I've ever only run across one copy in my used store travels. I'll have to check where it's from when I get home from work.
I had never heard of per-ordering a cd before Violator came out, but my brother, who was in music retail at the time, sent me a birthday card 25 years ago and said not to buy the new album on release day! A couple weeks later I had that masterpiece and I don't know if it left my cd player for the rest of 1990!
So it turns out my copy with the inlay photo is Italian, which I thought it was, but I wasn't sure if it was Italy-for-Europe or something like that. I guess there wasn't a Pan-Euro edition until 2006...?
None of the remasters are bad. But on the other hand there are very few real improvements to the original CDs.
It appears only the European produced editions (maybe Japan) of this album contain that artwork, US had the black standard tray, hmm maybe Sire US had it edited out on purpose
I know this is an oldish thread, but at least it's 2 years newer than the 40-page DM SACD thread... I've been re-listening to a few of my favorite DM albums, comparing pressings. I should note that as of yet I've only had access to 24/88.2 PCM conversions of the SACD layers. That said, here's what I've found. Some Great Reward: I prefer the original to the SACD. The SACD is very good, but to my ears the original (German Mute/Intercord in my case) is a bit more dynamic and has more pleasing bass and overall frequency balance. The SACD sounds a little clinical to me, although still very good. But IMHO not worth paying the big money for it. Violator: I'm torn on this. The SACD is very good and at moments has an almost holographic quality to it. But to my ears the original (German Mute/Intercord in my case) is perhaps slightly more dynamic and has more satisfying bass impact. IMHO not worth paying the big money for the SACD in this case - although I reserve the right to change my mind. Ultra: I agree that the original and remaster sound nearly identical - and AFAIK they even have identical DR numbers. My favorite version is a homemade version, where I've taken the redbook layer of the remaster and run it through Izotope's declipper. To my ears, the result sounds similar to my comments on the original versions of Some Great Reward, and compares favorably to the SACD for the same reasons. Black Celebration: Here I prefer the SACD. I will never, ever give up my German Mute/Intercord original - I love the 14-track playlist, the proper intro to "Question of Time," and the memory of when I bought it and how much I loved it. But to my ears the SACD improves the clarity and the bass impact - it's just a more satisfying listen. I'd also note that I recently auditioned the HDTracks version of this album and was quite surprised at how different - and inferior - it sounded compared to the SACD. The sibilance alone is a deal-breaker IMHO - the original and SACD are both quite sibilant because of the original recording, but I find the HDTracks version's sibilance more distorted, with the original and SACD much cleaner-sounding. Finally, I only have a 2-channel system, but I have tried listening to Ultra via the 2.0 LPCM from the accompanying DVD, as well as a 2.0 mixdown of the 5.1. The 5.1 mixdown in particular sounds very good - but I was dismayed at small differences in the actual mix, that I didn't care for. In other words, the content on some of the individual 5.1 tracks was simply different than on the stereo mix. So based on this, I swallowed hard and shelled out just under $70 for the Black Celebration SACD/DVD 2-disc set on discogs, but I'm not planning on buying other installments in the SACD series at this time.
@tmtomh I totally agree with how good the WG Mute/Intercord DM CDs are - generally, you can't go wrong with them IMO. Although I'm happy with my cd of Black Celebration, it's Speak and Spell I've never been completely satisfied with - the early WG (with the incorrect track list) sounds a tad undefined and muddy, and the UK Mute sounds a bit thin. Have you heard the SACD/DSD of the debut?
I've got a WG Int 11 track and the WG Sonopress 16 track S&S no issues with sq, both are nice and warm to these ears and prefer both of them over the SACD Just a personal taste...
I only had Music For The Masses and Violator on CD before the SACD's came out. I bought all the SACD's and put the original CD's away forever......well I thought forever...... until, on a whim I bought The Singles 81 to 85 Nimbus CD. I loved it and now feel the SACD's are loud and harsh sounding. I've been collecting the Australian original CD's since (I say collecting, I only have two) but I feel confident that everything before Ultra will sound better on the original CDs.
