Soulstation1 Posted June 18, 2003 Report Share Posted June 18, 2003 (edited) the best version of blue train will always be the original wax lp. looks like i ain't missin' much on the blue train sacd, major disappointment. ss1 Edited June 18, 2003 by Soulstation1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Claude Posted June 18, 2003 Report Share Posted June 18, 2003 (edited) Watch out for Blue Train MFSL CDs appearing on ebay now. There are always people who blindly "upgrade" their discs to the latest technology. But the Mofi CD is definitely better than the SACD. No, I'm not selling mine Edited June 18, 2003 by Claude Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
J.A.W. Posted June 18, 2003 Report Share Posted June 18, 2003 Watch out for Blue Train MFSL CDs appearing on ebay now. There are always people who blindly "upgrade" their discs to the latest technology. But the Mofi CD is definitely better than the SACD. No, I'm not selling mine Pity, would like to compare it with the TOCJ B) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Parkertown Posted June 19, 2003 Report Share Posted June 19, 2003 I may keep an eye out for one of those MFSL discs. Does anyone have a nice, clean mono lp? And, if so, could that person please dub me a copy onto cdr? I would love to hear this session, and believe that it can sound good! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
davef Posted June 19, 2003 Report Share Posted June 19, 2003 'tis funny how Greg just trumpets every SACD as being fantastic... just like any format, there are good and bad ones... this falls to the later... sad to say. Anyone have an idea when another round of Blue Note SACD's come out? Hopefully the next ones - if any do - will be an improvement! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grey Posted June 19, 2003 Report Share Posted June 19, 2003 'tis funny how Greg just trumpets every SACD as being fantastic... I remember Greg trumpeting SACD before it was even on the market ! Of course, just previous to that he thought we should sell all our CDs and only buy JRVGs. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skeith Posted June 20, 2003 Report Share Posted June 20, 2003 I am not clear on everyone's posts whether they think the regular CD layer is also fairly bad sounding as much as the SACD layer. Is the Cd layer really not as good as the MOFI? anyone compared them? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shawn·m Posted June 20, 2003 Report Share Posted June 20, 2003 (edited) I gave the PCM layer a near complete listen at one point. IMO, DSD criticisms hold for the PCM layer as well. I wonder if both CD and SACD masters were derived from the same re-master source? A PCM master? Edited June 20, 2003 by kartoffel·hadi blues Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Claude Posted June 20, 2003 Report Share Posted June 20, 2003 (edited) I think that it is the remastering that really makes the sound. Both the CD and SACD layer have the same tonal balance, narrowness and dynamics. The difference between redbook CD and SACD or DVD-A are marginal compared to the influence of the remastering engineer. The Universal classical SACDs (Philips, Deutsche Grammophon, Decca) with music from the analogue era are made from PCM masters (24bit/96kHz) because it was found the difference between hi-rez PCM and DSD is inaudible. Edited June 20, 2003 by Claude Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shawn·m Posted June 21, 2003 Report Share Posted June 21, 2003 I suppose your right, Claude. I don’t have an opinion on 24/96 verses DSD, and I imagine any difference would be inaudible on my system anyway. I could be entirely wrong; perhaps RVG followed Doug Sax’s lead and individually re-mastered each hybrid layer from the analog master. Judging by the results, the idea of Van Gelder specifically re-mastering Blue Train in DSD is somehow more troubling than if he’d generated both PCM and SACD layers by converting an intermediate re-master. Either way, Van Gelder’s rumored hearing loss could explain a lot. I’ve started on the downhill side of my time on this planet, so perhaps there will be a time when I appreciate RVG’s orthopedic re-masters? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
J.A.W. Posted June 21, 2003 Report Share Posted June 21, 2003 I’ve started on the downhill side of my time on this planet, so perhaps there will be a time when I appreciate RVG’s orthopedic re-masters? I'm 56 and my dislike of RVG's remasters is still increasing... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shawn·m Posted June 21, 2003 Report Share Posted June 21, 2003 I'm 56 and my dislike of RVG's remasters is still increasing... Orthopedic re-masters; it was a good theory while it lasted. