Dylan

[Rspaight]

Yup. Actors' Guild, running from Oct. 23 to Nov. 16.

Ryan

[Ron]

SACD layer: Sorry, Ron. The "air" is back! Tight, deep bass. Highs are crystal clear without the slight fuzziness on the CD layer.

Damn you, Ryan. Damn you! Now *you* explain to the wife why I gotta buy yet *another* stereo goodie [and accompanying software].

[thomh]

SACD layer: Sorry, Ron. The "air" is back! Tight, deep bass. Highs are crystal clear without the slight fuzziness on the CD layer.

Damn you, Ryan. Damn you! Now *you* explain to the wife why I gotta buy yet *another* stereo goodie [and accompanying software].

Air, depth, ambience and the like are midrange effects mostly attributable as by-products of vinyl playback. Nothing to do with what is on the master tape. If you prefer that then there is nothing wrong with that.

Ron, you might as well buy into SACD as I have a feeling that is where we are going to see the greatest efforts done with regards to correct mastering. In order to get your feet wet just get the new cheap Pioneer 563A for under $200. They have been speaking very highly over on the SH forum.

With that said, I still cannot for the life of me understand how a tape with probably a frequency roll off at around 13-15kHz and a dynamic range of below 75dB cannot be properly represented on 16/44 CD.

[lukpac]

LP - Columbia PC 33235 (supposedly purchased week of release by my in-laws -- it has the liner notes in black on the back and a solid red inner sleeve)
This sounds nice -- natural, lots of "air" around the instruments, good definition of all the elements. Bass is a bit murky but reasonably deep. Vocals are laid back and smooth. Solo at the end has nice bite.

-----------

So there ya go. Definitely worth an upgrade from the old CD, even on the CD layer only. I think the SACD layer is an additional step beyond the CD layer -- it has the "spaciousness" of the LP without the surface noise.

Here's a question for you, Ryan. Have you ever made CD-R copies of any of your LPs? Or heard CD-Rs of albums you have? I'd be curious as to what your experiences are. Personally, I haven't noticed much/any difference between my LPs and the CDs I make from them. But, of course, I do have an inferior system, so...

[Rspaight]

Damn you, Ryan. Damn you! Now *you* explain to the wife why I gotta buy yet *another* stereo goodie [and accompanying software].

Well, don't give up until you hear what your massive manly DAC can do with them.

With that said, I still cannot for the life of me understand how a tape with probably a frequency roll off at around 13-15kHz and a dynamic range of below 75dB cannot be properly represented on 16/44 CD.

Good question. I wonder if the *slightly* fuzzy highs I heard on the CD layer were an artifact of the downsampling process Sony uses to convert the DSD down to redbook. (Which could be why Steve H. insists on mastering the redbook layers seperately instead of using the downconversion. Maybe I should check out one of my CCR SACDs...) All I know is that the cymbals were ever so slightly "smeary" on the CD layer, and not on the SACD layer.

As far as the openness goes, ya got me. The SACD layer wasn't quite as spacious sounding as the LP, but definitely better than the original CD and a notch or two better than the CD layer of the SACD. As you say, that's something more associated with vinyl, but it's also the characteristic I notice most in SACD vs. CD.

Here's a question for you, Ryan. Have you ever made CD-R copies of any of your LPs? Or heard CD-Rs of albums you have? I'd be curious as to what your experiences are. Personally, I haven't noticed much/any difference between my LPs and the CDs I make from them. But, of course, I do have an inferior system, so...

I have, but my sound card sucks, so I wouldn't put much stock in the results. They generally came out sounding quite similar, if a bit "duller." Grant sez the SoundBlaster cards (which I have) chop off the high frequencies, which would expain that.

Ryan

[Rspaight]

By the way, I listened to the 5.1 mixes of Slow Train Coming and Bringing It All Back Home last night as well.

Slow Train is magnificent, as good as any multichannel SACD or DVD-A I've heard. Knopfler's guitar rings out very nicely, and the nuances in Bob's voice are right there. Great stuff.

Bringing is still not the fullest-sounding record ever made, but the 5.1 mix does spread things out nicely across the front and give it a bit more room to breathe. If you liked the original for its compressed sound, you won't like the 5.1 so much, but I found it quite engaging. (God, it sounds like I'm reviewing wine or something.)

As a side note, the 5.1 mixes of Blood and Slow Train were more discrete, with stuff coming from the rears. The 5.1 of Bringing was primarily up front, with ambience and reinforcement in the back. (Which I guess makes sense, since there were fewer discrete tracks to play with.)

Ryan

[J_Partyka]

BOB DYLAN SACD SHOOTOUT
Part One - Blood On The Tracks ...
The contenders:
LP - Columbia PC 33235 (supposedly purchased week of release by my in-laws -- it has the liner notes in black on the back and a solid red inner sleeve)

The original American catalog number for the Blood LP was JC 33235. According to Goldmine, Columbia introduced the prefix "PC" in 1984 for budget-priced ("Nice Price") reissues. This new prefix replaced the original "CS," "JC," "FC," etc., but the five-digit number on most titles remained the same.