Those new "collectors" editions have replaced the multichannel hybrid SACD with a red-book CD, but the DVD is identical. The CD+DVD editions are still on sale in HMV over here at €20 a pop. You can tell the SACD and CD editions apart by the hard plastic slip on cover on the case. Also there is a tiny (I mean tiny) SACD symbol on the back of the SACD editions.
No kidding they are, exactly why it's important for people searching them out to make sure the seller provides close up pictures
I remember a few years back, people were selling the CD versions as SACDs. A lot of unhappy campers there. They did the same with the Genesis SACDs and lots of others. Tommy The Who de-luxe edition suddenly became CDs instead of SACDs recently.
I may as well post this here as well The West German Blue Stripe Int. #02 of Construction Time Again has pre-emphasis located in the SUB Q channel, so if your early copy sounds sterile/bright with harsh vocals that may be the reason, not sure if it was passed on to other pressings, I'm willing to bet the early Japan has it also
On Depmod it shows 2 discs for Intercord 846-807: http://www.depmod.com/albums/construction_time_again/a0355.htm. Are those 2 different releases/masters? It's just that I don't recall my WG 846 having pre-emphasis. Discogs shows a 1984 and a 1986 with the same cat number. Perhaps the 1984 is the only one to have it? With regards to Speak & Spell, apart from the different track list on the Int.846 (11 track), it sounds very different from the 16 track. Which do you consider sounds 'correct' or prefer to listening to?
There certainly are two different paint schemes for the Intercords (earlier shiny darker-blue stripe and later matte lighter-blue stripe), but I don't know if that signifies different masterings.
It's possible the later light stripe corrected this, mine is the dark, has the cat number under the tray, actually I detected it by accident, it was when I replaced my old Oppo 80 with the Onkyo 7030 and it sounded completely different (better), so I did a EAC Pre Beta scan on it and it was found in the SUB Q channel, come to find out Oppo's do not add the curve when tagged in the SUB, but the Onkyo did I prefer the 'Extra-Track' edition of S&S
Totally agree here. Stupid decision to remove these three additional tracks (which everyone got used to through the years) from Black Celebration. I also still don't understand why all bonus tracks came on DVD only. So you have listened to the original BC and the SACD only, but there's also the regular redbook remaster. Is it an improvement over the original release and is the SACD that much better to justify its steep price?
I'm 99% sure that the 1984 and 1986 versions are based on different masterings. Even after applying de-emphasis in the 1984 disc, the DR ranges from 11 to 14, and my memory is that when I ripped the 1986 CD, every track had a DR of 11.
Don't recall the sound sound of the rebook layer - I either heard it once and didn't love it, or else didn't audition it because of some negative (or at least "meh") comments here about it. As for the bonus tracks, I too would have loved them. I guess they wanted to make Disc 1 the "pure," universal album, with no country or region-specific bonus configurations, and leave all the bonus stuff for the DVD.
Okay, I change my mind right? For Speak & Spell, I just gave the 1988 'Bonus Track' stripe and the 11 track dark stripe, Cat number behind the tray, a good listen, you are right, they do sound different, the 88 sounds and is slightly more compressed than the early (not that it's bad by any account), I found the early more tone-ably ear friendly, warmer I guess, this of course applies to what I enjoy
Here's the DR report of my 1986 WG (light blue stripe) Construction Time Again: ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- DR Peak RMS Filename ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- DR11 -3.06 dB -16.67 dB 01 Love, In Itself.aiff DR11 -2.29 dB -15.91 dB 02 More Than A Party.aiff DR11 -4.32 dB -18.32 dB 03 Pipeline.aiff DR12 -2.17 dB -16.27 dB 04 Everything Counts.aiff DR12 -4.30 dB -19.20 dB 05 Two Minute Warning.aiff DR12 -3.84 dB -18.81 dB 06 Shame.aiff DR14 -2.85 dB -18.80 dB 07 The Landscape Is Changing.aiff DR11 -2.80 dB -16.63 dB 08 Told You So.aiff DR12 -3.42 dB -17.38 dB 09 And Then....aiff DR11 -10.27 dB -27.46 dB 10 Everything Counts (Reprise).aiff ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Number of files: 10 Official DR value: DR12 ============================================================================================== I do like the sound of the '86 a lot but I wonder how the two compare..
