Scott Walker CDs - 1992 and 2000 versions

[Crummy Old Label Avatar]

Not sure if anyone here is into this, but I'll throw it out there anyway. Does anyone have the lowdown on the first four Scott Walker CDs (Scott, Scott 2, Scott 3, and Scott 4)? First CDs isssued around 1992 on British Fontana, then remastered around 2000 via Universal/Mercury (UK only). I have the 1992 issues. They sound pretty good, though I have no vinyl to compare them to. The 2000 remasters are 24-bit, blahblahblah. Has anyone heard them? Better than the 1992 discs? Worse? Louder? Compressed? Who knows? Certainly not me. Ah! Googling turns up no useful info about any of this.

As they say "elsewhere" ... thoughts?

[Ess Ay Cee Dee]

nt

[Xenu]

Count me in as an interested (but useless) party.

[Crummy Old Label Avatar]

Guess I'm just going to order one of these and find out. I'll go with Scott 4. I'll let you know how they compare. With Xmas mail, etc. I should get it in, oh, about 12 weeks.

[Xenu]

Are there just those two versions? I always see super-cheap Japanese imports of those things, which stand out precisely because "super cheap" and "Japanese imports" rarely go together; I figured they might be similar to those XTC mini-LP sleeves, which retailed for the same price (or occasionally slightly less) than the standard, jewel-case issues.

[Crummy Old Label Avatar]

Never even heard of those or saw them. How much is "super cheap"?

[Leppo]

Does anyone have the lowdown on the first four Scott Walker CDs (Scott, Scott 2, Scott 3, and Scott 4)?Better than the 1992 discs? Worse? Louder? Compressed?

Yes, the 2000 versions are better than the 1992 discs. They sound terrific with no compression/maximization or NR and were remastered by Simon Heyworth, using HDCD from the original 1/4" studio master tapes.

[Crummy Old Label Avatar]

The only one I picked up was Scott. It does sound a bit better, but not dramatically so. I like the slight sonic improvement, but it certainly isn't enough for me to invest in the other three discs. (Especially after looking at my bank balance.) They DO merit downloading as FLACs, however. Does someone care to upload these at Pedro's? That would be sweet.

[Leppo]

The only one I picked up was Scott. It does sound a bit better, but not dramatically so. I like the slight sonic improvement, but it certainly isn't enough for me to invest in the other three discs. (Especially after looking at my bank balance.) They DO merit downloading as FLACs, however. Does someone care to upload these at Pedro's? That would be sweet.

Just curious, have you listened to Scott on a player with HDCD decoding? I find that these new versions do have more dynamic range from HDCD decoding. Scott 4 in particular is outstanding.

BTW, you have a PM regarding your request.

[Crummy Old Label Avatar]

Replied to PM! Thanks!

My CD player doesn't do HDCD. Does it really make a difference? I've read varying opinions about it. No doubt about it, Scott Walker's Fontana albums are spectacular recordings. What with the orchestral arrangements and all the dynamic range that entails, maybe these discs really showcase HDCD capability in a way your typical narrow/squashed rock recording would not.

I remember krabapple was doing some ripping/listening tests with HDCD encoded discs. What did you ever conclude about that, krabapple?

[Leppo]

My CD player doesn't do HDCD. Does it really make a difference? I've read varying opinions about it. No doubt about it, Scott Walker's Fontana albums are spectacular recordings. What with the orchestral arrangements and all the dynamic range that entails, maybe these discs really showcase HDCD capability in a way your typical narrow/squashed rock recording would not.

In this case, yes, HDCD playback does make a difference. I find that with HDCD decoding these discs sound a bit more dynamic with less distortion in comparison.