Dire Straits Self-Titled SHM SACD

That is my goal for those who have similar taste in sound. I just wish everyone would be more clear about the type they prefer rather then given definitive blanket statements that everyone of these expensive discs sounds great.

Even the highly regarded engineers around here, Steve and Barry, have had a few dogs. So how on earth can all of these SHM CD's "sound great" as one or 2 here have posted. Seems to me that the high cost of these has come into play by biasing opinions to varying degrees. Something I was guilty of myself on Japan 1st pressing for a short while until I did some truly blind critical compares. Anyone who says cost and or degree of difficulty in tracking down and obtaining an item (in this case a CD/SACD/etc) never factors in is not being honest. As it's human nature to have that factor in consciously or unconsciously.

 

Of course it's an agenda. He could not be more flagrant about it. But at least the dude's being honest and upfront. In fact I give him credit for NOT keeping a secret agenda like so many on this forum, even if his method is severely flawed.

Has anyone taken him up on that "challenge" or even responded. Perhaps he is right???

Of course it should be done for someone who does not already have an opinion on SHM based media.

 

I'm going to do that right now. Pulled out the original Vertigo CD and will compare to the SHM-SACD now. Stay tuned.

 

The statement you made was a strong one... "excrement". Are they really THAT bad?

The funny thing is the AJA disc, to my ears, sounds the most lifeless to me in comparison to both the original (Steve mastered) CD and the Cisco LP.

The Velvet Underground... I never really gave a "major" opinion on... since I didn't compare it to anything else, but considering the source of the original quality recording, I didn't think it was SACD demo quality at all.

I am now going to listen to the Dire Straits SHM-SACD and compare it to the original Vertigo CD.

If you look back at the beginning of this thread, I was sort of on the fence about the overall quality of the Dire Straits SHM-SACD to begin with.

 

If you say that a lemon taste sweet and "Love is the thing" by Nat Kong Cole is a hard and brittle recording, you can say thay, but it's an inaccurate statement.

 

Many claim Meyer Lemon's do. 'Nuff said!

 

Yes, and where I stand, the earth looks flat to me.

 

Have you ever tried one? Or just commenting on something you have no idea about. If I said I do not like SHM's without having at least sampled some then you would go bonkers. Guess if you spend a lot of money on SHM's then you have the right to state whatever regarding any subject on earth without any 1st hand knowledge.

 

I have nothing more to say.

 

I couldn't disagree with your assessment more strongly.

 

I may have an agenda against SHM crap but your behavior is embarrassing. Especially Espen R's. Someone should remove your posts from the last 2 pages of this topic. Grow up!

 

Tell you what...since you're in Sanges camp and want someone to take his challenge...I think it only fair that you offer a challenge. Give someone one of the SHM-SACD's you called excrement and if they do not agree and think its good- you'll let them keep it.

See....silly isn't it? Just as silly as Sanges challenge that you want someone to take him up on.

 

For what little it's worth most outside of this thread on this forum agree with me regarding these SHM SACD's. Not that I care.

I sold the SHM's already. Unlike some of you I don't have the money to keep around $120 worth of discs I find impossible to enjoy in any manner.

Yes the challenge is silly but for those of you who feel so strong about the alleged great SHM sound it does give you a way to prove your point. However you may need to come up with a creative way of bringing this type of project to fruition. Bottom line would seem to be that posting to a forum is cheap talk which no one wants to back up in any real manner that would cost them $. I include myself as part of the no one in that last statement.

Later folks, I'll stick to normal CD threads from now on. So enjoy your expensive SHM SACD's as they appear to be the central factor to your stereo and multichannel enjoyment and your lives in general.

 

How is my behavior embarassing exactly? You need to post "avoid mini lp cds' right next to your avatar-which sounds like someone pretty desparate to make a statement all right,Same as Rick's post regarding SHM-SACDs as sounding like excrement.Pretty laughable if you ask me-and sad

 

Dude...it's ok to disagree about sound issues but you don't need to take shots about peoples 'lives'...there's no need for that. We can all agree to disagree and still show respect to each other...but when you decide to make it a comment on someones 'lives in general' then it's definitely time for you to say:



to the thread.


.