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Claude Posted June 21, 2003 Report Share Posted June 21, 2003 (edited) 'tis funny how Greg just trumpets every SACD as being fantastic... Here are some SACD reviews that Greg wrote for an online hifi magazine: http://www.positive-feedback.com/Issue2/maltzsacd.htm http://www.positive-feedback.com/Issue1/maltzsacd.htm (Carole King Tapestry): SACD adopters are divided on the quality of this offering. Some say the SACD is not better than the CD because it reveals the limitations of the source tape with surgical precision. I am bullish on the Tapestry SACD. It communicates the ballads with a gentleness and honesty that defies CD conventions, and the up-tempo tracks rock with a pace and accuracy that leaves CD behind. There are plenty of warts to hear, especially on King’s vocals, but still there is more realism and better imaging of the piano, vocals, guitar, bass, and drums, without the glassiness of CD. ... and so on. Edited June 21, 2003 by Claude Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest GregM Posted June 22, 2003 Report Share Posted June 22, 2003 (edited) Ah...praise from all the little caesars. I've listened to this with great attentiveness 5-6 times now on my SCD-1. No, it's not the best SACD out there, but it sounds wonderful, with realistic presence and a nice, deep soundstage. Doesn't sound "compressed" on my system. Sounds fairly open, though not as much air delineating the instruments as most other SACDs--may be a touch PCM-processed. I half-suspect it comes from a 24-bit transfer rather than a direct-to-DSD transfer, but since Rudy isn't talking, none of us knows. The music simply doesn't sound trebly, or edgy. It sounds like one would expect a 3-horn front line to sound in a living room, as I said on the Hoffman board. The macrodetail is just shy of phenomenal, although I was hoping for more microdetail--that really shines with straight DSD transfers. Hardly worth griping about, though you malcontents here and on SH's site are perfectly welcome to piss and moan all you want. If you listen to this on a good system you can hear that the reverb mainly comes into play very naturally, during the trombone solos, and during Lee's solos when he seems to lean farther away from the mic, allowing room reflections to play a bigger role in his mic feed. The little disclaimer is on many SACDs that don't come from Blue Note, so those of you reading some "conspiracy" into the fine print are jerking your own weasels. As for the soundstage, we've been through this a million times on the old board re: RVGs. Some of us like Van Gelder's approach and some don't. Vive la difference. And yes, I own about 200 SACDs I'd say, and don't consider any of them a lemon. They vary depending on the recording and engineering, but to varying degrees they *all* go beyond what I hear CDs doing on my system. This Blue Train SACD is certainly no exception. And certainly a welcome addition. Kudos to Blue Note. It's a good start. Edited June 22, 2003 by GregM Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest GregM Posted June 22, 2003 Report Share Posted June 22, 2003 I'll just go ahead and post the imminent one liner replies to get them out of the way. ---------------------------------- There goes the neighborhood. All Greg can talk about is SACD. You can say that again. He never met an SACD he didn't like. Greg thinks he's always right. I care more about MUSIC than sound. Well you must have had a boring Saturday night, Greg! --------------------------------------------------- There. That should about cover it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Claude Posted June 22, 2003 Report Share Posted June 22, 2003 (edited) So we finally managed to have you join the Organissimo board Edited June 22, 2003 by Claude Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shawn·m Posted June 22, 2003 Report Share Posted June 22, 2003 Even though this malcontent could not disagree more with Greg regarding treble and compression issues on SACD Blue Train, it’s nice to see somebody, anybody trying to defend the thing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest GregM Posted June 22, 2003 Report Share Posted June 22, 2003 (edited) I don't need to "defend" it because it sounds pretty darn good. If you think I'm alone you're dead wrong. For example, here is someone else's take on the BN SACDs, including Blue Train which he rates A-/B+. Having listened to 4 of the Blue Note SACDs (Jones, Charlap, Beldon, Coltrane) on several occasions, I have to compliment Blue Note for the quality of their initial SACD offerings. Is anyone from Blue Note reading posts at this forum? The (stereo, I can’t comment on multi-channel) sonics on these SACD recordings are quite good; you deserve high praise. I have been very disappointed in the sonics of some of your CD offerings (Chucho Valdes, "Live at the Village Vanguard," places too much emphasis on percussion – a sonic disappointment (IMO); Stephon Harris, "Black Action Figure," has washed-out, bright sonics (IMO)). This has caused me to hesitate about purchasing your CDs, unless I had some reasonable indication that the sonics were good. However, I can recommend the above SACDs without hesitation, in terms of sonics. (Note that I am also a fan of