DVD/DTS Poll Velvet Underground - Loaded (Re-Loaded 45th Anniversary Edition) [DTS 96-24/DD DVD]

[Bob Romano]

Please post your thoughts and comments on this DVD release containing a Dolby & DTS 5.1 surround mix

 

[Odys]

Pleasantly surprised by this one. I wasn't sure what to expect, but it very much surpassed my expectations. Great to have some VU in surround. 9

 

[rtbluray]

I struggled finding the right vote for this one, but in the end I have settled on a '7', breaking down my vote this way:

Content: 2/3 (Some weak songs on this one)
Surround Mix: 3/3 (No complaints here. I truly believe that Kevin Reeves created the best surround mix possible given the limitations of the source material.)
Fidelity: 2/3 (Not a fault of the current reissue engineers by any means. Just issues with the source recordings. They don't stand up as well against other recordings of the time.)
High-Res Disc: 0/1 (Speaks for itself)

The value of this disc is somewhat dubious IMHO given the fact that it's not a DVD-A (like it says on the disc…) and that it's only available in a Super Deluxe Edition, but if you're a fan of the Velvet Underground and this album, then this is something you should have in your collection.

 

[fredblue]

I struggled finding the right vote for this one, but in the end I have settled on a '7', breaking down my vote this way:

Content: 2/3 (Some weak songs on this one)
Surround Mix: 3/3 (No complaints here. I truly believe that Kevin Reeves created the best surround mix possible given the limitations of the source material.)
Fidelity: 2/3 (Not a fault of the current reissue engineers by any means. Just issues with the source recordings. They don't stand up as well against other recordings of the time.)
High-Res Disc: 0/1 (Speaks for itself)

The value of this disc is somewhat dubious IMHO given the fact that it's not a DVD-A (like it says on the disc…) and that it's only available in a Super Deluxe Edition, but if you're a fan of the Velvet Underground and this album, then this is something you should have in your collection.

Thank you for that balanced assessment, RT.

I have to say if I hadn't gone for it already your "3/3" score for the surround mix would have swung it for me, even with the only just above average overall mark you awarded it of a "7 - and I can absolutely see how you arrived at that overall score/rating when you break it down in such a way.

I think in future when I cast a QQ vote I will similarly pare it down to the component parts in the way you have, with the criteria you have chosen; 1.) Content ("x" out of 3).. 2.) Surround Mix ("x" out of 3).. 3.) Fidelity ("x" out of 3).. & 4.) Hi-Res status ("x" out of 1).. excellent and logical, even for something as emotive as music listening its the way to do it if you're going to be at all helpful to others here viewing these QQ Polls imho :upthumb

 

[rtbluray]

Thank you for that balanced assessment, RT.

I have to say if I hadn't gone for it already your "3/3" score for the surround mix would have swung it for me, even with the only just above average overall mark you awarded it of a "7 - and I can absolutely see how you arrived at that overall score/rating when you break it down in such a way.

I think in future when I cast a QQ vote I will similarly pare it down to the component parts in the way you have, with the criteria you have chosen; 1.) Content, 2.) Surround Mix, 3.) Fidelity & 4.) HI-Res status.. excellent and logical, even for something as emotive as music listening its the way to do it if you're going to be at all helpful to others here viewing these QQ Polls imho :upthumb

Glad you agree!
When looking back in the other "Loaded" thread, I gave 'Fidelity' 3/3, but reversed that decision when listening again and properly voting today, and I stand by that, especially now that I'm listening to "Child Is Father to the Man", an album recorded and released a few years earlier, but one that I think has superior fidelity in comparison to this one. Just my opinion of course, but anyone on here is free to take it for what it's worth.

 

[Clint Eastwood]

I struggled finding the right vote for this one, but in the end I have settled on a '7', breaking down my vote this way:

Content: 2/3 (Some weak songs on this one)
Surround Mix: 3/3 (No complaints here. I truly believe that Kevin Reeves created the best surround mix possible given the limitations of the source material.)
Fidelity: 2/3 (Not a fault of the current reissue engineers by any means. Just issues with the source recordings. They don't stand up as well against other recordings of the time.)
High-Res Disc: 0/1 (Speaks for itself)

The value of this disc is somewhat dubious IMHO given the fact that it's not a DVD-A (like it says on the disc…) and that it's only available in a Super Deluxe Edition, but if you're a fan of the Velvet Underground and this album, then this is something you should have in your collection.

