| August 26th, 2005 10:13 AM |
|
|
| buttergun |
I know the Hot Rock re-release is mastered for SACD, but does it sound any different for those of us without SACD equipment than the remastering job on Forty Licks? On regular stereo equipment, is there a noticeable difference between the remastering/sound quality on the SACD Hot Rocks and Forty Licks? |
| August 26th, 2005 10:41 AM |
|
|
| egon |
some say yes, some say no...,
i have the remasters which i played on my normal player
and yes, they sounded much better.
now i have a sacd player, but to be honest i don't really hear the difference between "normal remastered" or "SACD remastered" |
| August 26th, 2005 01:38 PM |
|
|
| Jair |
quote:
egon wrote:
some say yes, some say no...,
I say YES. I think is much better!
|
| August 26th, 2005 02:32 PM |
|
|
| Egbert |
So does the non-SACD layer of the 2002 Abkco remasters sound the same as the material on Disc 1 of Forty Licks? I would assume them to be taken from the same source.
Also, Forty Licks Disc 2 and Jump Back - any difference in sound quality?
|
| August 26th, 2005 02:38 PM |
|
|
| Jair |
quote:
Egbert wrote:
So does the non-SACD layer of the 2002 Abkco remasters sound the same as the material on Disc 1 of Forty Licks? I would assume them to be taken from the same source.
Also, Forty Licks Disc 2 and Jump Back - any difference in sound quality?
I say YES for the first question, but I don't think Jump Back has the same quality as Forty Licks. Actually, the quality of No Security is also better than Jump Back.
Anyway, my copy of Jump Back is not that new, just released in US, mine is the first pressing...
|
| August 26th, 2005 04:33 PM |
|
|
| egon |
quote:
Egbert wrote:
So does the non-SACD layer of the 2002 Abkco remasters sound the same as the material on Disc 1 of Forty Licks? I would assume them to be taken from the same source.
yes |
| August 26th, 2005 07:26 PM |
|
|
| Soldatti |
Brown Sugar in Jump Back sounds bad, the worst sound of the song in any CD.
Forty Licks sounds fantastic. |
| August 27th, 2005 09:52 AM |
|
|
| IanBillen |
[quote]buttergun wrote:
I know the Hot Rock re-release is mastered for SACD, but does it sound any different for those of us without SACD equipment than the remastering job on Forty Licks? On regular stereo equipment, is there a noticeable difference between the remastering/sound quality on the SACD Hot Rocks and Forty Licks?
____________________________________________________________________________
Bob Ludwig, considered the very best mastering engineer in the world did FL and all those remasters. He is A numero-uno and does the best. What you are hearing is a great remastering job on normal PCM encoding, normal CD. If you want to hear the SA-CD the CD itself, your CD player, and reciever must be SA-CD ready. If not you are hearing the normal layer. Forty Licks, is not on SA-CD I don't believe but I could be wrong. The remasters are definately SA-CD hybrids. Regardless there is an SA-CD layer there but uses a totally different encoding technique called DSD. There is no way a normal CD player can take advantage in any way of that layer unless the player, and reciever are SACD. SA-CD sounds even a little better, unbelievably. I have both.
Ian
[Edited by IanBillen] |
| August 27th, 2005 03:26 PM |
|
|
| CraigP |
Very true, very true. Bob came to my friend's college for a lecture. I would have liked to meet him. I aspire to be like him. |
| August 28th, 2005 06:42 AM |
|
|
| wgwalsh |
Mr. Ian:
When you refer to SACD receiver, don't you really mean a receiver with an optical cable port ?
When SACD players came out, the SACD receivers were hardly ever discussed.
The pulse code modulation you spent with Aunt Bea in the kitchen will be with you forever.
wgw |
