Thread: Whos' Next - Great Sound or not./opinions/information/thoughts

Posts: 97
Page: prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 next

Post by clem August 28, 2010 (31 of 97)
rammiepie said:

To Wolf359: It took me years to build up my present sound system and believe me, I was always under the financial gun, as well. I lust after the $15,000 (US) Playback Design SACD/CD player but have other priorities. But better players and systems do inevitably yield better sound and as long as one owns the physical discs, we only have better sound in the future to look forward to.

Happy listening!

(Addenda: IMO, spending $50+ on a single disc is the real crime here but what other alternative do we have, other than NOT to purchase it and risk seeing it go OOP and fetching a small fortune on E~bay)

Ram the primary purpose of sacd is to archive tape into a digital format for future pressing of all media. There is no garentee of original master tapes or remastering. I belive we will see more SHM sacd where the quality of the recording is not the primary goal. Universal needs to transfer there ageing inventory of rusted tape to sacd.When this format came out ,quality ramped up quickly and many companies gave us cutting edge results,Now we have to be careful,the goal for large companies is profit. Don't assume sacd means your getting original or remastered. There archiveing the best tapes they have on hand. There looking for acceptable quality not audiophile quality. Stick with the smaller independents for quality sacd. They have the passion for the quality we desire.....Btw Tommys quality blows aways Who's Next.No comparrison.

Post by clem August 29, 2010 (32 of 97)
rammiepie said:

To Wolf359: It took me years to build up my present sound system and believe me, I was always under the financial gun, as well. I lust after the $15,000 (US) Playback Design SACD/CD player but have other priorities. But better players and systems do inevitably yield better sound and as long as one owns the physical discs, we only have better sound in the future to look forward to.

Happy listening!

(Addenda: IMO, spending $50+ on a single disc is the real crime here but what other alternative do we have, other than NOT to purchase it and risk seeing it go OOP and fetching a small fortune on E~bay)

The crime is paying 50.00 for an item when it has no substantial benifit over existing recordings.

Post by danfaz August 30, 2010 (33 of 97)
Haven't received mine yet, but remember how some folks said the Aja SACD sucked at first? Then, after a few plays, it started to open up? Perhaps this may be the case as well.

Post by clem August 30, 2010 (34 of 97)
danfaz said:

Haven't received mine yet, but remember how some folks said the Aja SACD sucked at first? Then, after a few plays, it started to open up? Perhaps this may be the case as well.

I am a huge fan of the Who and this album, my high school years started in 73. I burned thru so many 8 tracks, cassettes etc etc. I bought so many versions before this one and hoped this SACD would be better than the Tommy SACD, which is outstanding. This SACD is equaled in quality or i should say slightly less to the CD-SH version made in 1986, Steve Hoffman was using the original mater tapes and itís on a plain Redbook CD. Now we get a version of unknow origin. Not the original master tapes.

I suggest that you review your SACD faithfully. Then buy this older version by SH and give it a listen. MCABD 37217 Japan made version.

Then give us your opinion. Thatís what this forum is all about. And good luck with your CD break in plan..

Once done .Please explain how you justify the $50.00 cost benefit over older versions...And finally its not bad, its just not near great,and itís not worth the 50.00 ..

By the way the SH version is 10.00.

Maybe thats why I was let down after my listening experince. I felt some big company sold us less that what we deserved.

Post by subterraneanbob August 30, 2010 (35 of 97)
I am disappointed in this sacd and do not understand the philosophy behind Universal Japan's release of this, other than are there legal loopholes allowing them to put this type of product out.

If Jon Astley did do the transfer, why is it so inferior to the shm-cd version which also bears his handywork? If it is a different tape, once they have supposedly the original analogue original why such an inferior product. Listen to the cymbal crashes in BABA O'REILLY and compare to the shm-cd or the Classic Records lp and they just sound horrible.

It's almost that they took some cassette they had lying around and did a dsd transfer and put it on sacd. There are some serious questions to be answered here. People who love music will pay what they have to to get archival recordings of precious music. With the economy and music business in the tank like it is, to put out something this poor is really a crime.

I will of course listen to this a few more times, but I was preparing to sit back and really be blown away. When I started to listen my first thought was "boy is this lifeless and dull". After some brief comparing I found out how truly disappointed I am.

I was going to order the BLIND FAITH sacd, but I doubt it now as Universal Japan can't seem to be trusted. If anyone has any sources to contact Universal or Universal Japan directly I would appreciate it. These people have some explaning to do.

Post by pgmdir August 30, 2010 (36 of 97)
I haven't heard this, but I will tell you that it is my favorite rock album of all time--- Nicky Hopkins' piano in "song is over"is fabulous. But we have to make sure that our expectations don't exceed what's there on the original tape.

I was so annoyed at the remix of Quadraphenia, that I went for the older edition, by the way.

Some things just sound better on the LP, or on the radio.

Bill

Post by clem August 30, 2010 (37 of 97)
I dug out my original decca 1971 who's next lp and played it. Even with all the scratches it sounded better. You can hear more. The keyboards had a unique pitch,the tambourine s was there and sweet. I had hope that after 40 years of technology advancements in electronics and materials we would at least get the same quality album . Nope we got what universal wanted to give and to archive for the future. I am annoyed. Music is our leagacy and this great album is only a partial sample of the original. We anit gonna take it. I am mailing mine back to universal. U©k Em

Post by pgmdir August 30, 2010 (38 of 97)
Clem... put it away and listen a few days or even weeks from now. Sometimes it's the fact that it's a re-mix can mess us up. I have a daugher who is 44 now, and Song Is Over is one of her favorite pieces of music of all time. You may feel different later...

Bill

Post by rammiepie August 30, 2010 (39 of 97)
I still have not received my copy of the Who's Next and already feel cheated. As I posted before, that "Limited Edition" moniker made many a person take notice and pluck down $50 on an untested product.
Sure the early vinyl sounds better. Those tapes were pristine when that album was pressed and who knows how deteriorated those masters are after having been used so many times over the years (oxide flaking, etc).

I have ten SHM~SACDs on order (6 are now en route) and I'm sure Universal/Japan raked in a bundle but I think this debacle is something of an eye (and ear) opener and the stamp of approval "Made In Japan" just lost something in translation.

Post by Merganser August 31, 2010 (40 of 97)
Who's Next and Blind Faith on SHM-SACD......WOW!

These have never sounded this good, I'm blown away.

Page: prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 next

Closed