The Beatles - Abbey Road 50th Anniversary (5.1 & Dolby Atmos mixes)

[LuvMyQuad]

I just don't get all the negativity (Maybe SPLHCB???) ; this should be a time of great jubilance

hey I'm happy too, but cautious as well.

 

[ar surround]

I’ll refrain from personal editorial but for discussion’s sake I wanted to post the ATMOS-related excerpt by Michael Fremer about the preview listening he attended in NYC. I highly recommend clicking on and reading the full piece here.

I read Fremer's review several times. Here is the excerpt that drives me bananas:

"I'm telling you what happened next not to embarrass or humiliate anyone but simply to do my job as a reporter: "Come Together" started and it was immediately clear that something was technically "untogether" with the playback. Everything was centered as if in a mono mix! The sound was muddy and exaggerated on bottom and the top end was missing. I couldn't have been the only one sitting there hearing what was terribly wrong and hoping that playback would be halted until it was fixed.

I grew increasingly agitated in my seat. I remember saying to myself "Okay, I know they like to give us the full bottom, but this is ridiculous". I could hardly contain myself. I looked around and there were closed eyes and a lot of "grooving" going on. "Something" was also in mono and clearly it was mono of one of the two tracks centered! Things were missing. What is going on? I almost stood up and shouted "STOP THE SHOW THIS IS WRONG!!!!"

I almost did, but stopped myself. When "Here Comes the Sun" played and there were no handclaps (among other crazy off-kilter and missing elements), I turned to the guy sitting next to me and I said "This is mono!". He said "I don't know, I kind of like it. It sounds very direct!" I said something else to him that I can't recall but before I was finished a guy down the row hit me with some big air brakes as in "SHHHHHHHSSSSHHHH!" I was interfering with his soaking in all of this remixing "genius" and the completely new "take" he was getting from this classic album."

Huh? Why were the people Fremer is talking about even invited to this session? People who cannot tell the difference between mono and stereo should not have been in that room auditioning a new stereo mix, let alone an Atmos mix. (Hey, I know, qualifications and privilege often don't go hand in hand.) People who have the music so ingrained in their heads that they close their eyes and are "grooving" to what is a shell of the original recording...a mistake...don't belong in there either. Finally, I'm ROTFLMAO at that guy who liked the "mono" snafu because "It sounds very direct!"

Enough ranting for one day!

 

[kokishin]

Come together, right now
Over Giles

 

[sjcorne]

I read Fremer's review several times. Here is the excerpt that drives me bananas:

"I'm telling you what happened next not to embarrass or humiliate anyone but simply to do my job as a reporter: "Come Together" started and it was immediately clear that something was technically "untogether" with the playback. Everything was centered as if in a mono mix! The sound was muddy and exaggerated on bottom and the top end was missing. I couldn't have been the only one sitting there hearing what was terribly wrong and hoping that playback would be halted until it was fixed.

I grew increasingly agitated in my seat. I remember saying to myself "Okay, I know they like to give us the full bottom, but this is ridiculous". I could hardly contain myself. I looked around and there were closed eyes and a lot of "grooving" going on. "Something" was also in mono and clearly it was mono of one of the two tracks centered! Things were missing. What is going on? I almost stood up and shouted "STOP THE SHOW THIS IS WRONG!!!!"

I almost did, but stopped myself. When "Here Comes the Sun" played and there were no handclaps (among other crazy off-kilter and missing elements), I turned to the guy sitting next to me and I said "This is mono!". He said "I don't know, I kind of like it. It sounds very direct!" I said something else to him that I can't recall but before I was finished a guy down the row hit me with some big air brakes as in "SHHHHHHHSSSSHHHH!" I was interfering with his soaking in all of this remixing "genius" and the completely new "take" he was getting from this classic album."

Huh? Why were the people Fremer is talking about even invited to this session? People who cannot tell the difference between mono and stereo should not have been in that room auditioning a new stereo mix, let alone an Atmos mix. (Hey, I know, qualifications and privilege often don't go hand in hand.) People who have the music so ingrained in their heads that they close their eyes and are "grooving" to what is a shell of the original recording...a mistake...don't belong in there either. Finally, I'm ROTFLMAO at that guy who liked the "mono" snafu because "It sounds very direct!"

Enough ranting for one day!

If you read on, he mentions that there may actually have been some sort of playback issue with regards to the stereo remix:

When it was over and the lights came on, Mr. Hayden (who I've know for many years, probably decades now), was embarrassed and profusely apologized for the awful sound and the playback screw up. I blurted out "Why didn't you just stop it???????" He said later outside the screening room that he kept hoping it would be fixed, but unfortunately it was not. He self-admitted to being a feline. However it was a relief to know what we heard was not right!

Honestly though, the whole thing is kind of unclear and appears to be written by someone who doesn’t care much for remixes or surround sound...

