2. music
  3. 1041799657

Impressions of the Stones SACDs

I bought the Hot Rocks compilation just to dip my big toe in the remastered waters. I don't have an SACD player, so the purchase was based on good reviews of the Red Book sound.

So far, I'm far from sold on it. The recordings do sound open and detailed and crisp in ways that I haven't heard before, but overall they sound too bright and very, very hard. Songs like Honky Tonk woman have a thin and glaring vocal quality that makes me run for cover. The guitars are edgy too.

Has anyone else experienced this? I'm trying to tell if this is just weekness of my system right now (It can sound bright and hard with bad recordings, but is usually pretty good sounding with good recordings).

Paul
paulraphael

Showing 2 responses by ben_campbell

ben_campbell
1,169 posts
 
I have the London Years and Let It Bleed-clearly the production is different on the same songs.
I think there is a clear reason why-they've went back to the original tapes and the compilations were obviously produced different at the time (YCAGWYW is noticeably inferior on the single version on the London Years)-it states clearly in the notes they've tried to stick to the original mastering as closely as possible.
I think Let It Bleed is magnificient and The London Years is clearly a marked improvement on the original CD release.
I don't however notice a marked difference between the SACD/CD layer except to say I probably prefer the CD layer!
ben_campbell
1,169 posts
 
Paul read my post-the compilations were released at different times from the original albums and probably the mastering or mix were different(perhaps compressed for a more mainstream market?)-these new remasters will only show the differences that already existed-as they probably regarded the compilations as releases in their own right so they haven't changed the mix or mastering.........as I stated You Can't... is miles worse on the London years.
More to discover