Life in Surround - Surround Music Review and Discussion YouTube Channel

[edisonbaggins]

DSotM and Quadio are on my mind.
For the former, I want to make sure I have some wavs of the 4.0 and 5.1.
For the latter, I'd love to get some opinions of the differences between the quad mixes and the DVD-As of II and V.
Asking for a little help if anyone has rips, can give me a little review, etc.

 

[sjcorne]

For the latter, I'd love to get some opinions of the differences between the quad mixes and the DVD-As of II and V.
Asking for a little help if anyone has rips, can give me a little review, etc.

They couldn't be more different. The quads were mixed for SQ LP release and as such are super discrete: usually the drums are across the fronts, vocals, bass guitar, and some guitar/brass solos are through the center, while the horns, rhythm guitars, piano, etc are in the rears. The quads also have a few extra elements not included in the stereo or 5.1 mixes, such as the extra lead guitar highlights and acoustic rhythm guitar in "25 Or 6 To 4".

The 5.1's are more of a "big stereo"-type deal: I don't think there's actually anything truly discrete in the rears, but the center channel contains isolated guitar and brass solos. The DVD-As sound a bit better than the Quadio Blu-Rays to my ears, but the lame mixes keep me from spinning them more.

"25 Or 6 To 4" (4.0):


"25 Or 6 To 4" (5.1):

 

[edisonbaggins]

They couldn't be more different. The quads were mixed for SQ LP release and as such are super discrete: usually the drums are across the fronts, vocals, bass guitar, and some guitar/brass solos are through the center, while the horns, rhythm guitars, piano, etc are in the rears. The quads also have a few extra elements not included in the stereo or 5.1 mixes, such as the extra lead guitar highlights and acoustic rhythm guitar in "25 Or 6 To 4".

The 5.1's are more of a "big stereo"-type deal: I don't think there's actually anything truly discrete in the rears, but the center channel contains isolated guitar and brass solos. The DVD-As are remixes from the original multis, so they do sound a bit better (the horns on II in particular seem quite a bit less muffled), but the lame mixes keep me from spinning them more.

"25 Or 6 To 4" (4.0):
View attachment 40071

"25 Or 6 To 4" (5.1):
View attachment 40070

Wow, thank you!

 

[JediJoker]

The DVD-As are remixes from the original multis, so they do sound a bit better...

But the quad mixes would have been from the original multis, too. Are you suggesting that the equipment used to mix them in the '70s degraded the sound, whereas that used in the '00s did not?

 

[sjcorne]

But the quad mixes would have been from the original multis, too. Are you suggesting that the equipment used to mix them in the '70s degraded the sound, whereas that used in the '00s did not?

No.

I assume the 5.1 mixes were done on a DAW and digital tools unavailable in the ‘70s were used to bring out the absolute best of what was on the multis. Plus, the quad master is one generation away from the multitrack master(s).

The 5.1 mix of II sounds better fidelity-wise than any other version of the album I’ve heard. I’m just not a fan of the surround mix. I feel the same way about the DSOTM 5.1 mix compared to the quad.

 

[edisonbaggins]

No.

I assume the 5.1 mixes were done on a DAW and digital tools unavailable in the ‘70s were used to bring out the absolute best of what was on the multis. Plus, the quad master is one generation away from the multitrack master(s).

The 5.1 mix of II sounds better fidelity-wise than any other version of the album I’ve heard. I’m just not a fan of the surround mix. I feel the same way about the DSOTM 5.1 mix compared to the quad.

We definitely agree on the DSotM mixes, which I have compared.

 

[JediJoker]

No.

I assume the 5.1 mixes were done on a DAW and digital tools unavailable in the ‘70s were used to bring out the absolute best of what was on the multis. Plus, the quad master is one generation away from the multitrack master(s).

You say, "No," followed by a qualified, "Yes." It is your opinion that mixing in a DAW produces better-sounding results than mixing on an analog console. I understand the thinking, but can say from personal experience that this is not a rule.

As for an extra tape generation due to the need for a way to store the mix, do you think this way about all analog mixes, regardless of channel count? Because that's just setting yourself up for mass disappointment with much, if not most of the history of multitracked recorded music. "Gee, I like this music, but it bothers me that I can't hear this mix live from the multitracks or captured straight to digital."

 

[edisonbaggins]

I think the takeaway is that the DVD-As might sound better, while being a less interesting mix. Very intriguing to me.
Bear in mind that I love the Quadio fidelity just fine and haven't heard the DVD-As.

 

[sjcorne]

You say, "No," followed by a qualified, "Yes." It is your opinion that mixing in a DAW produces better-sounding results than mixing on an analog console. I understand the thinking, but can say from personal experience that this is not a rule.

My only opinion on the matter is that the Chicago II 5.1 mix is sonically superior to the old quad, but I prefer the old quad mix because it is much more discrete. My apologies for being unclear.

