Jethro Tull's Thick As A Brick Stereo/5.1 remix will be reissued in October 2022

[MarkN]

The CD/DVD and double vinyl sets are now available for pre-order from Burning Shed:

https://www.burningshed.com/store/jethrotull/product/444/4140/
https://www.burningshed.com/store/jethrotull/product/444/4141/

The release date is now Nov. 5th. The DVD indicates DD and DTS 5.1 tracks in addition to hi-res (96/24) stereo for the new and original mixes.

 

[0tto]

$33 (without shipping) for high bitrate mp3?
hello EMI, how are you today? i guess yours execs lately purchased
extra large wallets and struggling to fill them up.

 

[rtbluray]

$33 (without shipping) for high bitrate mp3?
hello EMI, how are you today? i guess yours execs lately purchased
extra large wallets and struggling to fill them up.

 

[rtbluray]

$33 (without shipping) for high bitrate mp3?
hello EMI, how are you today? i guess yours execs lately purchased
extra large wallets and struggling to fill them up.

Couldn't agree more. My guess is these pinheads at EMI were so worried about giving us great deluxe packaging (and I am actually really excited about the book) that they forgot to give us HIGH-RES DELUXE QUALITY 5.1 AUDIO!!!!

I mean honestly, how much more would it cost to have included Blu-Ray in the package? About $25 is my guess. I understand Blu-Ray is expensive to author and replicate, but yet the labels fail to understand the extra costs associated with DVD-Audio THAT DO NOT EXIST!!!

I will definitely be getting this release cause Brick is my favorite Tull album, and SW can do no wrong with his remixing. However, my excitement level has dropped quite considerably, and I'm very disappointed with EMI. The company that gave us great quality products on Blu-Ray last year have now sunk to a low yet again.

And don't even get me started if the DTS isn't 96/24! :howl

 

[elmer]

Disappointing, yes - deal breaker, no. I could do without the book however, and will stand by (hopefully) for a less "special" edition with just CD/DVD and some basic liner notes. I certainly could live with less Gerald Bostock.

 

[ssully]

$33 (without shipping) for high bitrate mp3?

DTS is not 'high bitrate mp3'. (not that 'high bitrate mp3' is necessarily a bad thing either)

 

[rtbluray]

Out of my frustration for the lack of high-res 5.1 in this set, I followed in the footsteps of Paul Sinclair by writing an open letter to Ian Anderson. I've posted it here on the Jethro Tull Facebook page, and I will also email it to Ian as well.
If you agree with what I've said, simply like the post and/or add a comment below.

Will this change anything for this release? Probably not, but I'm still hopeful that we can change things for the better for any future releases.
Thank you.

(On a side-note, I've now reached my 300th post!)

 

[0tto]

DTS is not 'high bitrate mp3'. (not that 'high bitrate mp3' is necessarily a bad thing either)

33 bucks for disc, in the light of LS from UMG @ $12, ELP from Sony @$20, KC @ $20+, etc. it's actually premium price.
if someone willing to pay for it, that's their move. i'm not as for this amount i will not have what i expected and willing to
pay to have it.. last DTS i purchased was Opeth @ $16+ and i regret 'cause it was waste of money.
sounds absolutelly not acceptable.

Despite all of the misinformation that is out there, a DVD-Audio/Video disc can not only reproduce 5.1 and stereo audio in high-resolution, but it’s playable on all DVD players and costs absolutely nothing extra to author and manufacture compared to a standard DVD-Video disc.

actually authoring of content for AUDIO_TS would cost extra as its additional work. replication cost wouldn't differ.
it the same, about $1.20~1.30 per disc on 1000pcs. without package and doesn't matter, is there VIDEO_TS only
or both, AUDIO_TS and VIDEO_TS folders with contents.

 

[ssully]

33 bucks for disc, in the light of LS from UMG @ $12, ELP from Sony @$20, KC @ $20+, etc. it's actually premium price.
if someone willing to pay for it, that's their move. i'm not as for this amount i will not have what i expected and willing to
pay to have it.. last DTS i purchased was Opeth @ $16+ and i regret 'cause it was waste of money.
sounds absolutelly not acceptable.

This is beside the point I was addressing. The fact remains that DTS is not high bitrate mp3. Both lossy perceptual codecs, but different algorithms.

