The best SHM-SACDs

But you like all of them! So there is nothing subjective in your recommendations. Only points and never a counterpoint from you. So regardless of the SHM-SACD you will state it sounds great. People, thank you for your ever widening blanket statements that they are all great? Do they thank Universal Japan as well? I'm sure there website contains they same thing [hyperbole], assuming of course I could read it.


P.S. "I hear deep into the (master)tapes" - how do you know this? Have you ever heard any master tapes that SHM-SACD's were transferred from?

 

Agreed! I don't care if the music moves someone I'd like to know why they think the sound is good.

 

We should look past the one note joke already and move on to actual helpful analysis like rjstauber provided.

 

Roland…

"John Barleycorn Must Die" (running time 34:25) is a must have IMO… sounds better than any other Island remaster I heard… a very open analogue sound. Never heard the original UK Island. But I doubt the original sounds more analogue like this one.

"Gasoline Alley" is also very good, a little bit on the bright side, but every other version has this bright mix. I only had The WG Mercury for comparison and the standard Mercury remaster. The SHM-SACD is definitely better in every way.

"Fire and Water" is great… the transfer isn't so "spectacular" like on Wishbone Ash, Cream, Traffic, Caravan or The Who. I compared the SHM-SACD against an original Island, the Deluxe Edition and the tracks on the Free box set "Songs of Yesterday."

I use different DSD filters on my playback… it depends on the recording which filter I use. So my reviews are only "my" opinion.

By the way… after longer listening and comparisons, I changed my Pop/Rock top ranking a little….

Outstanding
Caravan - In the Land of Grey and Pink
Cream - Wheels of Fire
Gentle Giant - Octopus
Traffic - John Barleycorn Must Die
Wishbone Ash - Argus
The Who - Who's Next

Very good
Fairport Convention - Liege and Lief
Free - Fire and Water
Elton John - GYBR
Rod Stewart - Gasoline Alley
10cc - Original Soundtrack

Good (but not in every aspect)
Eric Clapton - 461 Ocean Blvd, Layla
Dire Straits - Dire Straits
Kiss - Destroyer
Steely Dan - Aja, Gaucho

Poor
Allman Brothers
Asia
Black Sabbath
Moody Blues
Police (horrible)
Rainbow
Velevet Underground (horrible)

 

It's normal that Velvet Underground sounds horrible, the original masters sound horrible. They just have tried to make the best of it. IMO this will be the "definitive version" of this album. Just the same for Derek & the Dominos, I've heard different versions of this album ... but I never loved the sonics. Maybe (for one time) I prefer the original sacd over the shm-sacd.

I'm satisfied with Moody Blues, Allman Brothers (better than the original sacd, don't have the mofi-disc), Black Sabbath, Kiss and Rainbow. They're not "reference titles" but I think most fans would be very satisfied with the sonics (and will prefere them over previous releases).

The Police I didn't bought. Their "Every Breath You Take - The Classics" sacd is enough for me. I'm not a fan of their albums, and thought the "source"-quality won't justify the price.

For the "Deutsche Grammophon" classical titles they used 96/24 PCM transfers, but some of them sound really good (e.g. Hilary Hahn).

 

I compared the Rainbow SHM-SACD against the 2 CD Anthology (mastered by Steven Fallone)... and the tracks on the compilation sound slightly better. The SHM-SACD sounds a little "compressed." Maybe the upcoming Rainbow remasters are better.

 

would be interesting to see how a redbook version of the same mastering from the same tape sources would compare to the SHM-SACD........

My assumption: It would sound as good as the SHM-SACD, at least the next best thing to the SHM-SACD....

 

I'm amazed that anyone thinks the Sabbath is poor... I think it's a great sounding disc... The Police I agree with though, it sounds so shrill! The VU & Nico from this series is the best I've heard it sound... Though not a high quality recording by any means! (The collector in me bought that one, and I was impressed with it which was a bonus )

 

Claus, thanks a lot for your updated ranking and your additional comments, that is very helpful.

