Sly & the Family Stone Greatest Hits - 4.0 Audio Fidelity Multichannel SACD (October 2015)

[Franklin]

What do you mean "if true"? It's been confirmed nine ways to Sunday.

Calm down, you're not on the Hoffman forum here. While you may consider yourself to have had enough confirmation I've only seen someone apparently quote Hoffman here.

 

[Philip Spinner]

I loved the mono mix of Dance to the Music on 45 disc. Yes it's the short version but the bass is incredible. Can't wait for this.

 

[wavelength]

Calm down, you're not on the Hoffman forum here. While you may consider yourself to have had enough confirmation I've only seen someone apparently quote Hoffman here.

Have a look here:
http://forums.stevehoffman.tv/threa...ty-sacd-quad-and-mono-hit-mixes.452254/page-9

 

[cupboy]

Is this the first mono edition or did it come out in vinyl mono back in the day?

 

[Quad Linda]

Sly's Greatest came out about two years after Epic (CBS) abandoned mono pressings. Most of the tracks on the original 2ch LP were electronic rechannelings of mono singles. Playing the SQ LP without decoding is the first time many people heard this album in 2ch that wasn't electronically rechanneled.

I'd love to hear it in REAL mono, although I'm much more anxious to hear it in 4.0 SACD, having had it on LP, SQ, Q8 & original rechanneled CD.

Is this the first mono edition or did it come out in vinyl mono back in the day?

 

[Larry Geller]

Sly's Greatest came out about two years after Epic (CBS) abandoned mono pressings. Most of the tracks on the original 2ch LP were electronic rechannelings of mono singles. Playing the SQ LP without decoding is the first time many people heard this album in 2ch that wasn't electronically rechanneled.

I'd love to hear it in REAL mono, although I'm much more anxious to hear it in 4.0 SACD, having had it on LP, SQ, Q8 & original rechanneled CD.

Only three tracks were reprocessed. That's hardly "most".

 

[Old Quad Guy]

I'm counting the days until this title comes out.. Mono, that's going to be Real Cool, looking forward to it.

 

[cupboy]

I'll have it first because I'm a member.

Although I would be curious to know if the stereo tracks would have fit on there too. I think they would have on the redbook layer, not sure about SACD.

 

[cupboy]

Not always - surely you know that already.

Having spent around $5K on SHM SACDs... haven't heard a bad flat transfer yet.

The only badly EQ'd disks I've ever heard were mastered either by Mew, Inglot or Hoffman.

 

[wavelength]

Having spent around $5K on SHM SACDs... haven't heard a bad flat transfer yet.

The only badly EQ'd disks I've ever heard were mastered either by Mew, Inglot or Hoffman.

I'd throw Bob Ludwig in that group too - because of Goodbye Yellow Brick Road.

 

[sf49erjohn]

It's funny how we are governed so much by computers that even obvious mistakes go unnoticed...like leaving the "t" off of greatest in the upcoming release by Sly And The Family Stone...I saw it on amazon and thought it was just their mistake...but now importcds has the same mistake...

The good news is the price on importcds HERE

Thanks Ordered! Canceled Amazon and save $5-$6.

 

[oxenholme]

Having spent around $5K on SHM SACDs... haven't heard a bad flat transfer yet.

The only badly EQ'd disks I've ever heard were mastered either by Mew, Inglot or Hoffman.

The only SHM SACD that even vaguely pleases me is Sticky Fingers. And in the case of Love Over Gold I very much prefer the sound of the original 1983-1984 PolyGram Hanover redbook CD.

I have dozens of CDs mastered by the gentlemen whom you mention that sound superb to my ears.

 

[oxenholme]

Having spent around $5K on SHM SACDs... haven't heard a bad flat transfer yet.

The only badly EQ'd disks I've ever heard were mastered either by Mew, Inglot or Hoffman.

The only SHM SACD that even vaguely pleases me is Sticky Fingers. And in the case of Love Over Gold I very much prefer the sound of the original 1983-1984 PolyGram Hanover redbook CD.

I have dozens of CDs mastered by the gentlemen whom you mention that sound superb to my ears.

 

[Q-Eight]

Let's not forget that mid-1970s quad master is probably a third / fourth generation analog tape. It may even be 1/4" tape and any noise reduction would be very early Dolby or equivalent.

That's not true. The Quad masters we've seen are generally ½" 4-track running at 15 i.p.s. and, if you can believe the markings on the boxes, may only be second-generation Safety Copies. First-Gen would be the actual reels being mixed down from the multitrack. That's why a lot of these Quad tapes sound so amazing. They are low generation, low mileage, rarely EQ'd tapes that have not been played in over 40 years. As long as they are left in controlled storage, they come out in spectacular shape. Refer to the B, S & T Quad. Amazing sound and virtually no noise.