You can use any method you want to evaluate discs as long as your final point total is at least rational....and a 7 is certainly a good score(IMO because I might give the same number on this one)..BUT deducting points for it not being what some consider hi res means little to me...the whole "it's not a real DVD-A" argument seems irrelevant to me...the sound quality trumps any of these so called "qualifiers"...like 96kHz..or 192kHz...there is almost an obsession with these numbers and the reality is that these parameters don't guarantee success...but people seem to dismiss anything less as being inferior before they even hear the disc...there are plenty of excellent discs that don't have those metrics that sound better than their 96kHz or 192kHz counterparts or real DVD-A's that don't sound as good as DVD-V's...and some people portray DTS as another inferior element even though there are lots of great discs that employ this mode...it's not rocket science...it's music and it either sounds good or it doesn't...how the sound is achieved isn't the important part...at least for me...

 

[rtbluray]

You can use any method you want to evaluate discs as long as your final point total is at least rational....and a 7 is certainly a good score(IMO because I might give the same number on this one)..BUT deducting points for it not being what some consider hi res means little to me...the whole "it's not a real DVD-A" argument seems irrelevant to me...the sound quality trumps any of these so called "qualifiers"...like 96kHz..or 192kHz...there is almost an obsession with these numbers and the reality is that these parameters don't guarantee success...but people seem to dismiss anything less as being inferior before they even hear the disc...there are plenty of excellent discs that don't have those metrics that sound better than their 96kHz or 192kHz counterparts or real DVD-A's that don't sound as good as DVD-V's...and some people portray DTS as another inferior element even though there are lots of great discs that employ this mode...it's not rocket science...it's music and it either sounds good or it doesn't...how the sound is achieved isn't the important part...at least for me...

Clint, I really don't care what you or anyone else thinks of how I vote (or the rationality behind it), but please don't use an actual poll thread as a soapbox to express your views on voting, high-resolution audio, and music in general. There's plenty of other good threads for that, but THIS thread is about "Loaded", and let's keep it that way. Thanks.

Over & Out.

 

[blue.monk]

This release was a welcome under-the-radar surprise for me. Not being a huge VU/Lou Reed fan I doubt I would have pulled the trigger had our resident bargain hunter, Clint Eastwood, not found a great deal (thanks Clint!). The mix is all I could wish for in a (presumedly) 8-track recording and the fidelity is very strong despite some rough edges (many elements appear to have been recorded ‘in the red’). The material is solid & varied and strikes me as leaning back towards the 60’s rather than reaching forward. The arrangements are appropriately minimal and the performances appealing and loose. A very solid 8 for me.

 

[rusinurbe]

Rather wonky quad like Mix which is Mucho Fun IMHO.

Plenty of extras on CD its a shame it was not a Blu Ray package like say XTC's standard setting sets but its a nice package.

 

[slowpoke67]

Just got my hands on this and I quite like it. True that it's not one of VU's best albums overall, despite including the classics "Sweet Jane" and "Rock & Roll," the engineers have done a very admirable job on the surround mix, considering they were probably working with only eight tracks, as blue.monk observed. I love hearing Lou Reed's voice prominently front and center, almost as if he's standing right in front of you literally spitting out some of the lines. Would love to get a surround mix of the first album, but I assume if they could have done that, they would have for the High Res Blu-Ray. This one though, all things considered, a 7/10.

 

[EMB]

A '9' for me, but only because it was the weakest of the four VU albums, which is saying something when you have the likes of "Rock & Roll" and "Sweet Jane." Lou Reed's songs seem at times tired, as if he were playing back to the '50s and early '50s music that helped shape his music--if not his lyrics. There is fun and irony to be here and there, but for someone familiar with VU & NICO and WL/WH, this was mild stuff, and very pale (with exceptions) to the 1969 MGM Lp.

Wonderful mix, with vocals and instruments well balanced and isolated (my only problem with the 5.1 was that when Lou was singing, his guitar wasn't with him; the vocals tend to be isolated).

Package and presentation a solid '10'


ED

 

[GOS]

A '9' for me, but only because it was the weakest of the four VU albums, which is saying something when you have the likes of "Rock & Roll" and "Sweet Jane." Lou Reed's songs seem at times tired, as if he were playing back to the '50s and early '50s music that helped shape his music--if not his lyrics. There is fun and irony to be here and there, but for someone familiar with VU & NICO and WL/WH, this was mild stuff, and very pale (with exceptions) to the 1969 MGM Lp.

Wonderful mix, with vocals and instruments well balanced and isolated (my only problem with the 5.1 was that when Lou was singing, his guitar wasn't with him; the vocals tend to be isolated).

Package and presentation a solid '10'


ED

How totally ironic! I literally just finished listening to this tonight. It's one of my favorites, sounds excellent....I'm pretty sure I voted already.

 

[EMB]

It's a pity the third album hasn't gotten a 5.1 treatment, or even if that's possible. Can you imagine "The Murder Mystery" in multichannel? Might well send ya insane...:yikes But we're talking degrees here when it comes to quality. If pressed, I think my order of favorites would be, top to bottom: WL/WH, VU & NICO, VU, LOADED, but all are remarkable in their fashion. I think it's ironic that even after the move to Atlantic, the VU still couldn't get arrested commercially, really. Worse, the cancellation of the "Rock & Roll" single was a bad decision (I mean, Mitch Ryder's Detroit did get a minor hit out of it, remember).