As for the point you are addressing here, a look at the QQ polls indicates high consumer satisfaction with many DTS surround releases. Your mileage may, and obviously does, vary.

 

[rusinurbe]

I understand the reason for packaging a CD with the DVD-Audio disk ... costs almost nothing, and fits in the same package size ... but an LP makes more sense than a CD.
If you are a fan you likely have the CD (I have the MFSL Thick As A Brick CD), and I have never played ANY of the CDs that came with ANY DVD-Audio disk.
I DO play the Aqualung LP (and I have the MFSL vinyl and the DCC gold CD). It is an excellent pressing, and I would be happy to have TAAB on LP and SACD (oops, did I say SACD? ... I meant DVD-Audio).

I see Vinyl and CD or DVD as totally different bedfellows, and i also feel that a record comapny would getter unit sales on a reissue by have Vinyl and CD/DVD reissues rather that CD and Vinyl/DVD sets

so many Vinyl buyers dont have any interest in anything digital, likewaise 5.1 fans are more likely to buy a CD/DVD set than a DVD/Vinyl set.

 

[cupboy]

As for the point you are addressing here, a look at the QQ polls indicates high consumer satisfaction with many DTS surround releases. Your mileage may, and obviously does, vary.

Well, many of these people are happy with the Q8 format also. I think they are just rating the mix nothing else.

 

[0tto]

This is beside the point I was addressing. The fact remains that DTS is not high bitrate mp3. Both lossy perceptual codecs, but different algorithms.

As for the point you are addressing here, a look at the QQ polls indicates high consumer satisfaction with many DTS surround releases. Your mileage may, and obviously does, vary.

algorithm doesn't really matter. we have two animals, lossy and lossless and both are in digital domain,
thus general rule is same for both - the more we store the info about source sound, the more detailed
sound we will have during converting of digits into analog domain of physical sound.
either of DTS (48KHz or 96KHz) contains data about sound @ the rate 1510kbps which is about 1/10
of PCM @ 96KHz
if you divide those data between used channels (let say 6) there will be 251kbps per channel,
which is pretty close to quality mp3 format.
always wondering about the people who see the difference between HD and SD shots of the movie but
stubborn to accept that same difference in the sound. just because they can't hear it, doesn't mean that
others cannot hear too.

 

[rusinurbe]

algorithm doesn't really matter. we have two animals, lossy and lossless and both are in digital domain,
thus general rule is same for both - the more we store the info about source sound, the more detailed
sound we will have during converting of digits into analog domain of physical sound.
either of DTS (48KHz or 96KHz) contains data about sound @ the rate 1510kbps which is about 1/10
of PCM @ 96KHz
if you divide those data between used channels (let say 6) there will be 251kbps per channel,
which is pretty close to quality mp3 format.
always wondering about the people who see the difference between HD and SD shots of the movie but
stubborn to accept that same difference in the sound. just because they can't hear it, doesn't mean that
others cannot hear too.

Its interesting, but not everyone is blessed with golden ears and that is unfortunate, especially as most of themm are bean counters at major record lables.

I prefer to have Lossless for sure but am usually happy with DTS, in many cases because i dont have those golden ears that peope like you have i just dont notice that much of a difference, unless i play things side by side.

We did go searching for a new TV teh olther week and saw some nice sets but you could see the difference in the TV shop between a good set and a great set but only side by side.

Same goes for music.

i would rather have DTS than nothing at all, its a compromise but allows the DVD to play on every player and does maximise the market and upsets a few in the niche audiophile market

 

[fredblue]

Its interesting, but not everyone is blessed with golden ears and that is unfortunate, especially as most of themm are bean counters at major record lables.

I prefer to have Lossless for sure but am usually happy with DTS, in many cases because i dont have those golden ears that peope like you have i just dont notice that much of a difference, unless i play things side by side.

We did go searching for a new TV teh olther week and saw some nice sets but you could see the difference in the TV shop between a good set and a great set but only side by side.

Same goes for music.

i would rather have DTS than nothing at all, its a compromise but allows the DVD to play on every player and does maximise the market and upsets a few in the niche audiophile market

not being nit-picky but a proper DVD-A (with MLP/PPCM Lossless surround, DTS, DD & proper Hi-Rez stereo streams) together with a regular redbook CD in a CD/DVDA combo is the solution that satisfies everyone.

anyone can play all/any of it in any machine.