 

[Clement]

YOWZA! I found your YouTube channel when I searched for "surround music reviews"; I was looking because it occurred to me that doing some video reviews would help me listen to ALL of my discs. Well, great minds think alike (as do mediocre minds, my daughter likes to point out!), and now my lazy aspect can just live vicariously through you--it's for the best as I have a classic face for radio! I was so enamored of your work that I watched your first 16 videos last night and this morning and just read through the 11 pages of this thread! What a joy! Thank you SO very much for your love and commitment. I think I'll slow down on the watching, so I don't go into withdrawal waiting for your most recent posts! So rather than do my own surround channel, I can begin posting comments on yours! I retired early from teaching high school Engl-ish and have been taking classes at a local community college. Searching YouTube (and writing here this morning) is just my way of avoiding writing a research paper! Procrastination! You think after being a citizen for 58 years, I'd have emigrated by now! And yet, were it not for procrastination, I would never have found such jewels as this site and your YouTube channel! Keep on vlogging! Peace

 

[edisonbaggins]

YOWZA! I found your YouTube channel when I searched for "surround music reviews"; I was looking because it occurred to me that doing some video reviews would help me listen to ALL of my discs. Well, great minds think alike (as do mediocre minds, my daughter likes to point out!), and now my lazy aspect can just live vicariously through you--it's for the best as I have a classic face for radio! I was so enamored of your work that I watched your first 16 videos last night and this morning and just read through the 11 pages of this thread! What a joy! Thank you SO very much for your love and commitment. I think I'll slow down on the watching, so I don't go into withdrawal waiting for your most recent posts! So rather than do my own surround channel, I can begin posting comments on yours! I retired early from teaching high school Engl-ish and have been taking classes at a local community college. Searching YouTube (and writing here this morning) is just my way of avoiding writing a research paper! Procrastination! You think after being a citizen for 58 years, I'd have emigrated by now! And yet, were it not for procrastination, I would never have found such jewels as this site and your YouTube channel! Keep on vlogging! Peace

YOWZA, right back! This kind of thing is exactly why I'm doing Life in Surround. I very much appreciate the viewing, any likes, comments, etc. as it causes the YouTube algorithm to push the videos out more widely. So thank you, very, very much for the support, in that regard.
We can also put your passion to work if you'd like to make requests, suggestions, pitch ideas and stuff like that. It's true that I'm a one-man shop, at this point, but I still need the community's help. If I can improve something, I will. Some of the best ideas, including improvements, have come from fellow QQers. That outside perspective. The better these videos get, the more our beloved hobby will be enjoyed and maybe even grow.
Thanks again for watching and this post. I look forward to your comments and other interaction, as this adventure rolls along.

 

[sjcorne]

Toy Matinee might be a cool one to review. The album isn't particularly well known, and the surround mix is one of the best I've ever heard.

 

[ar surround]

Toy Matinee might be a cool one to review. The album isn't particularly well known, and the surround mix is one of the best I've ever heard.

For those wanting it now:

https://www.ebay.com/itm/Toy-Matine...335336?hash=item364cb79ba8:g:qPAAAOSw9kNcv1ZD

 

[4-earredwonder]

Toy Matinee might be a cool one to review. The album isn't particularly well known, and the surround mix is one of the best I've ever heard.

Perhaps a LIFE In SURROUND detailing label DTS Entertainment's eclectic output both on RBCD DTS and MLP DVD~A might give Mike more diversity to choose from, Jonathan. I've always felt that it WAS DTS Entertainment which single handedly introduced SURROUND Music to the masses IN THE DIGITAL AGE and did over a period of years bring a diverse roster of artists to prominence through their stellar efforts [and we also got QUEEN, as well].

DTS Entertainment Discography: https://www.discogs.com/label/34886-DTS-Entertainment

 

[edisonbaggins]

Toy Matinee might be a cool one to review. The album isn't particularly well known, and the surround mix is one of the best I've ever heard.

It's definitely getting a review. I like the DTS Entertainment overview idea too. Ideally, I'd like to do a video for every label. AF, Dutton, DTS, AIX, etc.

 

[JediJoker]

...RBCD DTS...

That would be *DTS-CD, which is, by its very nature, not Redbook.

 

[4-earredwonder]

That would be *DTS-CD, which is, by its very nature, not Redbook.

OY, SEMANTICS! But technically, you ARE correct ....... so DTS~CD it shall be!

 

[sjcorne]

I've always felt that it WAS DTS Entertainment which single handedly introduced SURROUND Music to the masses IN THE DIGITAL AGE and did over a period of years bring a diverse roster of artists to prominence through their stellar efforts [and we also got QUEEN, as well].

I'm not entirely sure if those early Mobile Fidelity International or "Miller Nevada" DTS-CDs (a number of which are sourced from quad masters) are from actually from the same company as the later "DTS Entertainment" titles.

I got the impression that said earlier titles (Abraxas, Band On The Run, etc) were from a smaller independent operation that Brad Miller was directly involved in, which was later absorbed into the larger "DTS Entertainment".

 

[4-earredwonder]

I'm not entirely sure if those early Mobile Fidelity International or "Miller Nevada" DTS-CDs (a number of which are sourced from quad masters) are from actually from the same company as the later "DTS Entertainment" titles.

I got the impression that said earlier titles (Abraxas, Band On The Run, etc) were from a smaller independent operation that Brad Miller was directly involved in, which was later absorbed into the larger "DTS Entertainment".

Brad Miller is heralded as the Father of Mobile Fidelity so doubtful he was involved with DTS Entertainment which I am assuming was an outgrowth of DTS' work competing with DOLBY in the motion picture biz. If you recall, back in the 90's, I always considered DTS to be somewhat superior to Dolby and coveted DVDs which sported the DTS moniker.

 

[sjcorne]

Brad Miller is heralded as the Father of Mobile Fidelity so doubtful he was involved with DTS Entertainment which I am assuming was an outgrowth of DTS' work competing with DOLBY in the motion picture biz.

Those early DTS-CDs said to be from ADAT copies of quad masters were actually the work of Mobile Fidelity (then called Mobile Fidelity International). Brad Miller's name is all over them. It seems after his death, they became the vehemently stereo-only operation we know today.

I think DTS Entertainment is an entirely different and unrelated label that focused on putting out new 5.1 mixes (Queen, Porcupine Tree, Toy Matinee, etc etc).