion breakdown on the first track) come in, they don't sound muffled at all and have plenty of that hi-rez 'magic' that never fail to make the hairs on the back of my neck stand up. Sometimes I think people have been so conditioned by modern remastering where the high end has been EQ'ed like a ski ramp and the hi-hats are sizzling like bacon in a pan that anything less sounds muffled to them.

You have to remember these albums were originally recorded with the intention of mixing in stereo, where all these instruments had to sit on top of each other in the mix. They couldn't all occupy the same part (treble area) of the frequency spectrum, each had to have it's own 'area' carved out. I recall similar complaints/observations about the Loggins & Messina quad mix, but that's what happens when you spread the instruments that occupy the upper end of the frequency spectrum (guitars, horns, hi-hats/cymbals in L&M's case, and flute/sax/analog synth, etc. in the case of this album) and put them in the rear speakers.

I've owned the original stereo vinyl of this album, the late 90's CD, and the 96/24 digital download, and I've heard the SQ LP and owned the Q8 and the tonality of this release is very faithful to the sound of the original. If you like the other Headhunters quad SACD from the early 00's, I don't see how there's any way you could be unhappy with this one, it's fantastic - maybe it just needs to be cranked up to reference volume to be fully appreciated.

Great summation of how this SACD sounds, Dave, I concur! :upthumb

Personally I think the SQ LP is a bit brighter.. but that maybe as a result of something in my vinyl playback chain rather than any major uptick in treble relative to the mastertape/SACD... I will say that track 1 has a lot of "boxy" sounding drumming up front (might that be the kind of thing quicksrt is referring to regards sound quality?) but you can hear from the percussion (its like a cowbell or something?) in Front L & R and especially what's happening in the rears that the source this SACD came from is in great shape.. and after the 1st trk the fronts are more lively, still less sparkle than the rears but the rears are where its at with this Quad mix and as I love rear heavy old Quads, I give this a "9".

More Herbie Quad please, AF! (or anybody!)
(psst.. To anyone here reading who hasn't heard it yet, the Quad of Herbie Hancock's "Sextant" is AMAZING.. a real showcase Quad mix, if musically slightly less, umm, 'accessible' than "Thrust" imho, it'd be lovely to have that fresh from the Quad mastertapes too someday )

 

[kap'n krunch]

yup..Sextant is his...ooooooeeeeeeee..LP!!!

 

[cupboy]

Oh I wouldn't do that! Its very good for the most part (things improve front speaker wise after track 1 imho) and musically its great.

Well, OK. I'll open it and give it a try.

update: Nice booklet. I like the picture of the SQ labels.

 

[fredblue]

Well, OK. I'll open it and give it a try.

update: Nice booklet. I like the picture of the SQ labels.

Good man! Bravo! :upthumb

Interested to hear your thoughts and comments in time

 

[JonUrban]

I don't give a sh*t about WHO did this-I'm just pointing out the fact that there is a HUGE difference between Spectrum and Thrust , which, BTW , the original release date are only a year apart...

I'm just ripping a new a------- to the person IN CHARGE of overseeing this...Spectrum sounds great, how come Thrust sounds like sh+t????

It's called Quality Control....I guess there is no one listening on top , cause I'm sure somebody (and I know a bunch of folks on this Forum do QC for SH) in CHARGE did not listen...

Easy there Kap'n. I did listen to both of these before they were mass-pressed and released and I have to admit neither album was a title that I knew completely or even played a lot in old quad or stereo (new or old) as I am not a huge fan of this type of music, although I do appreciate it. Don't forget that these two releases are from two different camps, one Columbia and one WEA. They are both from the same vintage, but man that Spectrum is so spectacular and done so well that comparing ANYTHING to it might be a crime. The Spectrum soundscape is far more bare, basically a few musicians playing probably live together. The Herbie Hancock stuff, to my knowledge, is much more complex with more stuff going on and that would mean more tapes and more multiple tracks that may or may not be overdubbed or whatever. To me it sounded fine. My focus was swayed way towards Spectrum because I started to love it when I listened to it multiple times in my car.

So, frustration is fine, but contempt is a bit much. It's an old recording and it's not hammered with loudness or brickwalling so you can EQ it anyway you like. Or you can stick with your SQ or Q8.

One thing I can agree with you on - SPECTRUM is class A awesome in my book.

 

[quicksrt]

Well, you've scared me off. I didn't open mine and now will just sell it for whatever I can get for it.

Hancock is a virtuoso, and the production here is otherworldly. This music is magical and spacey in the best way. The piano soloing is laid into a spacious quad soundstage that sounds like it's as wide as the universe.

In other words, if you like progressive music, or spacey rock, or late night trips way out there, this album certainly rates a 10 musically. And it seems that the ambiance becomes more jelled after a couple of songs in, and this sealed up the four corners of the universe or soundstage that this music lives in.

See, this is where it is for me. The slightly dull presentation cuts into the ambiance for me no doubt. So front and rear sets do not talk to each other as much as I would like at first. Several songs in I sensed a correction to some degree, or my ears / brain adjusted.

Last night after I listened to Full Sail twice, I played EW&F Head to the Sky, Alice Cooper MoL, and then the Thrust SACD in quad. I hear a distinct difference in the dynamics (less) of the sound quality in Thrust that steelydave does not hear. Against these other AF SACDs, why do I hear something different? To me it is not the record production, nor the AF mastering which is smooth as silk. It's like the tape generation is just one gen away from the true 4-chan mix (no can't be?). It's not as bad as listening to a DTS Entertainment 4.0 CD from back in the day (remember them being slightly duller than one would hope), but it is along those lines.

I would buy this SACD without reservation due to the outstanding music, and very inventive atmosphere produced in quad for the players to play in.

I am holding off my my number rating for Thrust until I have listened to the stereo version tonight which is on my server, and the stereo layer on this SACD as well. Will I sense more punch and sparkle, or is it (in stereo) very similar to the quad as presented here?

 

[key_wiz]

10s all around for me on this one. Not really getting all the criticism, but this is the first time I've ever heard this album. I love funky jazz fusion stuff (don't know how I managed to this album for 43 years!) so I can't really compare to other versions.

But content is an easy 10 for me. And the surround mix is awesome. Aggressive and discreet. Another easy 10. Fidelity? I don't hear anything "murky" about it. If anything, it gets a little too bright in the rears on my system on the last track. The low end? Might be weak, but I find that a lot with these old quad mixes. I often find I have to mess with the bass management to get them right. So I'm not going to criticize the fidelity here.

Love it. Give me more Herbie!