Michael must lead a lonely life judging by those photos of his place. How in the world does he fit a nearly half-million dollar set up in there?
I have the SACD with the 5.1 surround. Sounds great to me. Audiophile? I have no clue what that means. But sounds great works for me.
He was going by "memory," if you notice at the end he states that he won't know until he gets the American version. In the actual box set review done later he had just purchased a mint US version and notes the differences between the two. He does not say which is better. I have both and prefer the Ludwig mastering, this is the original cut from the master tape and is likely closer to what Ferry wanted it to sound like. "I’ve often written that I would never bet against a Bob Ludwig mastering. So let’s start with one obvious fact: this is an amazing recording that’s difficult to damage, though the original CD did just that. I have it and it still sucks. Comparing the Bob Ludwig original with the British original: the RL is smoother and tonally flatter (that’s a good thing). The British original is more spacious and somewhat brighter. It does produce a vaster soundstage in terms of both width and depth as does the Japanese, which is still a good bet. This latest 96/24 reissue is tonally closer to the RL than to the original UK but the attack is somewhat softer with blunted transients and less depth. The stage is flatter. In addition to softer attack, the sustain is less generous and the decay, which produces the atmosphere is foreshortened to the point of being almost nonexistent. But that’s only by comparison because taken on its own, this is a more than acceptable reissue that some might prefer to the brighter British original. I suspect Bob Clearmountain might, but I don’t and my ears count more for me than do Bob Clearmountain’s, as yours do for you, as Bob Clearmountain's do for him! My advice: even if you invest in this box, try to find an original MASTERDISK American pressing and use that to compare to everything else."
You seem almost angry that I said he recommended the UK press. My motivation was simply to get the original poster to buy this $9 record versus a re-issue or combing the earth for an audiophile SACD or whatever. In the video I watched, I watched until he showed the last record and maybe I didn't watch til he signed off? I don't know... but I went out and ordered the Polydor EG50 or whatever. Hasn't arrived yet from England, but I am excited to hear it... Not saying the Re-issue is bad. Perhaps it's not worth a jump from $9.00 to $38 is all I meant. I paid $38 for the Bob Dylan MoFi Mono Bringing It All back Home.. now THAT was worth $38... And I think we agree that Bob Clearmountain isn't great.
Not angry at all, just trying to correct the record on what he stated in the video and what he posted in the later box set review. The UK press is great, I just prefer the US version which IIRC is the only one that was cut directly from the master tape. I am certainly not recommending the reissue (although I have never heard it) and I do agree completely with you regarding the $9.00 vs. $38.00 point.
I agree. I have the Avalon SACD with the 5.1 mix and it sounds excellent. I've never listened to the stereo layer as the 5.1 mix is outstanding!
I've not heard UK original yet but listened to the US Masterdisk lp last night & it was outstanding! Blew away the original EG cd & SHM-SACD I played prior to the lp. Going to put on the surround SACD tonight as I remember it sounding nice. Ordered a NM UK original lp (very inexpensive on Discogs) for good measure, given opinions here as to it being the best sounding of all.
I dont have the US R.L. cut,but my mint UK copy sounds amazing.I listened to "Flesh+ Blood" recently,now that is a lousy album and recording!
They probably mean vinyl on an audiophile label. I don't regard any vinyl as audiophile because of the intrinsic dynamic range limitations of the medium, but thats just me.
I have never owned Avalon as an album, only had some of the tracks on a Roxy Music compilation. Recently I had the opportunity to buy both the early Germany for Japan Polydor CD and the Black Triangle for reasonable prices. I'm still listening to both, and it's really hard to choose between them. I'm not bothered by the different track sequences because I'm not accustomed to any. The Polydor sounds maybe a little bit smoother on every track, but sometimes has big differences on perceived level and impact between tracks. This is most obvious between More Than This and The Space Between. After listening to the first one, the second really kicks in loud and in your face. The Japanese mastering engineer "corrected" this on the BT, so all the tracks sound more as part of one flow. Looking at the DR figures the BT should be no match for the Polydor, it looks (much) more compressed. But in listening it doesn't sound like a big difference. It doesn't sound compressed at all, and some of the compression actually helps to level the songs more evenly. In the listening reality, the BT sounds just nice and detailled with a warm (but not compressed) bass sound. The Polydor sounds fractionally less warm, but is more detailed and needs some volume to come to life. But the tracks are not nicely matched at times. This is a hard one. I wanted to listen to both, choose "the best" and sell the other one off again. But after 3 weeks I'm still not able to choose, I like both for different reasons...
