|
Review by wferrari August 3, 2010 (4 of 4 found this review helpful)
|
Performance: Sonics: |
Ok, there seems to be some widely diverging opinions regarding this remastered version. I'll just throw in my 2-cents, nothing more or less than a personal opinion.
I think that the main cause of the such radical statements ("Sound great" vs "It's rubbish") is mainly due to the equipment used. Fortunately I have a variety of ways to check the sound of the album, and I can use the 1999 redbook official and MFSL remasters as benchmarks. The first remaster is the one that at first may sound better and has the best soundstage, but it's a tad too bright for my tastes and I suspect it has also been remixed. The MFSL is a very nice sounding and neutral remaster. There are two main elements that characterize this remaster compared to the other two:
1) There is a slight predominance of lower frequencies, which have also been brought forward toward the listener. This should NOT come as a surprise, given the fact that this is a Japanese remaster. Having said that, the extra bass is really well defined, not leaking everywhere like, for example, the Rory Gallagher SACD, and it's in my opinion very pleasant to listen to with the proper equipment.
2) The soundstage is definitely reduced, mostly due to the previously mentioned characteristic. This is not the remaster that will make you say "Hey, I've never heard that before!". Minor instruments (such as the cymbals as someone else pointed out) are brought back and are given less emphasis compared to the other remasters. Don't get me wrong, the soundstage is great, but mainly because this is a really well produced album to begin with.
In regards to the equipment I used to verify the sound quality in comparison with the other two versions, this album plays fairly on my monitors (M-Audio headphones and speakers), while did not do very well on my open-hear soundstage headphones (Audio Technica AD-700) I use to listen to classical music. My main Hi-Fi system is very slightly on the bright side (Canton speakers), and I have to say that's the place where the SHM-SACD remaster really shines. But I can see how, in a system where the sub have a predominant position, this record may sound too boombastic.
I personally consider the MFSL version the best of the lot, but the SHM-SACD bring the extra depth that someone may seek to take advantage of some expensive equipment. Overall I consider this a good remaster that has been fine-tuned for more modern tastes (and equipments), but fans of the seventies sound may be disappointed by this release.
|
Was this review helpful to you?
|
|