 

[markshan]

Finally, I'm ROTFLMAO at that guy who liked the "mono" snafu because "It sounds very direct!"

Several people here said almost that exact thing to me when I complained about Rumours having vocals in all channels.

 

[jsulzinger]

Sounds like they were listening to the surround sound track with just the front L/R speakers. That would explain the missing hand claps.

 

[esimms86]

I don’t want to read too much in one audio journalist’s account of a single listen in an unfamiliar room with playback snafus going on. Once it gets released to the general public we’ll have more than enough opportunities to discuss and rate the new mixes. Anyway, I’m expecting big things from the stereo and 5.1 mixes which, taken together, should easily justify my outlay of cash.

 

[J. PUPSTER]

I just don't get all the negativity (Maybe SPLHCB???) ; this should be a time of great jubilance

My wife just made an announcement:

If you're happy and ya know it crap your pants -
If you're happy and ya know it crap your pants -
If you're happy and ya know it; if you're happy and ya know it... crap your pants -
-- "An interesting life in retirement; but it reminds me of some of you crotchety old farts here on the forum "

Now for the serious stuff:
I suppose the folks here consider themselves the standard-bearers (rightfully so), holding the music industry's feet to the fire for properly sounding surround titles. Of the few hundred regular posters here, seems we all have a passionate and substantial appetite for all things surround with all the various titles showed off day in and day out. One question then is; what currently is a proper sounding surround title? I believe the answer to that is buried here within this forum in the Poll ratings pages (with detailed analysis being important.) I've raged about that sort of thing myself here when it comes to T.O.M.B.S. (Tired of Mega Box Sets.) What's going to take time is an overall consensus on what a great Atmos mix should sound like (appropriate to the style of music); and pretty sure that it's not clearly evident to just a casual reader/lurker here on the forum for 4.0 and 5.1 mixes. Just keep in mind, Abbey Road 50th hasn't even been released yet! I for one am optimistic, but will hold those "accountable feet" to the fire, when and if necessary.

 

[esimms86]

My wife just made an announcement:

If you're happy and ya know it crap your pants -
If you're happy and ya know it crap your pants -
If you're happy and ya know it; if you're happy and ya know it... crap your pants -
-- "An interesting life in retirement; but it reminds me of some of you crotchety old farts here on the forum "

Now for the serious stuff:
I suppose the folks here consider themselves the standard-bearers (rightfully so), holding the music industry's feet to the fire for properly sounding surround titles. Of the few hundred regular posters here, seems we all have a passionate and substantial appetite for all things surround with all the various titles showed off day in and day out. One question then is; what currently is a proper sounding surround title? I believe the answer to that is buried here within this forum in the Poll ratings pages (with detailed analysis being important.) I've raged about that sort of thing myself here when it comes to T.O.M.B.S. (Tired of Mega Box Sets.) What's going to take time is an overall consensus on what a great Atmos mix should sound like (appropriate to the style of music); and pretty sure that it's not clearly evident to just a casual reader/lurker here on the forum for 4.0 and 5.1 mixes. Just keep in mind, Abbey Road 50th hasn't even been released yet! I for one am optimistic, but will hold those "accountable feet" to the fire, when and if necessary.

I think that most folks want to hear an adventuresome mix, something along the lines of the approach taken with the White Album’s 5.1 mix. At the end of the day, the Beatles purists will always have the original and 2009 stereo mixes, therefore, there’s no major risk in Giles coloring outside the lines for the 5.1 and Atmos mixes. Either way, I’m still super excited about the upcoming release.

 

[milt]

I realize I haven't heard it, and the comment about programming is lost on me, but I've been burned enough times to know not to simply accept anything on pure faith anymore. Especially when it comes to mega-advances in sound reproduction.

Skepticism is always healthy.
I don't have an Atmos system because I'm happy with 7.2 and I don't want to go the the expense of doing it right.
I do have a good friend who has an awesome Atmos system and it really is immersive.
Besides films we've listened to Atmos music discs, INXS & Automatic For The People among others and they are very well done, imo.

Personally I've never had any issue with Giles Martin's Beatles work.
I think people don't realize the limitations involved with some of the source material like Sgt. Pepper are expecting things that just weren't ever there in the first place.

I'll take the clarity of Sgt. Pepper remix over the POS fake stereo of the original Beatles releases prior to TWA any day.

 

[HomerJAU]

Another micro review from the recent Abbey Road listening session:

..speaking as someone who has heard every second of this album hundreds of times since the age of 6, it sounds amazing.

