More thoughts on Tapestry SACD...

It's been a hot topic lately so I've been giving it a few more listens than normal.

I made CD copies of the stereo versions from the stereo only and multichannel SACD's and I've come to the conclusion that they contain the same mixes. I can't hear a damn bit of difference. I thought I was hearing things when I played them in my car on consecutive days (that happens when you listen too intently) but this morning I played several songs back to back on headphones and I can say that even down to the most minute detail (panning, mono reverb, EQ choices, levels, tape drop outs, etc...) they are the same mixes. Nobody could recreate mixes this precisely.

Here's clips of two songs. The first part of each clip is from the stereo only SACD and the second from the multichannel. See if you can tell a difference. I sure can't.


http://home.comcast.net/~captaincasual/Tapestry_1.mp3

http://home.comcast.net/~captaincasual/Tapestry_2.mp3


- To get these to CD I went from a Sony ES series SACD player through Grover cables to a nice outboard A/D converter into my Masterlink.

 

My thoughts are they mislabeled the SACD. Anyone know Vic? Rob LoVerde?

 

Jamie, now that you've got the SACDs onto Redbook CDs, you could compare them on EAC. Well, I suppose it would only work if you have taken special care to make good CD copies (level matching, etc.). I've never tried it. In any event, this was reported in the last issue of Stereophile in comparing the stereo SACD track and standard CD of Norah Jones Come Away With Me.

 

I read that article but I don't have the program to analyze them. I sent copies to Todd Fredericks. Maybe he can help us out when he gets them.

 

I never thought the mixes were different, but I read that the first sounded better. Can you hear any difference between the SACDs on your system.

 

No.

 

I asked the question about a year ago "how different are the mixes" and it seemed that the answer was not much. I never repurchased my multichannel sacd since I wasn't someone who grew up hearing this album too much. The two channel version on the mc/2ch. was ok with me. If you look in the archive I'm sure there are others who have questioned the 2 channel being different on the two discs.

 

I knew it! Here's what I wrote on 08/22, in this thread.

Even though they were "supposed" to be different, my casual comparison noted really nothing. And I thought I might be losing my mind. Possibly I thought the one version was more forward just because of incorrectly matched volume levels

 

It is the multi-channel SACD track that sounds different. Likely it sounds better to my ears is that it is derived direct from analog tape to DSD harddrive.

Richard.

 

Have the prices on ebay gone down yet?

 

Sounds the same to me, at least on your samples. Maybe go over to the Sundazed site and e-mail Bob Irwin and ask why he was credited with doing a stereo mix for the newer disc?

 

I am glad to hear this news. As I have the multi-ch sacd, and was feeling a bit cheated. I had the chance to buy either one and settled on the multi, but that was before I heard the remix rumors.

 

Hi Jeff-

I have only the original- and I don't feel cheated - and I love surround. Seriously though- I will probably buy the MC mix just for the sake of having the choice. When I bought it- I had my choice of either at the time, but knowing the MC had the remix for the Stereo part- I wanted the original for history's sake.


Chris

 

So, I don't have to go chasing after the stereo edition anymore.

 

I'll exaimine the audio tracks when I receive the package and I'll post my results. This is very strange indeed. As I've said many, many times before, I trust Jamie's ears. If this is true then it'll save me the headache (plus others who have been extremely helpful) of trying to track down the original release (I own the multi-channel one). I'm suprised that there have been other members who own both versions claimed there were dramatic differences in the mixes? Maybe some of them fell victim to the hype (of the possible misprint) and closed their ears?? Anyway, Jamie, thank you again for bringing this to our attention.

Todd

 

"Steve,

I have both SACD versions of Tapestry, and the stereo mix on the 5.1 version sounds like a "remix" as opposed to a "fold down" "
Sam S.



From this comment from Sam S. on the other thread, it seems as if he was convinced that they are different mixes. I very carefully compared the stereo mix on the 5.1 SACD to the standard CD version about 6 months ago and I could not discern a difference.

 

You've lost me here, rockman. The stereo mix on a 5.1 version is a stereo mix, not fold-down of the 5.1 mix, so far as I know. Are you saying that the stereo-only SACD sounds different from the stereo + Mch SACD, or not?

I apologize if I'm just misreading your post.

 

I fixed my post. Part of it was a quote from another thread that Sam S. had posted. I hear no difference in the 2 mixes.

 

Also, I have never heard the stereo only SACD, I only compared the stereo mix on the 5.1 SACD to the redbook version, they sound the same.

 

Well, if the current Multi-SACD is not sporting a stereo remix then that's good news for the album's history and also our ears. I guess this does mean all eventual bets are off on the Ebay gravy-train. I bet they will plummet to well-below retail if one has the option for the same thing with 5.1.

 

Hi Jamie,

No, they have gone up! ........... maybe somebody saw your avatar?

Take care,
Jeffrey

 

Well, here's a post that'll make them go down again. I asked Rob LoVerde (he works with Vic at Sony Studios) if Vic remixed Tapestry:

 

I guess that puts an end to it.

 

Ok, so if Yesman says the 2 SACD stereo versions are the same and Rockman says the Stereo version on the 5.1 SACD is the same as the redbook, then....

.......we don't need either SACD. Just get the redbook remaster!

Right?

 

No - the mixes are the same, but the mastering isn't. They didn't just transfer the CD PCM master to DSD for the SACD - the stereo mix on the SACD's were mastered in DSD from the original analog stereo master.