But as a package, this set is pretty much unbeatable. If you're a VU fan, you'd be crazy not to own it.


ED

 

[GOS]

It's a pity the third album hasn't gotten a 5.1 treatment, or even if that's possible. Can you imagine "The Murder Mystery" in multichannel? Might well send ya insane...:yikes But we're talking degrees here when it comes to quality. If pressed, I think my order of favorites would be, top to bottom: WL/WH, VU & NICO, VU, LOADED, but all are remarkable in their fashion. I think it's ironic that even after the move to Atlantic, the VU still couldn't get arrested commercially, really. Worse, the cancellation of the "Rock & Roll" single was a bad decision (I mean, Mitch Ryder's Detroit did get a minor hit out of it, remember).


But as a package, this set is pretty much unbeatable. If you're a VU fan, you'd be crazy not to own it.


ED

I'm a fan...I own it...and well, I still might be crazy. I listen to this one often.

 

[GOS]

I am embarrassed to admit that I had not voted. I have NO clue why. I gave this one a 9. Excellent tunes, wonderful Quaddy type mix and great fidelity.

 

[sjcorne]

I was just looking at the files for this and realized I never voted or commented. I could probably write a long in-depth essay but I'd say @blue.monk's review was pretty much on-point.

Not really an audiophile masterpiece, but very nice mix for an album of this vintage. Interestingly the two songs I was looking forward to most ("Who Loves The Sun" and "Sweet Jane") are weaker mixes in comparison to some of the later tracks. I gave it an 8 overall.

I hope we see more surround from Kevin Reeves in the future. His style is not conservative at all, in fact it reminds me of the Columbia Q8 mixes (my favorite surrounds of all time) which highlight the four quadrants. His mix of Idlewild South just rocks, one of the best BD-A's I've ever heard.

 

[ai69]

True, the sonics may not be the best and this may not be the best Velvets album (though I love it), but what leapt out at me was how high the guitars were mixed in the 5.1. This is a ROCK album. The guitars growl throughout, particularly in Rock n Roll and tear through Head Held High. It elevated my opinion of Loaded instantly, making it sound like the first time I heard the album. This is what a 5.1 should do. Kudos to the producer. Scored it a 10.

 

[ngv99]

As I'm waiting for my Doobies Quadio set, this one thankfully showed up today to help me pass some time.

This was a pleasant surprise and much more of an aggressive surround mix than I had expected. My expectation was more of a band up front/ambiance in rears sort of mix. The beginning of Sweet Jane danced around the room quite a bit, Lou front and (directly) center, and a lot of driving acoustic guitars and backing vocals in the rears across all tracks. I did feel that the vocals were mixed a little too high, but I'm now wondering if my system needs calibration as I had the same experience with the Goats Head Soup disc. One thing to note: the DVD took well over a minute to load in my Sony UBP-X800M2, but loaded right away in my PS4. Not sure why that would be, but not an issue. It was just odd.

In regards to the rest of the set - the book is really nice with loads of photos. The stereo and mono CDs sound very good as do the outtakes. I didn't think the re-mastering of Live at Max's sounded much better than what I already had, if at all. The Philly 1970 show is borderline unlistenable due to the audio quality, but not many of us are buying this set for that disc.......

This album is a joy to listen to in and of itself and this surround mix is fun. I'm giving it an 8 for now, but once I put my system through recalibration I may up it. I sincerely hope some of the other VU stuff is released in surround one day. Sister Ray in 5.1 might clear out the neighborhood.

Edit: I went through the auto-calibration on my receiver and it appears to have helped the high vocal issue I had quite a bit. I am bumping this up to a 9. I gave it another full spin tonight and again, this is far better than I was expecting. Loved every second of it. More VU please!

 

[jefe1]

This is a great set and mix. The quality of the surround remix was unexpected.

 

[fizzywiggs41]

To be honest I was not too familiar with this album except for a couple songs.
Now I've had this album since shortly after it was released , but up til the past couple months I had not played it much-
But I thought I'd mention that this album is now in my regular play for surround listening, one I keep coming back to , almost once per week lately.
Two songs I find are standouts for this particular album are : "New Age " and "Oh! Sweet Nothing" ,and that's besides the two other oft played "Rock And Roll" and "Sweet Jane" .
So this album is a bit of a surprise for me.
Excellent surround mix by Kevin Reeves , and hopefully he does more early albums from 70's Rock Icons.


I give this album a well deserved TEN , partly for the music but mainly it's the engineer's achievement in 5.1.
I think It's an excellent mix from a 1970 album !