the music for each recording.) I give the following appraisal for sonics for your SACDs: Jones: A+, Charlap: A, Beldon: A/A-, Coltrane: A-/B+. I hope that more SACD releases will follow; thank you for the fine effort and results. Far be it from any of you to weigh in so level headed. I think most of you are so jaded and biased regarding Van Gelder's remasters that you can't listen with fresh ears. You're also like lemmings who follow each other in terms of your preferences. Just look at mny. The only guy on the board who has a better system than me and he hasn't even bothered to listen to the thing before criticizing me for enjoying it. Edited June 22, 2003 by GregM Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shawn·m Posted June 22, 2003 Report Share Posted June 22, 2003 If we are to pull quotes from other sources, then I’ll go with Steve Hoffman’s remark concerning SACD Blue Train: “I think I'll play my MoFi and be grateful for dynamic range.” In my opinion, there’s something terribly wrong when an SACD’s mastering cannot even match the dynamic range of a previous CD release. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest GregM Posted June 22, 2003 Report Share Posted June 22, 2003 (edited) Hadi says: >> If we are to pull quotes from other sources, then I’ll go with Steve Hoffman’s remark concerning SACD Blue Train: “I think I'll play my MoFi and be grateful for dynamic range.” << The difference is, I'm quoting from a source that actually bothered to listen to the disc in question. . .repeatedly. Steve never even listened to this particular SACD and everyone knows it. He simply read some comments and decided to stick with the MFSL, which is a perfectly valid reaction, but let's not read too much into that. In his opinion, K2s and XRCDs and Sony SACDs are dynamically squashed, too. Anything he didn't remaster is open to criticism on that board--and receives criticism, including some mighty fine sounding discs. >> In my opinion, there’s something terribly wrong when an SACD’s mastering cannot even match the dynamic range of a previous CD release. << If you're referring into the nifty little jpg file, as was explained on the SH forum, the reason it looks that way is because the SACD was mastered at a louder level than the CD. Really, this isn't too difficult to comprehend. Edited June 22, 2003 by GregM Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shawn·m Posted June 22, 2003 Report Share Posted June 22, 2003 Not difficult at all. I have no quarrel with a simple boost in volume across the frequency spectrum. That is not what I hear, nor what the graphics indicate. Incidentally, my particular opinion was formed before the jpg postings. As I said earlier, the depth and body of Trane’s tenor, for example, is superior on the SACD when compared to that of the CD I have. So why did I throw SACD Blue Train away? Even Maura Tierney, with all her natural beauty revealed in high definition, would not captivate if she were to lumber and lurch, Night Of the Living Dead-like, through her performances. CD should not be superior to SACD in ANY way. More should be expected from SACD re-masters than what Van Gelder has delivered with Blue Train. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
J Larsen Posted June 22, 2003 Report Share Posted June 22, 2003 k-hd, I don't understand the graphics you posted. What is on the x and y axes? Is this some sort of Fourier spectrum, or are we simply looking at volume level vs. time? If it's the later, I'm not sure what the graphics prove. I'm not trying to come across as confrontational, I'm just honestly confused. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest GregM Posted June 22, 2003 Report Share Posted June 22, 2003 (edited) It's just a graphic of the captured-after-the-fact wav file that is utterly meaningless and doesn't even compensate for level. I keep spinning this, trying to convince myself that it is "compressed" or "lacks dynamics" but the fact is this is the best sounding digital release from BN that I own. Edited June 22, 2003 by GregM Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shawn·m Posted June 22, 2003 Report Share Posted June 22, 2003 You’ve got it, J Larsen; the horizontal length represents time progressing from left to right. Volume at any given moment is represented by vertical lines. Baseline “0” represents no signal and “1” represents maximum volume output. Actually, Magic Alex posted a much better graphic comparison over on the Hoffman site. Hoffman thread again It’s an oversimplification, but solid bands that don’t break up much tend to indicate a good deal of compression and lack of dynamic range. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slsmcgrew Posted June 22, 2003 Report Share Posted June 22, 2003 GregM, I think your system needs some tweaking done on it. It sounds as if it is not working properly. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
_forumlogo.png.a607ef20a6e0c299ab2aa6443aa1f32e.png)
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.