Rolling Stones 2002 Sacd Hybrids vs. Recent SHM SACD

I picked up Beggar's Banquet- the sacd hybrid version- on ebay for 9 bucks the other day and just listened. I also got lucky at some point in the past and found the 2002 sacd hybrid release of Let it Bleed awhile back and didn't even realize it was an SACD until I put it in my player a month or so ago. Paid 10 bucks for that one. They both sound amazing to me. Better than any other Stones album I've heard before. I will say that the mid range on Beggars Banquet (particularly "Sympathy for The Devil") is a bit too distant compared to what I'm used to hearing but the guitar work is so amazing I can overlook the fact that Jagger's vocals seem to be a bit upstaged. Having heard both of these now and seeing that I can probably find other SACD hybrid 2002 Stones albums, I'm wondering if it really makes sense to buy the recent SHM SACD versions. Someone would have to make a great case as to why I should spend $59 a pop for them given that the older versions are available for much less. But I'm willing to hear opinions. What sayeth the forum?

 

I own almost every 2002 digipak hybrid SACD released. I suggest seeking them out. Most used CD shops still don't charge a premium for them and even the so so titles have some standout deep cuts.

 

The SHM-SACD's for all of the ABKCO titles use the same DSD mastering as the hybrid SACD's. I compared them and could not hear any difference, so I sold off the older ones.

 

Are all titles available? I'm searching now for the 2002 versions and having a hard time finding the titles I want. Namely Sticky Fingers, Exile on Main Street and Goat's Head Soup.

 

The 2002 SACD's only go through Let It Bleed. As of today, SACD's of any post-Let It Bleed titles have only been released in Japan on SHM-SACD's that are unique releases targeted at the audiophile market. Hopefully, we will see a wider release of these titles on SACD at some point, but I wouldn't count on it.

 

Here is a very good guide about the 2002 remasters by our member lukpac:
http://www.lukpac.org/stereostones/stones-cd-faq.txt

 

I, too, own the 2002 discs. Would be interested to read about how these compare to the SHM discs...

 

The 2002 SACDs only cover the ABKCO period. For Virgin titles, you have to go with the SHM-SACDs. I have the SHM-SACDs of Tattoo You, Love You Live, Sticky Fingers, and It's Only Rock 'n Roll, and they sound very good.

 

To give credit where it is due David Goodwin and Luke put together that great site.

 

Maybe not pertinent to the OP's question but I have the 2002 releases plus the SHM-SACDs of Exile and Sticky Fingers. Both sound better than any other version I've heard. I certainly would not replace the 2002 versions with SHM-SACDs. IMO, the recordings are not that great to begin with plus as someone said they used the same DSD masters for both the 2002 and the SHM versions. Considering I paid under $20 for the 2002 and SHMs are ~$55, not a chance.

 

Actually very pertinent... Thanks.

 

As said, I wouldn't bother with the SHM-SACD's for the ABKCO releases, but I would really recommend them for the later albums. I've got Sticky Fingers and Exile on SHM, and they are the best digital versions I've heard.

 

I've compared both Let it Bleed SACDs and couldn't hear a difference.

 

Unfortunately, my SACD laser will now only read single layer SACDs so I can no longer play hybrids. Doh. So, all of my 2002 Stones discs will only do redbook. That is why I am interested in having the single layer SHM-SACDs.

 

I've compared both of them as well and found the SHM-SACD to have a much more pleasing EQ.

Just more organic sounding...in-the-room-type presence.

A shame they're so darned expensive...

 

You would have made more if you sold off the SHM-SACDs.

 

Was just reading through lukpac's guide and he mentions bootleg copies of the 2002 Abko releases. Points out that they have no upc code but also says they are released in digipak form. I have four 2002 early Stones cds that I picked up used and while they're all in jewel cases, none of the four has a printed on the artwork. There are upc code stickers however. Anyone know if, in fact, I bought fakes? Because if I did, I'm taking them back immediately. Thanks!

 

The ones he was talking about there were some Russian CDs, they have different tracklistings, and sometimes claim to be alternate/mono versions of ABKCO era albums. They weren't copies. I believe they may have come out first.

 

I agree.

 

At $55 a pop for the SHM-SACDs, a new SACD player would be a better deal.

 

I agree

It's all relative, I suppose. As they will last a lifetime, I don't have a problem with the cost.

 

Picked up a copy of the SHM SACD of "Sticky Fingers" and listened last night. It was incredible! Exactly as you describe above. Unfortunately, the 2002 versions I own, which sound great, are Let it Bleed and Beggars Banquet so I can't do a direct compare. But very impressed with all three. Still, the "Sticky Fingers" stood out a bit more.

 

As lukpac's excellent FAQ notes, the 2002 hybrid SACDs (and for that matter, all SHM-SACDs/DSD-derived Redbook CDs of the same titles) use Bob Ludwig's DSD mastering, which resorts to using some noise reduction and analogue compression. The SHM-SACDs of the later albums (ie. Sticky Fingers through Dirty Work), by contrast, are apparently flat transfers, with no compression or processing.

If you have the choice between SHM-SACD, DSD-mastered Redbook CD, and hybrid SACD of the same thing, I'd go for the hybrid. Much better value for money. HDTracks also offers all of these pre-Sticky Fingers titles as 24bit FLAC files, if you have no SACD player. There are also vinyl pressings made from these DSD files. Each uses the same source.

 

What's the verdict on the 2002 hybrid version of "Hot Rocks"? Thinking of grabbing a copy from EBAY or doing a WTB posting for it here. Thanks.

 

I like it but there has been lots of discussion. You can search some threads. Here is an early and detailed analysis by a forum member: http://www.lukpac.org/stereostones/stones-cd-faq.txt