Elvis On SACD

No

One no will be counted from you only!

I invested in an SACD player years ago only to find that the first Elvis surround release turned out to be a DVD-A! I've since given up on surround sound and if Warner's recent announcement of TIE/TTWII deluxe editions is any indication, they have too! The original theatrical versions of these movies are to be released on DVD in remastered "Dolby Surround 2.0" sound. There you have it, even the movie industry, who pioneered surround sound in the first place, no longer sees the need to spend the money and remix these titles for surround, so what impetus should the record labels have to do so with audio-only releases?

SACD does not (necessarily) equal surround. I have mono and 2 channel discs by Police and Rolling stones and classical music etc..please SACD=surround??? Not.

As far as I'm concerned, for most of Elvis' catalog, we haven't tapped the full potential of the CD format, and given where CD sales are headed, we may never do so.

We have wringed the CD format dry. But most people do not discern with their ears as well as with their eyes..and you can ask yourself..it sounds great!..cannot get better...but the same with a photograph at 8x10,11x14 can look really good. Blow it up to the size of a BILLBOARD on the street.... With a low resolution 5 megapixels etc will look great until a point..then the squares are shown and you cannot tell what picture it was originally... A 35mm negative with a bad camera etc..will blow up looking bad but you will be able to see there was something recognizable...So SACD in sound is more or less that. You can really hear more as you get higher audiophile system...otherwise if you (or anyone) has no plans,dreams to get really high end gear than the 5 mega pixels are more than enough...people think differently with different things..everyone or lots would love to have a FERRARI even knowing they will not ever realise its 200 mph potential..cause no racetrack nearby etc...But its NICE TO KNOW IT IS CAPABLE!!! Know what I mean? Thank you for posting.

Yes, I have always heard that Elvis liked and preferred the Mono mixes for his records to have more of a "punch", so to speak, but in the 70's, RCA gave us four or five Elvis albums available in Quadrophonic, the equivalant, (or close to), to surround sound these days ...

I remember playing the ALOHA and PROMISED LAND album's in Quad back in the 80's and they sounded terrific compared to the dull sounding "stereo" mixes.

What I'm getting at is that most of Elvis' catalog hasn't had first-class transfers and great restoration come to market yet.

The Budd/Jeansson/Anesini/DSD phase has only begun, and let's face it, there are still a lot of masters and outtakes to rework yet.

I believe I have a lot more to gain from the Sun project that will be released on standard CD than I do from waiting for some -- likely greatest-hits compilation -- SACD project.

The restoration work, we can all agree I hope, is more important than the CD/SACD debate. You could transfer the old '50s box versions over to SACD and they still wouldn't sound nearly as good as the Budd work on CD.

My priority is advancing the good work that's already being done rather than worrying about things I suspect will never happen.

No disagreement there. I expect the "restoration" work was done (and saved) at high resolution digital....because if it was not. Then it is no "restoration" whatsover. I know of one that was not...but this will be remedied soon. No point in for example restoring Wizard Of Oz to l ook good in your TV... should be done to be great looking in a cinema as well. Sorry to ramble a bit... but need to know my point is understood. Thanks again.

Last edited by Juan Luis on Tue May 15, 2007 7:58 am, edited 1 time in total.

Yes, I have always heard that Elvis liked and preferred the Mono mixes for his records to have more of a "punch", so to speak, but in the 70's, RCA gave us four or five Elvis albums available in Quadrophonic, the equivalant, (or close to), to surround sound these days ...

I remember playing the ALOHA and PROMISED LAND album's in Quad back in the 80's and they sounded terrific compared to the dull sounding "stereo" mixes.

All 45RPM mixes from all labels ,artists had more punch...compression is the reason..Analog thus much better sounding.

Hey, those are some cool-looking pictures from your Elvis room. I like the speaker setup, the small rear speakers right next to the big front speakers, for the most authentic surround experience you can get...

Hey, those are some cool-looking pictures from your Elvis room. I like the speaker setup, the small rear speakers right next to the big front speakers, for the most authentic surround experience you can get...

Two separate systems really. Large(tall) towers are part of 2 channel(audio only) with its own amp and preamp, etc.. the other smaller ones(FRONT LR) are for home theater use DVD,s etc. 2 speakers behind (one shown with books on the corner black to the right of King Creole original one sheet poster) plus subwoofer(not shown)....with its own receiver. .. TOTALLY SEPARATE audiophile and videophile systems including power connections. .....Made the most of 1(one) room! lol!!!

