As quad mixes go, this one is pointless, but it is the original intent. Plus there's 35 more minutes of music. It's the whole gig. Also, anytime you have a fender Rhodes thru a ring modulator, more is better. For this quad mix, it just seems like they threw up a stereo mic in the back of the hall. The mix as a whole gives the listener the feeling that they are standing in the middle of the 15th row. If the band wasn't playing thru a quad system in the hall, it wouldn't make sense to do a crazy mix after the fact. I'd prefer to hear deeper into the mix/music. But that obviously wasn't the original objective.
Nah, because it is the complete concert in the correctrunning order with sumptuous packaging. Personally, I don't mind only hearing the audience in the rear speakers. What I am curious about though is the high-res layer of this release and so if anyone has played the SACD yet, please share your thoughts.
I have played the stereo SACD layer via my PS Audio DirectStream Memory Player into my PS Audio DirectStream DAC, which is very revealing of sound quality. This Sony release sounds phenomenal imo. Detailed, dynamic and very open sounding. It's also a great experience to hear the concert presented in recording order with new material. Kudos to Sony! (The Audio Fidelity release also sounds very good, I think I may prefer this Sony for sound quality).
Lonson, I have the 2 CD and the AF SACD. I am pretty sure I have a download of the old 3 CD edition (the CDs mirroring the 3 original LPs). Really don't feel like buying this again. I only listen in stereo and don't care about anything multi-channel. Is there enough improvement in the stereo layer to make it worthwhile? I know I am asking you a subjective question, but I am curious specifically about the stereo layer. Are the extra songs worthwhile? Is the stereo layer a new remix? Comments above seem all over the place on this.
I would not say that this is true with LIVE albums. Most of my studio albums on SACD have an aggressive surround mix, but all of the LIVE albums I have on SACD/DVD-A pretty much leave the rears for audience and ambiance. Having the band surround you doesn't make sense to me.
This may be my favourite Santana album. It's nice to have a more complete edition but I don't think the extra tracks are all that exciting. Think these are the ones: Japan Bambele Um Um Um Light of Life The Creator has a Master Plan Conga Solo In addition, you get both Savor and Mr Udo, whereas other releases have one or the other (?). Tim
I feel the same way. I don't really think you need rear speakers just for 'ambience' on a live album...it's cool when you're watching a video, but for an audio-only experience, it certainly doesn't detract, but it doesn't add much either. I'd rather they do something cool and place you in the middle of the band, rather than halfway out in the audience. It's not as 'natural,' but to me the whole fun of 5.1 vs. stereo is to provide a different listening experience.
The packaging for this is unreal! I'm taking this Friday off to just listen to the album and compare it to my AF version, but also to marvel at all of the stuff inside. Serious eye candy!
$75. on this, plus the One Step Abraxas would equal too much invested in a band that's not even in my top 10.
A lot would depend on how much you love Lotus. The extra material is not that essential unless you are a Leon Thomas fan and unless you really are a Santana collector and love Lotus. If you do love Lotus, having the extra material woven into the concert recording order is a very cool thing. I have to say I really like this presentation more than the official three LP sequencing. And I'm a "spiritual jazz" fan so having the Sanders tune and having Leon Thomas featured adds value for me. I really haven't paid much attention to the "mix" as far as differences, there is little that seems to stand out in that regard except perhaps the Sony seems to have a bit taller and wider sound stage. As far as improvement to the stereo sound I find the Sony to sound a bit "livelier" and to perhaps have a bit more of an "open" midrange. . . that may be a bit hard to explain but a bit less of a congestion in that tonal range. If I had to make a recommendation I'd follow your original statement that you don't want to rebuy this. I think if this were a recording that means a ton to you either musically or sentimentally etc. . . . you would likely NOT be saying this and would order it as this is really the ULTIMATE digital release so far (exquisite packaging, added material, performance sequencing).
Good advice, Lon. I've tried many times to love Lotus; I want to. But the live setting and inclusion of Thomas on some of Santana's well known earlier tracks, along with more free-form noodling/improvising that read to me as rather aimless prevents me from really enjoying it. I can tell this is a great JSACD package, though. I hope they sell a ton of these and give the "ultimate" treatment to many other titles more aligned to my tastes. I could go for Santana Barboletta. I just think Santana's bands had limitations that were better ironed out in the studio, where they could be more disciplined about their playing.
