Deluxe Tommy comments

[Xenu]

As far as I can tell the new one is double-tracked, while the old one was single-tracked.

Fine by me - as long as both versions are available, it's great to have "something else".

FWIW, the bootleg versions of Model Child were always double-tracked...

Speaking of which, does anybody here have the Life with the Moons boot? I was never able to track that one down.

[Rspaight]

The plot thickens...

On my way out the door this morning, I checked the stereo vs. 5.1 of YMB. While the mix issues remain (drums too far up), there *is* more 'verb on the vocals in 5.1, and perhaps a smidge more on the guitar. (The guitar is still much drier than the previously released mix.)

Coupled with Luke's comments on the front channels of the album 5.1 mix as being very dry, I'm wondering if the stuff on disc two isn't a somewhat clumsy folddown of Pete's 5.1 mixes (losing the rear channel ambiance), rather than a dedicated stereo mix, let alone an attempt at using the original mixes. The credits list nobody for stereo mixing, just Pete for the 5.1 mixes and Astley for the mastering.

Hmmmmm.

Ryan

[lukpac]

That wouldn't surprise me. I'll have to check out the MC mixes on disc 2 (piece by piece, of course).

It's been suggested that I try transferring all the individual parts and seeing if a different stereo remix is possible. We'll see, although common information between various channels might make that tough.

[Rspaight]

Over on SH.tv, Gardo had some interesting comments on the 5.1 mix:

The multichannel mix was not what I was expecting. I'm still working my way through it--I'm only up to "Sally Simpson"--but right now I'm not sure it is what I was hoping for, either. The mix is very dry (very little reverb, in fact) and sonically aggressive. It's undeniably powerful and involving. Most of the time it sounds as if the band is right there in your living room. Aside from the bass, which is a little woofy truth to tell, the sound is smooth, even liquid, in the treble, frighteningly realistic in the midrange, and very dynamic. So what's wrong? Well, the multichannel mix doesn't sound much like Tommy anymore. There's a spiritual, ethereal, pearly quality to this album that the multichannel mix pretty much obliterates. The band themselves said that Tommy was an unusual sound for them, and that they never played like that in concert. The multichannel mix apparently tries to remedy that, and in the process it removes a certain quality of hushed expectancy that I love about the music and the performances...

[stuff about Broadway Tommy snipped]

Again, there are moments in the multichannel mix that are just extraordinary. The placement of the voices as the dramatic dialogues take place. The power of Moon's drums in all their glory. The sudden surge in dynamics at the end of "Underture" (that's a stunner all right). The beautiful strummed guitar at the beginning of "Pinball Wizard," now present and full-bodied in a way I'd not heard before in any version. All this is great and I'm thrilled to have it.

But I was hoping for more. I was hoping for what happened with Dark Side of the Moon, where the original spookiness was opened up and made even spookier for being so enveloping. Or take Toys In The Attic, where the feel of the original album is very much preserved in the multichannel mix, even as the mix is broadened and the surround channels used to enhance the instrumental interplay. With Tommy, by contrast, the feel is very different, even to the point of very different tonalities for some of the instruments--I'm thinking of the electric guitar in "Pinball Wizard" here, which just sounds musically wrong to me.

I did listen to the SACD two-channel mix and found it pretty bright and a bit compressed, though smooth and with good soundstaging. Haven't had a chance to A/B it with any of my redbook versions yet. The redbook layer on the SACD sounds pretty good but not as dimensional or smooth as the SACD two-channel layer. Both sounded pretty in-your-face at a quick first listen.

I'll have to spend some time with this release and see what it has to teach me.

Sounds pretty much in line with what's been discussed here. I agree with his comment on the vocal placement during the "dialog" sections -- that works amazingly well. Also interesting that we both picked out "Underture" as a high point dynamically.

Ryan

[Rspaight]

One last comment -- this is reminding me of the discussions surrounding the remix of Sell Out. The original feel getting jettisoned for a cleaner, drier sound...

Ryan

[lukpac]

Other than the "pretty bright and a bit compressed" line, I'd tend to agree with most of what Gardo said, based on what I've heard of the MC mixes.

[krabapple]

Other than the "pretty bright and a bit compressed" line, I'd tend to agree with most of what Gardo said, based on what I've heard of the MC mixes.

What about "The redbook layer on the SACD sounds pretty good but not as dimensional or smooth as the SACD two-channel layer. "?

Expectation bias, anyone?

[lukpac]

That too.

[Mike Hunte]

It's been suggested that I try transferring...

oh christ...tick, tick, tick...

[lukpac]

So I'm playing around listening to the various channels of the 5.1 mix. Right now I'm doing the center and sub. Each song seems to be different in some way. Some have the bass in the center, some have nothing but vocal (Acid Queen is Pete's vocal and nothing else, sans bleed). The sub has a *lot* more stuff than I was expecting. Or should I say, I wasn't expecting as much information at such (relatively) high frequencies.

Ok, so somebody needs to come up with a way to rip MC SACDs to the computer.

[lukpac]

One other note - there's a lot of places where tracks suddenly start or stop. On YMB, for example, the two vocal tracks are combined to mono briefly in the rear channels. Drums just switch on and off in places in the center and sub.

[Rspaight]

So I'm playing around listening to the various channels of the 5.1 mix. Right now I'm doing the center and sub. Each song seems to be different in some way.

Yes, I noticed that, too -- everything is arrayed differently from track to track. The drums move around quite a bit, which is unusual these days.

The sub has a *lot* more stuff than I was expecting. Or should I say, I wasn't expecting as much information at such (relatively) high frequencies.

That's interesting -- high enough to be directional, I take it?

Ryan

[lukpac]

Well, I was expecting it to be simply sub 1k info or something. It's more like sub 8k or so (or higher).

Apparently on the 775 you can mix the center (and sub?) in with everything else, but you can't fold everything down to 2 channels.

[lukpac]

That's interesting -- high enough to be directional, I take it?

Here's an MP3 to illustrate:

Sympathy/Acid Queen MP3

It's the center and sub channels from Sympathy For The Devil and Acid Queen. In both cases the center has an isolated vocal. Sympathy just has (low) bass in the sub, while Acid Queen has bass and drums.

Sorry for Pete's vocal being massively clipped - that track must be pretty loud, and it was overloading my sound input. I have no way to adjust that, unfortunately.

[Rspaight]

Apparently on the 775 you can mix the center (and sub?) in with everything else, but you can't fold everything down to 2 channels.

Yup, that's what I found with mine, too. (I really like it, BTW.) You could always throw a pair of powered PC speakers in for the back channels for experimentation purposes.

Ryan