Last edited by Juan Luis on Tue May 15, 2007 9:48 am, edited 1 time in total.

Yes, I have always heard that Elvis liked and preferred the Mono mixes for his records to have more of a "punch", so to speak, but in the 70's, RCA gave us four or five Elvis albums available in Quadrophonic, the equivalant, (or close to), to surround sound these days ...

I remember playing the ALOHA and PROMISED LAND album's in Quad back in the 80's and they sounded terrific compared to the dull sounding "stereo" mixes.

All 45RPM mixes from all labels ,artists had more punch...compression is the reason..Analog thus much better sounding.

Juan, I understand the whole "compression" aspect and concept of what you are saying, but Elvis often complained, (as I've read and heard thru out the years), that his records, 45rpm's, didn't sound the same way as on the acetate, or on the original mixes he heard in the studio before they were sent off to the pressing plant.

A good example of this theory is on the 2005 CBS documentary Elvis By The Presleys.

Yes, I have always heard that Elvis liked and preferred the Mono mixes for his records to have more of a "punch", so to speak, but in the 70's, RCA gave us four or five Elvis albums available in Quadrophonic, the equivalant, (or close to), to surround sound these days ...

I remember playing the ALOHA and PROMISED LAND album's in Quad back in the 80's and they sounded terrific compared to the dull sounding "stereo" mixes.

All 45RPM mixes from all labels ,artists had more punch...compression is the reason..Analog thus much better sounding.

Juan, I understand the whole "compression" aspect and concept of what you are saying, but Elvis often complained, (as I've read and heard thru out the years), that his records, 45rpm's, didn't sound the same way as on the acetate, or on the original mixes he heard in the studio before they were sent off to the pressing plant.

A good example of this theory is on the 2005 CBS documentary Elvis By The Presleys.

It was with Suspicious Minds on EBTP's. That is memory of Priscilla and Jerry Schilling. Elvis probably refered to (imo) the 60s acetates pre 69 when he could take home literally the finished mix complete...but with 69 stuff those acetates were unfinished,undubbed etc.. So I have doubts.

When it comes to the 'original mixes', most of them weren't what Elvis wanted anyway.

In terms of sound qaulity anyway. RCA had a bad habit of changing things on Elvis.

I don't think people realize how much Elvis music can improve sonically from cd.

Elvis could sound SO much better then what a cd can do.

SACD can be mono , stereo, or surround. Sony is going to release a couple of car sacd players, point is, the hardware division of Sony hasn't stopped with SACD. The problem is, the software is extremely limited in scope.

If you have a well-mastered sacd , you would be amazed by how real it sounds. People on this forum would flip.

It really is an amazing music-friendly format is DSD.

Short answer: Yes.

When it comes to the 'original mixes', most of them weren't what Elvis wanted anyway.

In terms of sound qaulity anyway. RCA had a bad habit of changing things on Elvis.

I don't think people realize how much Elvis music can improve sonically from cd.

Elvis could sound SO much better then what a cd can do.

SACD can be mono , stereo, or surround. Sony is going to release a couple of car sacd players, point is, the hardware division of Sony hasn't stopped with SACD. The problem is, the software is extremely limited in scope.

If you have a well-mastered sacd , you would be amazed by how real it sounds. People on this forum would flip.

It really is an amazing music-friendly format is DSD.

Short answer: Yes.

Exactly. Both formats (SACD,DVDA) "failed" (releases slowly still coming out) more because of public misunderstanding more than anything else...it boggles my mind that people would still say NO even with hybrid at the same price regular c d releases. Hybrid means that it will play on your CD player as if a regular redbook CD. Also plenty of Universal DVDplayers that accept (play) SACD,DVDA as well. At mid-level prices..300-500$$. Thanks everyone for posting.

There is a very simple reason why SonyBMG have drastically scaled back the release of SACD titles.

NO ONE IS BUYING THEM!

I'm with those who say let's DSD/BUDD/SEBASTION the whole catalog first, by the time that is finsihed there will probably be a new retail delivery system....flash drives perhaps.

But surround sound from stereo or stereo from Mono...never,never,never!

There is a very simple reason why SonyBMG have drastically scaled back the release of SACD titles.

NO ONE IS BUYING THEM!

For years they've been searching for the ultimate sound in music reproduction.

Now it's available, all the public wants is quantity, not quality !

SACD, DVD-A ?

They'd sooner have I-Pod & MP3 !

There is a very simple reason why SonyBMG have drastically scaled back the release of SACD titles.

