HW: EMI Reissues & what about 5.1 surround

[Chris Gibbs]

Hi ya,

Yup Dark Side of Moon 30th aniversary hybrid sacd sounds GREAT!!!
Even sounds great on conventional cd player (better than I remember an
earlier cd sounding)

So what is an sacd?  Can they be copied as sacd?  That is are any of the
sub-channels used for audio or is the encoding somehow done in the
equivalent wav file you get by ripping in the conventional manner?

Strange thing is one (pc dvd) player refuses to play this cd
One pc dvd player has noticable micro gaps between tracks
and cheepie pseudo 5.1 system plays it fine.

A copy I made is perfect on everything but is the copy still 5.1?

Chris

Iain Ferguson wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> Id say that Warrior is cluttered yet obviously trying for a big sound,
> was it recorded on a larger multitrack. It seems to me that the band
> tried to fill the soundscape with Warrior. It really does need to be
> completely remastered if a master exists. I love this record. and a
> remix might just enable us to hear exactly what the band were trying
> to get to ....
>
> If any of the Hawkwind master tapes still exist they should be 5.1
> surround dolbied now.( DVDAudio) I've just heard some Greatful dead
> and i felt stoned   after hearing it straight, Can't wait for a rich
> mate to buy  a SACD player then i'll listen to the floyd on surround.
>
> Colin, any chance of some surround sound re-mastering ?
>
>  I see that Gong are upto it at some pointthis year and I cant wait
> for that also...
>
> regards
> Iain
>
> Steve Youles wrote:
>
> > Oh all right then, I'll bite...
> >
> > 'Warm' for Quark and 'Clean' for Hawklords are perfect one-word
> > characterisations of those albums, although Hawklords could be
> > considered 'clean' only by HW's standards, I suspect - cf. the
> > muddier tone
> > of, say, Doremi.  (BTW, the single version of 25 Years is far
> > from 'clean' ; it snarls!)  PXR5 is like a box of chocolates with
> > soft- and
> > hard-centres, dark and light chocolate etc.
> >
> > WOTEOT has too much going on for one word to charactise it as
> > successfully,
> > but if anything I would take 'Lush' away from ASAM and apply it to
> > Warrior.
> >
> > Astounding Sounds - the word I would use is 'Hollow'.  I don't mean
> > this
> > perjoratively, but all the instruments sound as though they're
> > circling
> > around the periphery and in the middle is...nothing.  (On Quark, you
> > would
> > find Ade Shaw's bubbling basslines and Simon House's excellent
> > keyboard
> > work at the eye of the hurricane -avoided saying 'cyclone' there,
> > Tom!  On
> > Space Ritual everything sounds as though it's built around Dave &
> > Lemmy.)
> >
> > Not being an audiophile or conversant with some of the technical
> > terms you
> > used, Doug (RIBAA curve, was it?) I can't explain why I generally
> > prefer
> > the sound of vinyl to CD, but the latter medium often sounds to me
> > like the
> > upper and lower frequencies have been boosted and the middle cut.
> > Well,
> > Astounding sounded like that even when it was on vinyl!  Not that I
> > dislike
> > the album - au contraire, I think the *material* is excellent.  I
> > wonder if
> > it would be theoretically possible to remix it, as you described
> > your
> > friend Karl doing, and discover the hidden centre of this album?
> > Not that
> > you can 'put back in' what was never there in the first place, of
> > course.
> >
> >
> > Steve
> >
> >
> > --Doug
> > wrote:--------------------------------------------------------------
> >
> >
> > 'Warrior' - "powerful";
> > 'Astounding Sounds' - "lush";
> > 'Quark' - "warm";
> > 'Hawklords' - "clean";
> > 'PXR5' - hmmmm ... that one's tough since there's no consistent
> > overall
> > sound to it because of the different sources [studio vs. live vs.
> > demo],
> > the way there is for the other four ... (I'd be very curious to hear
> > if
> > anyone particularly agreed or disagreed with my rough
> > characterization of
> > those four albums.)
> >