 

[Q-Eight]

Double Post. :yikes

 

[Larry Geller]

That's not true. The Quad masters we've seen are generally ½" 4-track running at 15 i.p.s. and, if you can believe the markings on the boxes, may only be second-generation Safety Copies. First-Gen would be the actual reels being mixed down from the multitrack. That's why a lot of these Quad tapes sound so amazing. They are low generation, low mileage, rarely EQ'd tapes that have not been played in over 40 years. As long as they are left in controlled storage, they come out in spectacular shape. Refer to the B, S & T Quad. Amazing sound and virtually no noise.

But this post is in stereo, not quad.

 

[alk3997]

That's not true. The Quad masters we've seen are generally ½" 4-track running at 15 i.p.s. and, if you can believe the markings on the boxes, may only be second-generation Safety Copies. First-Gen would be the actual reels being mixed down from the multitrack. That's why a lot of these Quad tapes sound so amazing. They are low generation, low mileage, rarely EQ'd tapes that have not been played in over 40 years. As long as they are left in controlled storage, they come out in spectacular shape. Refer to the B, S & T Quad. Amazing sound and virtually no noise.

If it is a safety copy, then that is at least third generation. First generation multitrack, then mixed for quad and then a safety copy of the quad.

Of course if this message gets repeated three more times we can claim this is true quad message (but would it be first generation?)

Andy

 

[Q-Eight]

If it is a safety copy, then that is at least third generation. First generation multitrack, then mixed for quad and then a safety copy of the quad.

Of course if this message gets repeated three more times we can claim this is true quad message (but would it be first generation?)

Andy

Your usage of the terminology isn't correct. I don't know anybody in the biz that refers to the multitrack as "First Generation" because it can get awfully confusing. What we refer to as a multitrack, may be a "finished" or "finalized" multitrack. That being a tape that has been bounced down from a "Session Multitrack" to clean up any unused tracks, flubbed or botched parts, etc. A final multitrack could be third generation from the original session tape. However, when you're talking 2" tape, running at 30 i.p.s. if a person is careful, you won't lose a whole lot of tonal quality through the bouncing.

A bad example is how John Fogerty originally created the "CCR Sound". They would record the basic tracks at the Factory onto 1", 15 i.p.s. 8-track equipment. Then, John would take that 8-track, dub it onto a 16-track at Fantasy in L.A. and then proceed to do all the sweetening and overdubbing himself on those extra 8 tracks he just created. This is why some of the early CCR songs have that muddy, murky sort of feeling to them because the basic tracks are 2nd-Gen on that second 16-track multi! (See how I said it could get confusing?)

So, generally speaking, a "Mixdown", sometimes referred to as a "Master" is your primary. A Safety copy could also be a primary if it was dubbed on a second machine at the exact same time - which wasn't uncommon. THEN you get into the usage of "generations", as a copy of that Master (or Primary Safety Copy) would become a "Second" Generation tape etc, etc, ad nauseum.

Depending on the state of the archives at Columbia, Sony, BMG (whatever it is this week) we could be lucky enough to be getting a first-generation 15 i.p.s. Quad Master that is only one generation removed from the multitrack!! Due to the limitations of SQ, we also don't get a whole lot of echo or EQ added to that, so in many cases, these Quad masters have a more pure sound quality than a lot of the stereo masters!

 

[bmoura]

That's not true. The Quad masters we've seen are generally ½" 4-track running at 15 i.p.s. and, if you can believe the markings on the boxes, may only be second-generation Safety Copies. First-Gen would be the actual reels being mixed down from the multitrack. That's why a lot of these Quad tapes sound so amazing. They are low generation, low mileage, rarely EQ'd tapes that have not been played in over 40 years. As long as they are left in controlled storage, they come out in spectacular shape. Refer to the B, S & T Quad. Amazing sound and virtually no noise.

That's right. The Audio Fidelity Multichannel SACDs from the Quad era are being created from the 1st Generation Analog Master Tapes. Transferred directly to DSD from the Analog domain by Gus Skinas at the Super Audio Center.
Some excellent results as you noted.

 

[Q-Eight]

That's right. The Audio Fidelity Multichannel SACDs from the Quad era are being created from the 1st Generation Analog Master Tapes. Transferred directly to DSD from the Analog domain by Gus Skinas at the Super Audio Center.
Some excellent results as you noted.

*Sigh* The stuff dreams are made of. I would love to be able to hold one of those original tapes in my hands. It might seem silly, but that right there would be the genesis of a legend. For instance for 20+ years, the only way to hear some of Sly's tunes in true stereo was to track down the Quad LP. It wasn't until the late 90's that they finally decided to re-engineer those three tracks.

Remixing would be my dream job.