Steely Dan - Countdown to Ecstasy SHM-SACD on 7/30/2014

Geez, I don't know what to make of those graphs. The left channel of the SACD does appear to be ever so slightly less dynamic for this song. However, the right channel does not to my eyes, but that could just be an illusion due to the differing amplitudes of the 2 files for that channel.

As I said before, IMO, they are too many variables inserted into your graphical output to draw any conclusions from them. I'm not saying you're ultimately incorrect, but I don't think these graphs are useful in proving (or disproving, for that matter) your contention.

 

Thank you both, yes I see my error and I should have known better. As a civilian I got focused on the original aspect and missed a step that the multitrack tape does not apply anymore.

It does make me wonder why, given all the problems the two-track stereo master tape had throughout the years, did they not try a remix from the multitracks. Is that just a complete no-no, you can’t ever recreate what was done so why even try? Were the multitracks just as damaged? Is it now the case, say with the Steven Wilson Jethro Tull remixes, enough time has passed, or it is now more in vogue, to go ahead and remix something where it is really more about the 5.1 and the new stereo mix is an afterthought; or maybe the original mix had enough problems to begin with fans are going to say why not? [I hope I did not get that wrong, the only time you would use the multitracks again is to remix a new two-track stereo master, and I guess that is just not done that often barring 5.1 or some other song remix purpose]

I thought for a second, and hunted for, if any SD multitrack tapes had been lost or stolen, but that does not seem to apply to CTE. In that research, I did find an interesting 2006 Roger Nichols article here about music preservation, restoration, switching to new formats; he provided the best most concise description of the Plangent Process I have read yet. He also talks about the ‘97 remasters not turning out as well as the ’81 digital transfers.

He also mentioned something possibly interesting about tape copies. “When the only format for mixing to was analogue tape, I did not mix to a piece of tape then copy it. I had a second tape machine recording in parallel to avoid the generation loss. Now the backup was equal to the original.” Is it at all possible one of those popped up somewhere and survived better than what was considered the original?

 

Why not re-mix? Who knows, but IMO there are generally a lot more reasons not to re-mix than there are to re-mix. A very small percentage of albums get remixed. If I had to guess, I'd say none of the creative interests in the Steely Dan LPs has sufficient desire to go back and revisit those albums.

On your last point, again...who knows?

 

Thanks for posting that link to Roger's article. I had been hunting thru his website trying to find references to the Steely Dan mastering work he did - that's exactly what I was looking for.

Cheers,
Paul

 

Yes I very much agree; on the whole, the remix thing falls on the gimmicky side of the tracks and is far more fraught with disaster. Imagine everyone shaking their fists, “how could you change what we all love, what gives you the right, blah, blah, blah”. Just look at how we freak out about the difference between this ’85, ’98 and ’14. Plus I agree generally artists are more about ever forward; and, quite a few would likely blush at the amount of obsession that can go on about a 40 year old album. It just makes me think however, given how controlling these guys are about the sound of their albums, that they at least gave it a try once in their lab.

Then there is the SD 5.1 program. I’m no an expert on this, but I think one 5.1 comes out, others announced, fits and starts, a few ready in the can, then poof on the old albums, new albums come out 5.1. These guys, or their at least their record label, do swing to their own metronome.

 

Very interesting...

 

I always worry about archive sites like this going down, so I'm going to quote a couple of the relevant Steely Dan passages here for reference:

"I, personally, have made a copy of every project I have ever worked on. I decided to do this in 1970 after seeing the storage facility at ABC Dunhill Records in Hollywood. Tapes were damaged or missing after being stored for only a few months. In 1981 all of the Steely Dan two-track tapes were transferred to digital. The record company could not find the 'B' side of the Aja album. We had to use the copy I made during the original mixing. We did not make digital copies of the multitracks, and since then the record company has lost the 24-track tapes of that album."

"When the only format for mixing to was analogue tape, I did not mix to a piece of tape then copy it. I had a second tape machine recording in parallel to avoid the generation loss. Now the backup was equal to the original. After the advent of digital, I printed the mix to two different formats in case one did not last as advertised. When DAT tape life was in doubt, I transferred to CD-R as audio files and to Exabyte tapes as DDP files while the DAT tapes would still play back. Now whatever I record is also stored on CD-ROM, DVD-ROM, or Blu-Ray as AIFF or BWAV files. Data files have more error correction than audio CDs, allowing for a better chance for recovery."

"To save extra work in the future, make the best flat transfers you can, and save them. Do the processing to the flat transfers instead of processing during the transfer. When the processing improves in the future you can then use the flat transfer and re-process it instead of having to go back and re-transfer the audio. In 1997 we tried to transfer the old Steely Dan two-track masters again with newer technology. Because of the additional 15 years of deterioration, the digital transfers done in 1981 sounded much better than anything we could do in 1997. So, the sooner you make the transfers, the better your results will be."

-Roger Nichols, Sound On Sound July 2006

Cheers,
Paul

 

That would be expensive and time consuming. Trying to replicate a mix - especially since you wouldn't remember all the processing and tricks you might have used during the mixing process - would be a very difficult endeavour for an act like Steely Dan. You're bound to get something noticeably different from the original.

It would be easier for recordings with 8 or fewer tracks and less processing. George Martin remixed several of the early Beatles records for the '80s digital masters - I thought they sounded fantastic, and still close enough to the originals. But from Revolver on, forget it. You'd never get it quite right, and it would take forever.

 

This is not a serious storage facility, this is a joke!

 

CDJapan is listing the Countdown to Ecstasy SHM-SACD as out of print. $#!+! That wasn't a very long run.

 

Gee...need to be quick these days!!

 

It's been out of print for a while. Weird. It is not bad issue, but not perfect.

 

It's still available from multiple US sellers, but at much inflated prices, as usual.

 

Some here were not quite satisfied with this SACD, and they might be happy to unload their discs.

 

Like who?

 

plenty of pissing and moaning in this thread. just go back a bit.

 

Really. People either loved it or absolutely hated it. No middle ground.

 

Folks, there has never been a unanimous opinion regarding sound. Never gonna happen.

 

Well, I just bought Countdown to Ecstasy off of Amazon (I had some AMEX points so it didn't hurt too badly) and Pretzel Logic from CD Japan. I'm a sucker for Steely Dan and for SACD's.

 

Tell us what you think about it when you have a chance to listen!

 

Slightly off topic - are we talking about the same Roger Nichols who worked with Harry Nilsson?

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roger_Nichols_(recording_engineer)

 

So I guess it's not.
Pancreatic cancer. The worst of the worst. Awful, but what a legacy he left.

 

Just got the SACD. Have not yet been able to listen to it. Man, the packaging is ridiculous! "SHM'd SACD for Audiophile Only"????

 

I have been missing some SHM-SACD's recently. I am usually good at ordering them.

I needed this one and Pretzel, but cdjapan was out of stock/print.

I got an email from acoustic sounds that they were having 10% off. Turns out they have both of these in stock and free shipping too.