NO ONE IS BUYING THEM!

I'm with those who say let's DSD/BUDD/SEBASTION the whole catalog first, by the time that is finsihed there will probably be a new retail delivery system....flash drives perhaps.

But surround sound from stereo or stereo from Mono...never,never,never!

Where did you get surround sound from stereo? If it were done theres plenty of multi tracks to do so from! 3,8,16 ..all could be mixed for that. And BTW I have stated time and time again that SACD is great even in stereo only or mono only! Is that so hard to understand? Plus I was thinking of one friggin album! From Elvis In Memphis or compilation etc...I am not asking for the whole friggion catalog!!! JUST ONE!!! Obviously the people of Sony/BMG do not find it necessary to put EP in the best possible sound cause the FANS are whining about spending on LEGITIMATE stuff but are like Howard Hughes in their pockets when it comes to those crappy soundboards...because it has a nice booklet!!

Last edited by Juan Luis on Tue May 15, 2007 11:59 pm, edited 1 time in total.

There is a very simple reason why SonyBMG have drastically scaled back the release of SACD titles.

NO ONE IS BUYING THEM!

For years they've been searching for the ultimate sound in music reproduction.

Now it's available, all the public wants is quantity, not quality !

SACD, DVD-A ?

They'd sooner have I-Pod & MP3 !

I would not be surprised (in the years to come) that the AUDIOPHILE releases will be 320 MP3!! Plus a nice booklet in the mail.

There is a very simple reason why SonyBMG have drastically scaled back the release of SACD titles.

NO ONE IS BUYING THEM!

For years they've been searching for the ultimate sound in music reproduction.

Now it's available, all the public wants is quantity, not quality !

SACD, DVD-A ?

They'd sooner have I-Pod & MP3 !

I would not be surprised (in the years to come) that the AUDIOPHILE releases will be 320 MP3!! Plus a nice booklet in the mail.

There is a very simple reason why SonyBMG have drastically scaled back the release of SACD titles.

NO ONE IS BUYING THEM!

For years they've been searching for the ultimate sound in music reproduction.

Now it's available, all the public wants is quantity, not quality !

SACD, DVD-A ?

They'd sooner have I-Pod & MP3 !

I would not be surprised (in the years to come) that the AUDIOPHILE releases will be 320 MP3!! Plus a nice booklet in the mail.

Downloads at 320...you mean like the Beatles and EMI are doing next month

There is a very simple reason why SonyBMG have drastically scaled back the release of SACD titles.

NO ONE IS BUYING THEM!

For years they've been searching for the ultimate sound in music reproduction.

Now it's available, all the public wants is quantity, not quality !

SACD, DVD-A ?

They'd sooner have I-Pod & MP3 !

I would not be surprised (in the years to come) that the AUDIOPHILE releases will be 320 MP3!! Plus a nice booklet in the mail.

Downloads at 320...you mean like the Beatles and EMI are doing next month

And no booklet!

I would guess that if ANYbody on the planet would be interested in Elvis on SACD it would be people on this forum.

But even the people here don't seem to understand sacd that well.

SACD is best with people who REALLY listen to the music. People who hear the sound, not just play it, you know what I mean?

If people on this forum don't know or care about the sound quality improvements of sacd, well then theres little hope BMG would care.

I just can't believe how people analyse and disect sound from cd's here, and then turn around and say, DON'T put Elvis on a new improved format to really bring out the sound?

what the hell?

I enjoy good sound. But I don't dissect it. I don't sit there and wish the drums were here and the lead guitar was there. Or the backgrond singers were over here. Or that the overall mix was more like this instead of that. I'd never enjoy anything I listened to if I did that.

In short, my ears are satisfied with cd sound. I won't invest in SACD just because it has "better" sound. Next year there will something new with still "better" sound. I'm through playing that game.

Most people here seems to think DSD sounds great, right?

Well hearing DSD on cd is like watching a hdtv show on a normal tv.
You get the sense that the picture looks better and clearer, but the real fun starts with a hdtv.

If you think DSD sounds great on cd, you'd be amazed at SACD sound.

Maybe BMG is smarter then we think if half the people on this thread don't care about sacd sound for Elvis.

Is it ignorance of the format, or just apathy?

and ignorance wins by a nose!

Well on a normal web site I wouldn't be surprised about that attitude; but on a collectors web site I am.

I certainly know there are more important things in the world then gd cd sound; but to say on a collectors forum that cd sound is fine and sacd's are a waste. Yeah, that's gonna surprise me.