Elton John DVD-A vs. MFSL GBYBR

I just got the MFSL of Goodbye Yellow Brick Road the other day and was anxious to compare it to my DVD-A version of the same album. I have read on here that the original SACD release of this album is not well thought of and that the latest SHM-SACD seems to have very differing opinions in terms of quality. This is the first time I have ever compared a DVD-A to an MFSL. I know many of here consider the MFSL of this album to be the definitive version and I really love my DVD-A version so I thought a good old A/B was needed.

I decided to stick initially to comparing the 2 channel layer on ther DVD-A to the MFSL for obvious reasons. I came to some very interesting results when choosing either the 2 channel or surround layer on the DVD-A. First and most importantly, the MFSL completely and utterly blows the DVD-A 2 channel out of the water. I am thrilled with the warmth of the MFSL in particular with my only complaint being that it seems like there tends to be a tad too much bass on some tracks, though this is hardly a bothersome aspect to me as I'd rather have too much rather than not enough bass. The 2 channel DVD-A is too airy for me (best way I know to describe what I'm hearing) and it just lacks the balls of the Mofi. A friend of mine has the first pressing vinyl of the album from the 70's and I played the MFSL back on his system then compared it to the vinyl and I must say that the CD was nearly indistinguishable to me from thr vinyl, though I admit my ears have lost some "skills" over the years due to 28 years of drumming! So, for 2 channel, the MFSL just kills the DVD-A.

Now, all the above being said, I think the 5.1 DVD-A of this album is comparable or even...*gasp* BETTER than the MFSL. I just cannot believe how more detailed and ballsy the surround layer is compared to the 2 channel and I cannot figure out why this should be the case. Why would they take away all the "umph" of the music when going from 5.1 to 2 channel...weird. So...I will continue to listen to the DVD-A for surround and probably never even listen to the 2 channel again. Instead, out will come the MFSL for strereo playing.

I must say, this being the first EJ MFSL I have bought I am mightily impressed with it. What do others on here think should be my next EJ MFSL purchase? I think my second favorite EJ album would be Honky Chataeu. Where does that MFSL rank with the other MFSL EJ releases?

 

Oh yes, one more thing. If there are any others on here who have the MFSL, DVD-A and the SHM-SACD I'd love to hear there thoughts on any A/B/C comparions they might have done....VERY curious!

 

I wish I got the MSFL version when I had the chance a long time ago when it was released. It's my favorite EJ album. I do have the remaster and the SACD double disc version. So I guess the SACD isn't good?

 

Well, I dont know as I dont have the SACD myself but from what I've read on here, the original SACD is not very well liked and the new SHM-SACD gets very mixed reviews...some love it and some dont. I do really love the MFSL though I think the 5.1 DVD-A sounds fantastic!

 

Thanks for the info. I guess I'll have to keep an eye out for the MSFL and the DVD-A. Hopefully I can find either for a nice price.

 

I have a bunch of Elton SACD's including Elton John, Madman, Tumbleweed, Captain Fantastic, Honky Chateau and GYBR. I don't mind them but the complaint on here is too "bright".

 

Some people say the original SACD is too bright and some say it's great. I enjoy it. My old scd-777 and my current 5400 seem to play it well and it's not too bright. A bit but not as bad as some say. My favorite is the MFSL (vinyl and cd). I think Steve had mentioned they were flat transfers.

 

The SHM-SACD is quite nice...way better than the original SACD (IMO)

 

I would rank Honky Chateau right behind your Goodbye Yellow Brick Road. The other album I have on MFSL is Tumbleweed Connection. The final album Madman Across The Water I prefer the original MCA Made In Japan CD but that is just my personal preference. Nothing wrong with the MFSL on that either.

 

Thanks for all the reviews , I too love this album , but it's a bit hard to find what to get .
I have the Original MCA "rainbow" label vinyl from who knows when , it's okay , but a bit flat sounding for my taste .

 

To be fair, a 5.1 DVD-A isn't quite an apples to apples comparison since it uses a different mix of the album (and one that is higher rez to begin with).

The original SACD sounded OK--my only complaint with it was that the mastering was a bit shrill sounding and compared to the MOFI.

I don't think the MOFI has too much bass--since we have no idea what the mastertape sounds like (although IIRC Steve has stated that it sounds quite a bit like the mastertape--someone correct me if I'm wrong) I would hope that the bass on the MOFI represents the mastertape sound.

I don't have the SHM-SACD for comparison as I feel they are 1) getting too expensive and 2) I'm getting tired of buying the same music again and again.

 

Remember that the stereo track on the DVD-Audio might very well have been mastered from the final mixdown tapes for the album, while the 5.1 surround track is probably taken from a new mix of the original multitracks. So by listening to the 5.1 mix, you are much closer to the original recording and eliminating one generational loss of fidelity.

 

Good to know. That would certainly explain the night and day difference between the 2'channel and 5.1 layer in terms of sound quality!

 

I have the MFSL and the SACD hybrid and prefer the MFSL.

 

I shouldn't participate because I only have the MFSL - It's great!

 

recently picked up the MoFi (also have the DVD-A) love both. Anyone else notice the trakc listing on the back of the MoFi lists The Ballad Of Danny Bailey (1909-34) as The Ballad Of Danny Bailey (1903-34)? Is this just a typo?

 

I have both and to my ears you've got the right one Shawn.

 

MFSL is the best sound release.

 

Along those lines, when I play SACDs or DVD-As, I tend to play the surround/5/1 mix even though I'm not yet set up for surround sound on my stereo. My Denon is set up to automatically downmix the 5.1 to stereo and it seems to me I'm getting the better mix in most cases than playing the stereo mix that comes with the disc. Am I completely offbase in thinking this way?

 

I too have noticed some lacking of bass on DVD-A's and SACD's 2-channel layers, in general.

So much so that I've wondered if maybe my player is defective. Shouldn't there be more, if not at least as much, bass on a stereo SACD or DVD-A?

I'd read that some universal players (including a Denon model? I have an NAD T585) were found to have low freq's erroneously directed away from the 2 front, stereo speakers - even when no sub is selected in the player's setup.

Time and again I've played SACD's, then the redbook layer and found the bass to be prodigious on the redbook, and minimal on the SACD layer.

Back to Elton: The MoFi GYBR is a favorite of mine, and the early Japan for US MCA is poor in comparison. I do like the SACD's (don't have GYBR, though) but prefer the MoFi's of Honky and Tumbleweed. Tumbleweed is one of the best sounding cd's I own. You forget your listening to a recording, it's that good.

 

Honky Chateau MFSL is also very good, but I think the Madman Across The Water & Tumbleweed Connection Ultradiscs may be the next ones to add if you like the albums.

 

The GYBR SACD is too bright. I like the SACDs of Elton John and Captain Fantastic.

 

Being as the original poster above liked the DVD-a 5.1 much better than the DVD-a stereo mix, it follows that when one says so and so is better than the SACD, it begs the question - Better than what?

The Hybrid SACD stereo "CD" layer?
The SACD stereo layer?
Or, the SACD 5.1 layer?

Otherwise, it's all just propaganda.

 

I often wonder if those that complain a SACD is "too bright" that their speakers employ harsh and strident metal tweeters.

 

Metal tweeters are not inherently harsh and/or strident.