So, for "Gasoline Alley", you have not compared the SHM-SACD to the US Mercury (2nd Dennis Drake mastering). Do you want me to upload some samples of that mastering for comparison?

How would you describe the "Fire and Water" SHM-SACD against the original Island CD mastering? The Island CD mastering sounds very full and warm to me, quite a good transfer I think. Does the SHM-SACD have more/less bass/treble? How would you describe the differences? Is it really a noticeable upgrade for the SHM-SACD? I love this album and I am actually quite fond of the original Island CD. Would be willing to spend the money for the SHM-SACD since it is one of my favorite albums, but would totally hate it if I would find out that I actually prefer my old Island CD.

 

I have five of the above—everything except Argus—and agree they sound outstanding. I'm curious to find out what version(s) of Octopus you compared to the SHM-SACD. The only other version I have is the original UK vinyl, which, to my ears/system, sounds really close to the SHM.

Best,

Robert

 

I do not own the originals (I'm not a collector, who must own every pressing I lent me the US Mercury for an A/B listening from my audiophile friends...

"Fire and Water" is a "compressed" recording... yes, the original sounds full and warm, like the SHM-SACD too. The title track has too much bass for my taste.... on the original and the SHM-SACD. The sound quality varies from track to track also (on the complete recording). The reverb of the rimshots (0:29-0:35) on "OH I Wept" sounds very breezy on the SHM-SACD. Seperation of the instruments (guitar, bass, tambourine) on "Mr. Big" is slightly better on the SHM-SACD.

As I said before.... it sounds better as the original Island IMO, but the differences are not so huge like on Caravan, The Who etc. "Fire and Water" sounds very analogue, but it is definitely not a well recorded album..... what you can hear on every pressing. The compression during the recording reminds me to the first Queen album among others. That's the reason, why I wouldn't rate this SHM-SACD as an outstanding transfer.

Maybe it's 1 or 2% better as the original..... Conclusion... clearly better than the Deluxe, but only a minor (!) improvement over the original Island IMO.

 

It depends on what your references are.

Here is an example:
Here in Oslo/Norway, we have a guy that has extrem knowledge when it comes to HiFi. He also have money. He buildt most everything by himself. Even the most costly HiFi equipments has a lot of compromises.
Let me tell you about his RIAA-stage for Lp playback: The RIAA-stage is one box with small tubes. But the power supply that feeds the RIAA-stage is in another box. That box is about the size of the largest Mark Levinson power amplifier. And the parts inside this box that is the power supply for the RIAA-stage, cost him $13500. Then you can think of the power supply for the tubes that is the power-stage for his loudspakers...

It's all about noise, he said. Less noise, better sound, even below what can be measured, the sound improves, he says.
People that has listened to this system says it's the closest thing to live music.
And his hand buildt D/A converter for CD, sounds "grey and lifeless" compared to his vinyl set-up, it has been said.

It's all abot what references you have...

 

Then he don't know how to build D/A converters

 

would be my assumption too

 

I don't think so.

 

How does the Sabbath SHM-SACD sound to you compared to the 33PD, if you have that one?

 

I do not have 33PD but I compared against the original 1986 Castle and the 1996 Castle remaster. I found the SHM-SACD of Paranoid was abrasive, bright, harsh, and very much not crankable compared to those Castles. Even though the 1996 Castle used NR and limiting it still was better. Overall I like the 1986 original Castle the best, it is most natural and pleasant sounding, the tonality pretty much matches my vinyl. My advice is not to waste money on the Paranoid SHM-SACD.

 

I wouldn't rate so bad the SHM-SACD, but I agree..... it's not recommended. I have heard much worse SHM-SACDs

 

I am not sure I understood your post correctly. Did you compare the US Mercury to the SHM-SACD directly or did you compare it at an earlier point in time with other pressings, but not with the SHM-CD?

