Dire Straits-Brothers In Arms 5.1 coming

Could it be a two disc release with a DVD with the videos from that album??

 

It's interesting which version sounds better... SACD or XRCD

 

amazon.de

Wonder what's cheaper....UK.....FR or DE?

23 Euro's or 12 pounds.....hmmmmm

http://www.amazon.de/exec/obidos/AS...06/sr=1-23/ref=sr_1_11_23/028-1792182-1212538

 

23 Euros are too expensive!!! Amazon is not cheap... regular price at our local dealer about 20 Euros.

 

WOW is it ever!

12 pounds = $27 CND.....23 euro's is $35 CND!

 

It's fairly common knowledge that CD prices in the UK are way out of line with US, Canada and much of Europe. Somehow, the record companies continue to get away with it. Recently, they even forced retailer cdwow.com to raise its prices: I think the issue was that cdwow was sourcing its product from outside Europe and undercutting store prices massively. Not sure of the details, but there was a big fuss at the time.

Stevie

 

Well, I did a "practice" purchase on .uk, and it would cost me about $30CND. A "double disc" would cost about $28CND plus all our beloved taxes.....so I think the SACD is a better deal. And I'd rather have the SACD to be honest than 2 dopey discs.

 

The price at amazon.uk for me was £10.20 each, or about $19.30. Pretty reasonable, I must say.

 

I agree that the REM Double Disc sets are priced too high. Other titles from Beck, Barenaked Ladies, Flaming Lips have been more reasonable.

 

The Norah Jones SACD sounds awful. The vinyl LP kills both the SACD and the redbook. Sorry, perhaps I missed something?

 

uh oh, here we go.......

 

What you say about the Norah Jones vinyl might well be true, I've never heard it or the original master tape but, the SACD sure sounds real good to me as well as many others. I don't understand how you find the sound quality of the SACD to be "awful" and think there might be something wrong somewhere. One of the absolutely best sounding SACDs that I have or have ever heard is sourced from 24 Bits/96 KHZ.....Joe Weed 'The Vultures' so, source resolution is only one factor in the final result.

 

I agree with this statement 100%. There are so many factors involved in the final product, and source resolution is just one factor that must be considered.

 

How about those Blue Jays!
Let's not go NJ sacd crazy now.

 

My point was, since you seem to have missed it, that the SACD, though sourced from 44.1/16, still sounded better than the original Redbook release. I can't comment on the vinyl, because I don't own it and don't want it.

 

hint hint........

 

The Norah Jones SACD sound pretty good to me...

 

Daved64 has sent a BIG hint - let's stay on topic! THANKS!

 

Here's the SACD at Amazon UK: http://www.amazon.co.uk/exec/obidos...4520/sr=1-9/ref=sr_1_11_9/026-1056990-8269243

 

It is a known fact that there are at least 3 versions of the Norah Jones SACD. The one you seem to have, another one that develops spindle cracks, and a third one that was done from the 44.1/16 master. Oh, wait, there must be a fourth one beacuse mine suffers from the two last problems: spindle cracks and a very bad sound! This is why I will not buy another Blue Note album again.

 

I'd disagree with you, but that would be a thread crap.

 

I know the Rush remasters aren't very popular with a lot of forum-folk, but my main point really is that even though the source is the same digital information, the two versions sound different - so if the Brothers In Arms SACD is a hybrid, I'll be curious as to how this version will sound compared to the previous versions - even though all 3 (presumably) use the same digital source.

Maybe I should start a new thread - which is hated more: Rush remasters or Norah Jones SACD

 

I didn't want to create a huge argument because I do agree with the spirit of your remark. Steve has remastered from digital sources back to redbook CD and improved the quality a great deal. I agree a 44100/16 bit source can be improved going to DSD (I think its been proven a few times). I also enjoy the Norah Jones SACD although I don't have much to compare it to.

Its just that PW is my least favorite of the Rush remasters (very few of which are good). Its about 6 db louder than the original domestic CD across the entire frequency spectrum except the bass & treble with are about 3 or 4 db louder than that. It probably has more detail then the original CD but it sounds like an ultra-high fidelity recording as opposed to sounding like a band thats playing right in front of you. I own maybe 100 MFSL Gold CD (which are slammed for their smile curve in this forum) and none of them have the bass and treble pushed up like Bob Ludwigs 1998 Power Windows remaster. And when I calm down I'll tell the world how a really feel about this disc.

 

No sweat Drew.

 

Guys, this release might have better mastering than previous versions, but there will be no improvement in resolution that SACD is capable of, that is frozen at 16/44.1.
.

Why wouldn't it sound good? It was taken from one high resolution format to another. That's totally different than transfering from 16/44.1.