add to wish list | library

28 of 28 recommend this,
would you recommend it?

yes | no

Support this site by purchasing from these vendors using the links provided below. As an Amazon Associate earns from qualifying purchases.

Discussion: Deep Purple: Machine Head

Posts: 9

Post by MattMan657 July 19, 2011 (1 of 9)
I was wondering if anyone knew if this new 5.1 mix was derived from the original quad mix found on the 2003 hybrid and who mastered it? I've been trying to find one of the 2003 hybrids to add to the collection but obviously haven't had much luck.

Post by Fugue July 19, 2011 (2 of 9)
Sorry, I can't answer your question. However, I do hope they have remixed it from the 2003 version! I hate the imaging, especially with Ritchie Blackmore's guitar coming out of the left rear should come out of the right front speaker to properly mimic their stage set-up. Maybe that wasn't their goal, but it's still obnoxious to me!

Post by MattMan657 July 22, 2011 (3 of 9)
Interesting, I'd love to be able to hear the original quad mix. I missed out on a copy of it on ebay. I want to get the 5.1 and 2003 SACD to compare the differences.

Post by azure July 23, 2011 (4 of 9)
The album was recorded on 16-track as far as I can recall, so there is quite a lot of material to go round, and in this period the availability of 16 tracks on two-inch tape means that there is plenty of density without the significant audio degradation that followed the introduction of 24-track, two-inch machines a few years later. There is decent quality there, even without modern noise reduction technology. Paul Klingberg at Magna Vision in Santa Monica does an excellent job on the surround mix, really catching the sound of the time, adding a number of suitable effects like panning instruments around the room that are entirely appropriate for this material.

Paul Klingberg would have had to go back to the original session tapes to make a new mix.

Post by Varanus July 23, 2011 (5 of 9)
These titles that Warners japan is releasing in mutli channel were all originally released as dvd-audio. I do believe they are using the same mixes for the sacd. The DVD-audio was moxed for dvd-audio and is a different mix than the sacd. So unless they have remixed it again for the sacd i would say it will be the same mix as on the dvd-audio. The dvd-audio and the sacd have completely different mixes. Most seem to prefer the original sacd multi channel mix to the dvd-audio as far as surround mix goes on this particular album.

Post by arnaoutchot July 26, 2011 (6 of 9)
Yes, confirmed. I have both the old SACD and the DVD-Audio and I do prefer the original quadro-mix of the SACD. This does not mean that the DVD-A sounds bad, only different.

Post by wolf359 July 26, 2011 (7 of 9)
arnaoutchot said:

Yes, confirmed. I have both the old SACD and the DVD-Audio and I do prefer the original quadro-mix of the SACD. This does not mean that the DVD-A sounds bad, only different.

I was lucky enough to hear the orginal SQ disc and remember the amount of crosstalk between the channels whether this was intentional or not I am not sure. When the DVD-A came out I remember that it was different somehow, not realising that it was 5.1 Much prefer the then current SACD version, to me it seemed cleaner and closer to orginal mix now I know why, Has anybody got the Machine Head 25th Anniversery edition CD(the one with the bonus quad tracks) and played them through some form of Matrix decoder? what do they sound like I wonder ?

Post by MattMan657 September 19, 2011 (8 of 9)
Has anyone heard the new 5.1 hybrid? I want to find the original quad so badly but if the new 5.1 is better than I'd just opt for that. I don't care that the quad would be pricey, I'd rather have the better release as I have zero plans of getting rid of any SACD I buy.

Post by sonnysin168 September 20, 2011 (9 of 9)
I have the new Japan sacd. The multichannel is great. Spacious, detailed and mids have warmth which I find not common in rock releases. Plus it has fat bass. I wasn't able to buy the previous versions (sacd or dvda) so I can't really compare.

On the stereo side, it handily betters the AF gold version (which I have) because it is wider, has bigger bass and warmer.