Anyhow, I have uploaded a sample from the US Mercury from the track "Only a Hobo", in case anybody who owns the SHM-SACD wants to compare this sample to the SHM-SACD.

Here's the link:

https://www.yousendit.com/dl?phi_ac...25%26email%3De352547afe7018a4da92ce303ec06ff9

Thanks a lot for the comments. I might give this one a try eventually.

 

Claus, by the way, thanks for your "balanced" approach with regards to your opinion about the sound quality of these SHM-SACD's. It is much more helpful to grade these more gradually. Not all of them are wonderful but more than just one or two are excellent.

I also think it is a good sign that you don't mind to "correct" or update some of your previous comments after some more critical listening. That shows that you try to take this seriously with a thorough approach.

I am looking forward to possible future updates, either on already released titles or new titles.

All in all, even if not all of the new SHM-SACD's are that great (but at least seceral of them are), this is a very good trend (new SACD Pop/Rock releases with emphasis on sound quality).

And it seems they somewhat changed their mastering approach for these titles, since most of the not-so-great ones are from earlier batches. I think this forum might actually have an input on the outcome of these products. After all, people who are willing to spend around $50 to $60 on a SACD are limited in this world, and quite a few of them hang around here, I am sure.

 

This is not intended to be a thread crap, but either I have not selected purchases wisely or I generally don't hear a real improvement with SHM discs from Japan. Am I in the minority there?

 

I compared "Gasoline Alley" US Mercury pressing directly against the SHM-SACD a few days ago.

 

It was suggested I might think about formatting my opinions about the SHM-SACDs into broad categories. I have some reservations about it for philosophical reasons, which I will by-step unless someone is interested in my going into that. But in the "spirit of the game," following is my knee-jerk response, subject to further consideration:

Outstanding

Bruckner/Bohm
Stravinsky/Salonen
R. Strauss -- Also Sprach Zarathustra/Karajan
Mozart/Bohm
Berlioz/Davis
Bartok/Solti
Dire Straits - same
Blind Faith -same
10CC -- The Original Soundtrack

Very good

Rod Stewart - Gasoline Alley
Rolling Stones -- Let It Bleed
Eric Clapton - 461 Ocean Blvd
Steely Dan -- Aja
Moody Blues - EGBDF

Good (but not in every aspect)

[empty]

No Opinion*

Black Sabbath - Paranoid
The Who - Who's Next
Beethoven/Klieber
Kiss - Destroyer

Ordered But Not Yet Received

Liszt/Arrau
Chopin/Pollini
Beethoven/Szell
Mussorgsky/Gergiev
R. Strauss -- Eine Alpensinphonie/Thielemann
Traffic - John Barleycorn Must Die
Wishbone Ash - Argus
Elton John - Goodbye Yellow Brick Road
Rolling Stones -- Beggars Banquet
Fairport Convention - Liege and Lief

There are a couple, the Beethoven/Klieber and The Who -- Who's Next come to mind, that are just odd-ducks for me.

* My No Opinion category exists because I just don't have any basis for comparison, which is rooted in my reluctance to submit such categories. Or because I just haven't formulated an opinion about it.

 

Claus, o.k., I understand. Maybe you can let me know a little bit more about your impressions. How is the tonality between these two? About the same, or is one noticeably brighter than the other, or does one have more bottom end?

Did you notive and volume differences (was one noticeably louder than the other one)?

Would you rate the improvement similar as with "Fire and Water"?

I know the recording or mix of this album is not perfect (just like "Fire and Water" is not ideally recorded).

That would be greatly appreciated.

 

The SHM-SACD was a tad louder than the US Mercury CD. I recall very similar tonality btw both discs. Very analogue like...... my copy of the 98 Mercury remaster was almost unlistenable in direct comparison - very bright and harsh.... a midrange without any body. The SHM SACD isn't a laid back enjoyment, but better than the US CD and much (!) better than the Universal (IMO).

Well, hope that helps for your decision....