SACD/Surround Music Listenings and Impressions

[Woochifer]

It's been over a month with my SACD player, and quite a period of discovery with the different discs that I've played through that player so far. My initial impressions about the SACD player itself were discussed on an earlier thread. In cases where I've compared the SACD version with versions on other formats, I've gotten different degrees of audible difference/improvement.

So far though I'd have to say that the highlights of my SACD listenings have been with recordings originally done in DSD, and with multichannel remixes.

SF Symphony - Mahler cycle (CD/SACD hybrids)
As mentioned earlier, my primary motivation to get a SACD player (aside from needing to replace my CD changer) was to hear the SF Symphony's Mahler cycle in 5.1 surround. From both an artistic and technical standpoint, these recordings from the SFS are incredible. They are hybrid CD/SACDs that were originally recorded in DSD, so the SACD layers are basically a bit-for-bit rendering of the master recording. Even if you don't own a SACD player, the CD layers on these recordings sound great and really capture the SFS' masterful interpretations of Mahler. The SACD layer sounds cleaner and has a more relaxed yet detailed quality to it.

But, IMO it's the multichannel tracks that truly take the listener inside of Davies Symphony Hall and up to the conductor's podium. These listenings alone justified getting the SACD player. The recordings really captured (for better or worse) the sound coming off the stage at Davies, and did not overemphasize the hall reverb (which is accurate to how the hall actually sounds). The mix might steer more of the instruments into the surround channels than some listeners might like, but it is accurate to where the mics were placed during the recorded performance that I attended.

My understanding is that these Mahler CD/SACDs are limited editions, and they have only 3 more releases to go before completing the cycle. These recordings get my highest recommendation if you're at all curious about Mahler or want a good multichannel reference disc. I would start with Symphony #1, if you're new to Mahler. The 4th movement is especially powerful, and I think the playing was especially inspired because it was the SF Symphony's first concert after 9/11.

Other Surround Music
One of the advantages of surround music is that it requires going back to the original multitrack master, and allows for mixing to be done on high res digital decks without the signal loss that might have accompanied older analog recorders. Probably the best example of this is on the Concord Jazz label's two SACD compilations. I'm a long-time fan of that label, which has Dave Brubeck, Tania Maria, Diane Reeves, and the late Art Blakey as some of its many artists. They're also well known for their high production quality.

With their SACD releases, Concord remixed the tracks in the DSD domain from the original multitrack masters, and the resulting surround mixes dramatically improved the sound quality in many cases. Tania Maria's "Come With Me" is one of my all-time favorite jazz vocal tracks, and the two-channel version creates a pretty good phantom center and spatiality. But, the 5.1 remix exposes just how much processing it took to create that phantom center and spatial cues. The surround version almost sounds like a different recording session, when it actuality, it simply spread the original tracks into five channels and probably eliminated a lot of processing that got added during the original two-channel mixdown. Editorially, some listeners might question steering instruments and vocals into the surround channels, but there's no denying the improvement that the new mix made with the sound quality.

In addition to the Concord label, Telarc's Heads Up label also seems to have a lot very adventurous surround mixes in its lineup. Not all of the surround mixing works artistically, but a lot of the tracks were recorded in DSD and the sound quality is consistently high. The Jaco Pastorius Big Band's Word of Mouth Revisited album is a flat out smoker, with incredible soloing and bass guitar work.


Three-channel SACD
Another series of exciting SACD releases was the RCA Living Stereo series. Many recordings in this series along with the Mercury Presence releases were originally recorded to three-track master tapes. These releases repesent the first time that these three-track masters have been released to the public without any downmixing or other processing.

To try this out, I got the 1959/61 Gershwin recording from Arthur Fiedler and the Boston Pops. My initial impressions of the three-channel mix were mixed. Very clearly, the center image was much better anchored, and the overall soundstage seemed to have better definition. But, the two-channel mix had better spatiality and seemed to have more of a live presence about it. The three-channel mix sounded much better after I lowered my center speaker level by about 3 db. Both mixes had their attributes and advantages, but I think I generally preferred listening to the two-channel mix. I think that part of this might also come from the horizontal positioning of my center speaker. With three identical speakers up, my listening impressions might be different. This also might be reason why so many of the newer multichannel music mixes that I've heard, especially those of live performances, use the center channel very selectively and mix it at a lower level than the other four channels.

Comparing SACD with CD and 96/24 discs
In nearly all of my direct comparisons so far, the SACD layer generally has a more open, more detailed, yet more relaxed sound than the CD layers. As mentioned, the magnitude of difference definitely varies, indicating that other changes during the mastering process are probably at work here. The only listening where I did not hear a noticeable difference between the CD and SACD version was Miles Davis' In A Silent Way, which is an incredible performance but a bad recording. I was hoping that the SACD would breathe new life into that classic album, but it did not.

The most interesting comparison I've done so far has been with the St. Louis Orchestra's 1975 compilation of Gershwin's piano and orchestra works, originally released on the Vox/Turnabout label. The 96/24 high res DVD version of this recording from Classic Records has been one of my references ever since I got it four years ago. This is a great recording and a great performance of Gershwin's piano and orchestral pieces. Classic Records' 96/24 transfers are generally meticulously done, with input from the original production team whenever possible.

Yet, Mobile Fidelity's newer SACD version sounds noticeably better. With the two-channel layer, I did a direct comparison with the 96/24 disc, and the SACD version made the biggest improvement in the high horn registers, sounding very clean and well extended with all of the instruments.

Curiously, I also felt that the CD layer sounded slightly better than the 96/24 disc, while still sounding noticeably more blunt in the highs than the SACD. This might indicate that much of the Mobile Fidelity version's sound quality comes from the playback rig that it uses during the mastering process rather than the SACD format itself (although the CD transfer is downsampled from the DSD transfer).

And because the recording was originally mixed for quadrophonic release, the SACD also represents the first time that this recording has been heard in the true discrete 4.0 found on the master tape. This was a startling revelation in itself, because it really had an immersive "you are there" feel to it. The sense of space was conveyed at a much grander level than the two-channel version. I've never been to Powell Symphony Hall in St. Louis, so I can't verify for myself whether this represents a more realistic image, but from my vantage point, the surround mix is definitely more involving. I also thinking about repositioning my speakers so I can listen to this recording in the old "four corners" quad configuration for comparison. As much as I've liked the 96/24 version of this Gershwin recording, the SACD version opens up a new dimension of listening, and is another recording that I highly recommend.

Another direct comparison that I did was with DTS 5.1 version of Steely Dan's Gaucho album. This was originally released as a DTS surround disc, and was Eliot Scheiner's first surround mix. (Scheiner has gone on to become the most sought after 5.1 remixer in the business, and his 5.1 mixes of Steely Dan's most recent albums and Donald F@gan's solo albums sound absolutely amazing) This album was jointly re-released in DVD-A and CD/SACD hybrid versions a couple of years ago, and it seems that the SACD version greatly improved upon the original DTS mix. Aside from a slight improvement in how well the channels blend into one another, the SACD mix just seems to have a more revealing sound. Since these transfers occurred at different times, again, other factors besides the SACD resolution might be at work here.

Next up, I'm going to fire up some of my old vinyl versions and compare those with the SACD versions. That should be fun.