Hello to all, I will give my two cents on this as I am aware some people might be wondering if it is worth to buy this again after you got the AF version. I have both. Sound wise, the stereo layers to me sound very, very similar (opinion is based on a quick A/B comparison a couple of days ago when I got the Sony CD). As far a packaging, Lonson is right on the money: the Sony CD is stunning! Having said that. I am a huge fan of this album, as it is probably the single album in my collection where I happily have 3 copies (the Japan quadraphonic LP, plus AF and Sony CDs). In summary: if you already got the AF, there is no need to buy it again unless you are a big fan of the album. If you do not have the album, you need to decide if it is worth to play 2X the price to have the Sony Japan version. PS. Have not had the chance to hear the bonus tracks, but I am not holding my breath for it.
The only thing I agree with in this statement is the inclusion of Leon Thomas singing Santana's more well known tracks (he just isn't as good fit as Gregg Rollie or even some of the multitude of other singers that joined Santana over his long career that have to sing the early hits). Since this tour coincides with the Welcome album, I understand why Thomas is included (his singing on Welcome fits perfectly, though). I wouldn't say, though, that Santana's playing is noodling... yes improvising... but not noodling in the least. One of the best things about Lotus, compared with other Live Santana is that Carlos relies less on sustain, and more on playing than he does in later years. I first saw Santana live on the Borboletta tour - Beacon Theater October 1974, Leon Thomas was no longer in the band, and Carlos was back to playing with more sustain and less "fingers". Santana is one of my favorite bands of all time, all starting with the Woodstock soundtrack, and the movie - which my father took me to because I begged so much when I was only 11 years old. I actually asked my father if he would take me to see Santana at the Fillmore East (can't remember the year or how old I was) - but he claimed he tried to get tickets and it was sold out (he probably just told me that to appease me). Because of the quality of the playing on Lotus, I will continue to collect whatever versions are released. I have original vinyl issues, reissued vinyl issues, CDs, SACDs (AF and Sony), and will probably add the MOFI mastered Japanese vinyl version that is due out in June to my collection.
I agree Santana's playing is tasteful for the most part, but wouldn't you characterize some of Tom Coster's and Richard Kermode's playing as noodling, or at least directionless? Certainly it's refreshing in a way to hear Santana like this. But I think heavy distortion/sustain/reverb (and even echo in some of the Barboletta content) is part of Santana's appeal. In my more critical assessments of his playing, it helps to mask his harmonic limitations and reliance on pet phrases. But the bottom line is that I enjoy that in rock guitar and Santana in particular. I was also grabbed by the band, but mostly because of the tight Latin rhythms fused with bluesier song structures, and this is another reason the improvisation gets a bit boring for me. I understand the appeal of the band and of Lotus, but every time I try to listen with fresh ears I come away with the same criticisms. I'd just rather be listening to Santana's studio stuff.
IMO, this is the definitive version, like it was said the surrounds just captures the hall ambience, very little going on but it is very clean and detailed I perfer this over the AF. The packaging is OTT Japan with even more than the original Japanese LP. This is a favorite Santana album so no regrets
No idea why anyone likes this concert. The quad is like fake quad, with just echo in the back. This entire album is an overcompressed, meandering, joyless snoozefest. You couldn't pay me to listen to a longer version. The original release is too long if you ask me. Sounds like a Santana tribute band. Bored me mastering it, bores me to even think about it!
One last thought about the quad mix: many of us don't really listen to "quad" per se. Because we play it through our 5.1 systems. In a 5.1 array, aren't the "rear" surrounds actually intended to be placed more to the far right andfar left of your space, each one pulled back only around 10 degrees or so behind you? I wonder if anyone here tries to get a feel for both the "rears" set up to the side and slightly behind you...then moved them back more off the back wall and mostly behind you? I would think in a concert/audience mix like Lotus, this would make a sizeable difference in how you judge whether the rears are "wasted". (And, I also wonder if you percieve that doing anything to the definition, and the width of the front soundstage?) Still on the fence on this one, having given all my lunch money to Paul, Ringo, Ralf, Florian and Ian this month.
if you are serious>>>>>> I couldn't disagree more ,Carlos is a super guitarist and the Band is great ,His Solo on Toussaint Overture is anything but Meandering ,or Joyless
I was right unfortunately. The JSACD sounds very aggressive to my ear as I expected and as it would be. I prefer the AF SACD. Kudos to Steve.