 

Yeah,SHM-SACDS are the very reason for my existence to be honest.I love them more than life itself!

 

Has anybody actually said what this SACD sounds like yet?

 

Not directed at your way. You were never even mentioned. If you think you were you must have a large ego, your not a surgeon by any chance are you

I think the mod's do need to delete a few of dozen posts from this topic that are not relevant to the thread. Maybe we should all click on a random report post and let them know this topic has gone to the birds.

 

Original Vertigo CD vs.SHM-SACD - tough... I just can't do this anymore (that is compare) - takes away from just enjoying the music.

Ok... each has it merits, but in the end there was "one" thing that made the Vertigo CD a better listen for me.

I only compared 3 songs this time - Down to the Waterline, Water of Love and Sultans of Swing.

1) The SACD is mastered much louder than the Vertigo CD - in fact, even if someone were to say the SHM-SACDs were supposed to be flat transfers, I would say ... well the Dire Straits if it is a flat transfer on SACD they used a tape that had inherent compression. It sounds, in comparison to the Vertigo CD, to have some compression that reduces some of the overall dynamics. In fact this might be he loudest mastered SHM-SACD of the eight I own.

2) The SHM-SACD definitely has a sparkle to the high-end that the Vertigo CD can't match. But even though the Vertigo CD doesn't seem to have as "open" a high-end sound, it is fairly natural sound.

3) The SHM-SACD has a more forward "in your face" presentation. The bass seems to be overly accentuated.. almost overpowering the rest of the presentation. It seemed to throw off the balance of the entire mix. I kept wishing the bass would be turned down (I play SACDs through a true Analog Direct mode on my receiver where tone controls do nothing - so I couldn't compensate). In fact everything seemed to be a bit too loud (but not distorted) on the SHM-SACD - something was off. Even though the instruments were easily defined and there was a clarity that was there (which was not a prominent on the Vertigo CD), every instrument and voice seemed to have a similar volume level and a bit too much. A definite loss of dynamics in comparison to the Vertigo CD. As I mentioned the SACD did have a high frequency and low frequency extension that was greater than the Vertigo CD, but the sonic presentation wasn't as "natural".

4) The CD had a greater sense of natural balance to the music, where all the instruments fit better into the mix. When doing a more direct comparison to the SACD, it might sound a bit muted, but the CD could be cranked loud without strain and it sounded great. When I cranked the SACD, it hurt my ears. The bass became bloated and overbearing. It begged to be turned down when played too loud.

I preferred to listen to the French made by PMDC Vertigo CD over the SHM-SACD because of the listen-ability the CD had over the SHM-SACD. The SACD did present a different type of "clarity" to many of the instruments that the CD couldn't match, but I think it was marred by the louder more "in your face" presentation.

5) The SHM-SACD had, as I mentioned before, a more noticeable level of hiss, which couldn't be detected as well in the Vertigo CD.

6) One last comment.. when I compared the SHM-CD to the SHM-SACD a few days ago, I noticed that the overall time on disc was about the same, maybe a few seconds or so different (around 41:59), yet the Vertigo CD only clocks in 41:26. What could account for the 33 second difference? I guess I now have to stress over listening to the album over and over again, trying to find what songs might have slightly longer presentation. Remember the SHM-CD and SHM-SACD clocked in nearly the same, yet the Vertigo CD is shorter??? Maybe someone else knows (I guess I could do a search, but I just don't have the energy).

Well there you go.... earlier I felt the SHM-CD and the SHM-SACD sounded fairly close, and now with the Vertigo CD and SHM-SACD there is a difference, one where I feel the older CD is the more natural and pleasing listen. (I'm sure someone will find fault with my observations.. so bring them on.. )

 

Thanks for the review.

 

what?? why would we do that?

 

Just load both discs in itunes (or whatever CD software your PC has) and compare the song times to one another...even if it doesn't recognize the song titles(due to the SHM SACD being so new) it will show each song length.

 

The 1st line sounded like it was directed at me.

 

Not sure if your being facetious... since I did report back on page 3 and now just again a few minutes ago.

 

Does this mean the emperor has no clothes. I am sure you will lambasted by the SHM SACD investors but I admire your courage and honesty my friend.