[Rspaight]

Excellent -- thanks. Should know better than to trust the in-laws.

EDIT -- never mind. See below.

Ryan

[Rspaight]

The original American catalog number for the Blood LP was JC 33235. According to Goldmine, Columbia introduced the prefix "PC" in 1984 for budget-priced ("Nice Price") reissues. This new prefix replaced the original "CS," "JC," "FC," etc., but the five-digit number on most titles remained the same.

As they say in football, upon further review, I'm going to change my response (and apologize to my in-laws).

According to this:

http://www.searchingforagem.com/International018.htm

What I've got is definitely the first issue, with the black liner notes on the back. And they list the "PC" number as the number for the first issue, as well, and claim the "JC" number was added for the third issue.

In addition, (from the above page):

The first commercial release of the album has red Columbia labels and stamped matrix numbers: Side 1 - PAL-33235-2A, Side 2 - PBL-33235-2AA. I assume the "1A/1AA" matrix numbers were on the Blood On The Tracks test pressing, see 1974. The rear sleeve is the first design with the text in (almost unreadable) black.

Those are the stampers on mine.

Clear as mud.

Ryan

[J_Partyka]

The first commercial release of the album has red Columbia labels and stamped matrix numbers: Side 1 - PAL-33235-2A, Side 2 - PBL-33235-2AA. I assume the "1A/1AA" matrix numbers were on the Blood On The Tracks test pressing, see 1974. The rear sleeve is the first design with the text in (almost unreadable) black.

Those are the stampers on mine.
Clear as mud.

Clear as mud, indeed. I'd never heard of a pre-'80s "PC" prefix on Columbia titles before, but there you are.

In any event, it's the matrix numbers on the vinyl itself that are most telling, so if that quote is correct it would appear you do indeed have a first pressing.

[Rspaight]

Seems that way. It sounds pretty darn good, which I guess is the important thing. It's been well-played over the years, but definitely in listenable shape.

Ah, getting a big pile of records for free and trying to figure out what you've got. What fun!

Ryan

[Ron]

Let's move on to the "Highway 61" shootout, shall we [as fascinating as your stamper discussion is, however]?

[Rspaight]

BOB DYLAN SACD SHOOTOUT
Part Two - Highway 61 Revisited

Track sampled: Highway 61 Revisited

The contenders:

LP - Columbia PC 9189 (unknown reissue pressing)
Not very impressive. Vocals are very edgy, the drums are thin, not much top end, bass is murky. On the plus side, nice big soundstage and the organ sounds good. Overall, though, not great.

-----------

CD - DCC GZS-1021
Damn, this is nice. Fuller, smoother vocals and drums, same big soundstage, tighter and deeper bass, a bit more clarity. The "bigger" drum sound really makes the track cook. Still not much top, though.

-----------

SACD - Columbia CH 90324

CD layer: Quite a bit louder than the DCC. The vocal is much better than the LP, but not as smooth as the DCC -- it sounds a bit "pinched." Not as much bass as the DCC, but more top end. A *bit* less width/separation on the soundstage, but not hugely so. Not as warm as the DCC, but more detailed with more clarity (the piano, for instance is more audible here than on the gold disc).

SACD layer: A bit warmer, a bit more open, but not very different at all from the CD layer. The vocals are a hair less pinched, there's a little more low end. In the area of warmth and "fullness," this just about splits the difference between the SACD's CD layer and the DCC. Another increment more detail and clarity over the CD layer, which was already ahead of the DCC in that area.

-----------

Whew. Well, my poor old LP is a piece of garbage compared to these two digital discs (I got rid of the old stock CD a decade ago). So which is better? Comes down to personal preference, as much of a cop-out as that seems. If you like "feel," go with the DCC. The extra bass and smoothness goes down easy. The SACD adds more detail and clarity at the expense of the warmth of the DCC. So if that's what you're after, the SACD is the way to go, whichever layer you listen to. Me, I like the DCC.

Next up (probably tomorrow): Infidels.

Ryan

[Ron]

Now we're talkin'. By the way, last I checked, this kind of discussion is nowhere to be found on sh.tv. Keep up the good work, Ryan.

As a note, the only Dylan titles I'm interested in are Freewheelin', Another Side, Bringin' . . . Home, Highway 61, BoB, JWH. Now should you, when you get around to A/B-ing those titles, say the SACD layer trounces the CD layer, *then* the missus will have cause to worry about my spending real cash. So far I'm on the fence with this format.

[Rspaight]

Well, I probably won't look at BoB too closely because the only other versions I have are the old SACD and a mystery vinyl copy, and the stereo on the old and new SACDs are the same. (And MUCH better than the old CD and Mastersound -- not even close.) I would say the CD layer of that would be a very safe bet, since it's the same superior remix as the SACD stereo.

The others you list, though, I've got on both vinyl and stock CD, so I'll get to 'em. I'm doing Infidels next because I'm a contrary cuss.

Ryan