I asked what is "audiophile treatment" regards to mastering? The reason I asked is that if you think of all those wonderful 1st pressing of Beatles, Stones, Elton John (and countless more...), pressings that is valued highly to this day, the cutting engineer never did the mastering in mind for the audiophile audience. They only wanted it to sound right. And they mastered it for the common audience. I grew up with Avalon, mostly on Lp. Maybe there is a Lp edition out there that is best there is, I don't know. But for me the SHM-SACD does it today. I have never heard the title track as good and crystal clear as on this SACD. Listen to the voice of Yanick Etienne...wonderful. The Ludwig SACD is more distorted in sound, and a bit "pumped up".
Sure it's a generalization. There might be some reissues that sound better than the original records, out there, somewhere. But I for one haven't found one. I have a number of Bob Dylan, an Earth Wind & Fire, on MSFL an some other (can't be bothered to look for them at the moment) and they are at best leaving me neutral and at worst making me scream. The remastering jobs on those are often abusive and at times almost sound like a remix attempt. Which is doomed to fail because you can't remix a master. So it ends up being a massive boosting on some frequencies, an equally massive dampening of some other frequencies and steers away from the original record. Most of reissues do not justify their inflated prices and the hype around them. I understand one's got to make a living and that the market is small (despite all the hoopla about vinyl revival and so forth, it remains a fraction of what it used to be). Last, a good setup (I have a wicked one) should not be necessary, a good record should sound good on any setup. Remember when you were 13 and got your first turntable? Did it cost 4 zillion dollars and yet didn't it provide you with the most awesome eargasmic experience?
Back then the common audience was listening via a reasonably large stereo systems,even some all-in-one cassete or CD players had bigger drivers and beefier amplification than the average smartphone dock.Back then there were no loudness wars and nowadays anything that is not compressed to death is considered an audiophile stuff.Thankfully,the vinyl versions cant be compressed as much,but the general meaning in regards to vinyl is something that is cut from the original master tape and pressed at 45rpm on a high quality thick vinyl.
Lets agree to disagree There are technical limitations with every format out there,i just trust my ears.
I have owned Avalon on vinyl (in the day). The HDCD CD was pretty good I think, but I really do like the SACD that I have. There actually are two SACD versions; one has 5.1 on it also. Can't really comment on the more recent Japanese stereo only SACD, but I suspect its good also.
Listening to my Simply Vinyl of this that I just received today. The vinyl and packaging is pretty flawless and the vinyl is quiet. I think this is the best pressing Ive heard so far. The Japanese I find is the closest challenger and I'm not sure there is miles between it but the Simply Vinyl does seem to have a little more 'oomph'. Im not normally a fan of Japanese pressings, I find they generally tend to be overrated and have less bass or 'thin' sound to them. I really liked the Japanese pressing of this...but I think it will be put in the trade pile as I think the Simply Vinyl is slightly better. Im not sure I need that 'audiophile' reissue now. Im not sure they could make this sound better with the source they would probably have to cut from. The latest Miles half speed reissue is at the bottom of the pile for me. Don't bother with that one.
I have both the HDCD and the SACD version and they sound great, possibly my favourite album and also recording-wise. The SACD is a tad better than the HDCD but don't listen to the surround 5.1, just stereo. Such a beautifully crafted and recorded album, superb punchy bass lines, great stereo effect and wonderful clarity. My favourite song for the fantastic sound quality is "While my Heart is Still Beating", superb bass by Neil Jason, to the point that I can tell the difference on what tracks he played bass and what tracks Alan Spenner played bass.