Most of the new remix of the album was played, along with parts of the special “Atmos” mix — and hearing it over the mind-blowing sound system at the Dolby 24 Screening Room in New York is a privileged setting that won’t be recreated in most mortals’ homes. With that caveat, it sounds stunning: The remix places the listener in the center of the music, with the so-familiar elements of the Beatles’ sound — the breathtaking vocal harmonies, the snarling electric guitars, Ringo’s cascading drum rolls and Paul McCartney’s astonishing bass playing — moving from one speaker to the next fluidly.

Sounds promising!

Source:
https://variety.com/2019/music/news...-preview-50th-anniversary-edition-1203307482/

 

[ar surround]

Re: Michael Fremer article on Abbey Road

If you read on, he mentions that there may actually have been some sort of playback issue with regards to the stereo remix:

Yes, and that is exactly my point...something was terribly wrong with the playback yet a number of the chosen few who were invited to the first listen were clueless that there were problems.

 

[edisonbaggins]

Source:
https://variety.com/2019/music/news...-preview-50th-anniversary-edition-1203307482/

Hmmm... where have I seen that before...

 

[Wunlow]

Agreed.

It really does sound like the presentation was botched in some way. I've seen and heard major presentations botched in some way or another and knew first hand the presenters were cringing (a few times literally getting sick) due to technical errors that couldn't (or wouldn't) be stopped for various reasons. Point being is it was shocking to see just how many will either not know any better or simply take a cue from the tale of "the emperor's new cloths" and just go along for the ride.

 

[ar surround]

Agreed.

It really does sound like the presentation was botched in some way. I've seen and heard major presentations botched in some way or another and knew first hand the presenters were cringing (a few times literally getting sick) due to technical errors that couldn't (or wouldn't) be stopped for various reasons. Point being is it was shocking to see just how many will either not know any better or simply take a cue from the tale of "the emperor's new cloths" and just go along for the ride.

Remember this classic?

 

[4-earredwonder]

Re: Michael Fremer article on Abbey Road



Yes, and that is exactly my point...something was terribly wrong with the playback yet a number of the chosen few who were invited to the first listen were clueless that there were problems.

One of our UK QQ Posters who had attended the Dolby Atmos Sgt. Pepper Theater 'experience' stated that the playback levels were SO excruciating as to uncomfortably drown out the music. And let's face it, Michael Fremer is first and foremost an analogue aficionado who always ballyhooed Digital playback stating it lacked soul and substance........and IMO, is hardly representative of critiquing a digital remix of Abbey Road.

 

[ar surround]

And let's face it, Michael Fremer is first and foremost an analogue aficionado who always ballyhooed Digital playback stating it lacked soul and substance........and IMO, is hardly representative of critiquing a digital remix of Abbey Road.

Geez, I thought Fremer liked SACD and DVD-A? From a review of his in Sound & Vision way back in April 2005:

"Well-recorded 5.1-channel SACDs, such as those from Linn and Chesky, are rendered with a spatial and tonal effortlessness one associates with expensive 2-channel audiophile music systems—though, of course, with greater three-dimensionality mixed in 5.1..."

"I recently reviewed a double-LP set featuring Dylan songs remade as reggae called Is it Rolling Bob? on my music review Web site, and when a DualDisc version arrived the other day (Silverline 284603-2) featuring a 5.1-channel DVD-Audio mix of the album, I popped it in the player and was pleasantly surprised by the taut, muscular bass; the shimmering, non-sizzly cymbals; and the convincing physicality of the vocals. Hearing instruments coming from the sides is not my idea of a sonic thrill, but this mix made it more fun than faux..."

Oh, and Michael Fremer loves Lexicon Logic7...and youse guys know how much I love Logic7. From the same 2005 review:

...but Lexicon's Logic7 algorithm for deriving 7.1 channels from 5.1 sources was startlingly good. As advertised in the instruction manual, it provided "remarkable improvement compared to other decoders." Also as advertised, it ". . .increases the perceived length and sense of envelopment of the listening space." For the first time in my space, a pair of ES/EX rear speakers actually provided a worthwhile sonic enhancement instead of a distraction. The rear stage coherence was remarkable, with a smooth curtain of sound wrapping seamlessly around from the side speakers to the rears. Individual images appeared convincingly and with pinpoint precision in that space, and when the source material was good enough, the sensation of being in another space altogether became almost disorienting..."

So how could I ever doubt my best buddy Mikie?

 

[milt]

Perhaps OT but got this update for Amazon..jp.
Delivery 10/3/19
JPY 12.703 shipped == $119.34
I know that's far above other domestic prices but I obviously don't care.

 

[H.A.L.]

Perhaps OT but got this update for Amazon..jp.
Delivery 10/3/19
JPY 12.703 shipped == $119.34
I know that's far above other domestic prices but I obvisously don't care.

The SHM-CDs are worth that alone!

 

[milt]

The SHM-CDs are worth that alone!

Unlike Sgt. Pepper, TWA and Abbey Road packaging is the same world wide.
The SHM is the lone differentiation.