Hot Rocks SACD vs 40 Licks

I recon one needs an incredible system to hear the difference in quality from the older songs, remastered CD versions of 40 Licks and the SACD versions in the Hot Rocks.....cause I can't tell any difference in sound quality.
What's up with that?

 

Are you comparing the SACD layer of Hot Rocks with the cd layer of 40 Licks, or are you comparing the two cd layers?

 

I'm playing Hot Rocks in the SACD player and 40 Licks on the CD player.

So I'm comparing the SACD version to the remaster cd version. I can't tell any difference.

 

Hey Sput,

(((CRANK UP THE VOLUME)))

Jim W.

 

Hi, Sput.

I think 40 Licks is good sound and great music. I don't have Hot, but I have most of the other Stones SACDs and I, for one, really like each of them. The bottom line is that it's all great music, so your're in a win-win.

Bill

 

Did you see the Live HBO concert with the Stones?

I hope I'm in the shape Mick is at his age. They put on a great show.

 

Can you hear it now?

 

Pay attention to where echo/reverb is at work - the SACD layer has a more natural sound to it; crank You Can't Always Get What You Want; listen for the verrrrry first noticeable thing besides the hiss - the sound of people taking a gulp of air before they start singing is like, wow, man... The congas on Sympathy for the Devil really sound like someone's hands slapping skins on the SACD layer... BTW, I have both 40 Licks and the Hot Rocks Vol. 1, and I play the SACD at home, while the 40 Licks does road trips.

 

Changing the topic slightly, I've just noticed that Mothers Little Helper is in stereo on the SACD layer of HR but in mono on the CD layer.

That a bonus as I didn't buy the Aftermath SACD, having the London version already.

Have to say it sounds virtually the same as the London to me, I can' t hear any of the filtered bass added to the right channel that is supposed to be on the Aftermath SACD. Having said that, I can hear it on Paint It Black which I don't think has been mentioned before, Is that also a 3 track session?

BTW Thanks, for the effort put into the Stones Remastered FAQ, its been very useful.

 

You don't say! That's one that I haven't bothered picking up.

Try this: listen to *only* the right channel in that song. In the unprocessed version, you'll only be able to hear the vocals, the guitar overdub, and a *tiny* bit of high frequency leakage. On the processed version, you'll hear all of that, plus all of the bass sounds from the left channel (easy to spot).

Hrmm...I haven't noticed anything "fishy" on that track, although I only have it on the sampler. That was a 4-track session, although some of the 4-track songs *have* been tampered with.

 

Trust me...
There is a HUGE difference!

 

Yep, much better! I'll also be hearing them live (here in LA) in a coupla weeks.

Jim W.

 

I beg to differ. To these ears, the SACD layer on the Stones' discs seems to be marginally better than the CD layer, at best. Most people I know can't hear *any* difference between the layers.

 

Apples & Oranges!
Your playing the SACD & CD on two different players/transports!
Do they both use the same cables? Same power cord? Have the exact same output level?
Try both disc's on the SACD "player".

 

I tried comparing tracks from 40 licks, with the same tracks on the two Big Hits SACDs and found no noticeable differences in the sound.

I have a feeling that you would need a very sophisticated high end system to notice much difference.

 

Hey Luke,

I enjoy reading your comments on the sound quality of various discs. How about filling in your equipment profile so we'll have a better sense of what you're listening through.

 

I surprised that nobody has picked up on the fact that "Satisfaction" is in stereo (2002 remix) on Hot Rocks, but is the original mono on Forty Licks.

I want a non-vinyl sourced "19th Nervous Breakdown" in stereo, dammit.

 

That's all you can get, actually, as the stereo mix has never shown up on vinyl. The only releases of it have been on bootlegs or through trading circles, where it has come from tape.

 

Here's a perfect case where I'm very interested in what you're doing your critical listening on.

There's no reference point to go on at the moment.

 

C'mon, Luke! List your equpment! I did!

 

I can definitely hear a difference between the SACD and cd layers on "Hot Rocks." That being said, these aren't the tracks I'd put on if I wanted to demonstrate the higher resolution of SACD. I've never heard "40 Licks" so I cannot comment on its sound.

I would think that many people wouldn't hear a difference between the SACD and cd layers on the Abkco discs. Many people don't pay close attention when listening to music. An example: I demonstrated SACD for a friend of mine. He listened for about one minute and then said it sounded nice but he's happy with cd sound. I would also think that others who actually are more into music wouldn't hear a difference because of their room, speaker placement, and/or equipment.

 

Mine is strictly mono on both layers. Has this been changed in later pressings?

 

mmmm? definitely stereo on the SACD layer of my disc, I was immediateley suprised when playing it on my new SACD player. Although of course I bought mine in the UK, so it could be a different pressing.

 

I've just been and checked my UK purchased Hot Rocks and Mothers Little Helper is stereo on the SACD layer, but only mono on the redbook. I'd never played the redbook layer before, so had never spotted this difference.

I do now remember reading somewhere before these came out that both layers were meant to be in mono on Hot Rocks. It looks like the wait for this to be released in Europe was worthwhile! I suppose that this also proves that the redbook layer on these disks was not a simple down conversion from the DSD.