Warner did loads of these kinds of sets after DVDA shuffled off (including 10 REM albums, 8 Talking Heads albums, Jackson Browne's Running on Empty, Mark Knopfler's Sailing to Philadelphia, Graham Nashs' Songs For Beginners, David Crosby's If I Could Only Remember My Name) then for some unfathomable reason, they stopped.

then there's the subsequent King Crimson CD & DVDA re-issues, the two recent Sony ELP CD & DVDA sets, numerous Porcupine Tree albums presented in nice digibook CD/DVDA, the No-Man albums, the recent UMG Lynyrd Skynyrd, I could go on..

..but to my mind this is still the standard, no, the perfect way, to package and present 5.1 right now.

I can't see who it doesn't work for!?

Audiophiles are happy, surround fans are happy, collectors are happy - they are premium sets, ordinarily inexpensive, cheaper for the record companies to produce than vinyl/SACD/massive box sets, similar costing for the record companies to make as a CD/DVD-Video Dolby Digital or DTS-only release, plus they occupy less space for consumers to store in their collections than those gigantic boxes full of marbles, scarves and other useless toot!

add to that, they are easier for stores (the few left) to store and display, easier for online retailers to dispatch than big boxes, more environmentally friendly than using up loads of cardboard (and other materials) lavished on boxes full of needless waffle.

I just don't understand why a CD & DVD-Audio combo has not been universally adopted by the labels that are left now as the de facto way to go about it.

 

[0tto]

i would rather have DTS than nothing at all, its a compromise but allows the DVD to play on every player and does maximise the market and upsets a few in the niche audiophile market

sadly it's not a compromise but really very cynical piss off of consumers, whos money the very same labels want.
technical side allows to make hybrid DVDA which is universal for playback on any DVD player, for over decade now.
no one in studio working on the mix, utilizes degraded by shrinkage algorithms, source tracks, thus some "bright"
minds decided to degrade the sound, before dispatch it to replication factory.
"DTS just fine to me" is pretty similar to arguments of die hard stereophiles "surround sux, give us one more stereo
remaster and forget about remixing into surround", when in fact both are can be done on single disc and everyone
can chose mix of personal preferences.

 

[rtbluray]

http://www.amazon.com/Thick-As-Bric...F8&qid=1347490452&sr=1-1&keywords=jethro+tull

Well, unless the release date changes to the 6th and the price comes considerably down, Burning Shed is the way to go for me!

 

[elshagon]

http://www.amazon.com/Thick-As-Bric...F8&qid=1347490452&sr=1-1&keywords=jethro+tull

Well, unless the release date changes to the 6th and the price comes considerably down, Burning Shed is the way to go for me!

http://www.amazon.com/Thick-As-Brick-2-Special/dp/B0073XORCY/ref=sr_1_2?s=music&ie=UTF8&qid=1347505817&sr=1-2&keywords=Jethro+Tull+Thick+As+A+Brick+%2840th+Anniversary+Special+Edition%29

I'm showing $20.80 on Amazon

 

[rtbluray]

http://www.amazon.com/Thick-As-Brick-2-Special/dp/B0073XORCY/ref=sr_1_2?s=music&ie=UTF8&qid=1347505817&sr=1-2&keywords=Jethro+Tull+Thick+As+A+Brick+%2840th+Anniversary+Special+Edition%29

I'm showing $20.80 on Amazon

That's Thick as a Brick 2

The album we're mentioning is the reissue of the first Thick as a Brick album (my correct link on amazon)

 

[LizardKing]

http://www.amazon.com/Thick-As-Bric...As+A+Brick+(40th+Anniversary+Special+Edition)

I'm showing $20.80 on Amazon

http://www.amazon.com/Thick-As-Brick...ial+Edition%29
Thats Thick as a Brick 2!! Not the original album....

http://www.amazon.com/Thick-As-Brick...ds=jethro+tull
and this is Thick as a Brick:

 

[rtbluray]

http://www.amazon.com/Thick-As-Brick...ial+Edition%29
Thats Thick as a Brick 2!! Not the original album....

http://www.amazon.com/Thick-As-Brick...ds=jethro+tull
and this is Thick as a Brick:

And now the amazon price is even worse... @: