Pricey on cd japan, but just purchased Black and Blue and Its only Rock and Roll on SACD. I heard Fingerprint File sounds awesome so I purashed them. Any feedback would greatly be appreciated.

Fingerprint File sure sounds awesome, as does Time Waits For No One. The rest of the disc is a bit underwhelming, but that's probably just because the original recordings aren't all that great. I don't have the other two and I haven't seen any reviews of Black and Blue yet.

I heard that Fingerprint File is the original slower mix on the SACD.

It is. It actually sounds natural at this speed, unlike the weirdness that is the sped-up version.

Is it that the same version which is available on many bootlegs? It's about 40 seconds longer than the album version.

I haven't actually heard the bootleg version, but I don't think so. That version is a different mix, isn't it? This is the same mix, just running at a different speed.

If anyone can direct me to a link here for reviews of sacd discs, I would love to read the reviews. I got all the abkco ones when released in 2002, and I am really thinking of getting all the others.

[www.sa-cd.net]
[www.stevehoffman.tv]
[www.sa-cd.net]
[www.stevehoffman.tv]
[www.sa-cd.net]
[www.stevehoffman.tv]

Got Black And Blue. As far as I hear no differences in the tracks. (I mean regarding the version, not the sound quality.)



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2011-12-10 10:42 by midnrambler.

Thanks folks

I've been listening Memory Motel on SACD today.
I found some odd noise at the end of this song.

My general impression of them is:
Black and Blue > Exile > SF > GHS > Dirty Work > IORR > Emotional Rescue > Tatto You > Love You Live > Still Life

Anyway, I'm seeing each of them in a new light.
This's just great and a little early christmas present for Stones fans!

....what do they sound like in the dark ?...



ROCKMAN

Quote
Rockman
....what do they sound like in the dark ?...

I always turn off the light when I listen Helen Reddy All-Time Greatest Hits.

just ordered exile and sticky sacds

Quote
Bashlets
just ordered exile and sticky sacds

Ventilator Blues is a real surprise to me.
The sound is mighty blow compared to the previous version.

The last few days I've been listening to a HD copy of Sticky Fingers 2011 SACD that is floating around on the web. While it can't compare to the experience of listening it on a proper SACD player I was able to make my own idea about these releases.

First impression is the sound high quality and fidelity to the original recording. Every instrument is clearly audible with a special mention to the bass guitar. Hearing so clearly Bill Wyman's bass running on Sway while Charlie Watts is hammering his drums is a truly beautiful experience. Another highlight is Sister Morphine. Ry Cooder's slide guitar really shines now. And again Wyman's bass is astonishing. I doubt this album has ever benefited from such an excellent sound. This is how music should sound beca&use you can hear the interaction between instruments so well.

On the other side it's a "flat transfer" from the original master tapes. Which means songs have a very dry sound. I'm not sure if it's the best way to present this album. For example Bob Ludwig 1994 remaster is very colourful in comparison, and I wouldn't be surprised that many people prefer the remastered version over this "extremely audiophile" release.

Quote
kowalski
The last few days I've been listening to a HD copy of Sticky Fingers 2011 SACD that is floating around on the web.

Thought SACDs cannot be copied ???

Edit: I saw it was ripped with a sacd-ripper for PS3.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2011-12-15 17:26 by midnrambler.

I've got Let It Bleed on SACD

for this album SACD and HD are hands down a full ten yards better than all the other versions.

in future if i'm buying more stones back catalogue these are the only formats I'm interested in really

Quote
Captainchaos
I've got Let It Bleed on SACD

for this album SACD and HD are hands down a full ten yards better than all the other versions.

in future if i'm buying more stones back catalogue these are the only formats I'm interested in really

Let It Bleed on SACD is made from Bob Ludwig 2002 remaster. It's the same a the regular CD edition with higher definition.
This Sticky Fingers SACD is not a remaster. It's a new transfer. And the sound is very different from all the versions available on CD.

Quote
kowalski

Quote
Captainchaos
I've got Let It Bleed on SACD

for this album SACD and HD are hands down a full ten yards better than all the other versions.

in future if i'm buying more stones back catalogue these are the only formats I'm interested in really

Let It Bleed on SACD is made from Bob Ludwig 2002 remaster. It's the same a the regular CD edition with higher definition.
This Sticky Fingers SACD is not a remaster. It's a new transfer. And the sound is very different from all the versions available on CD.

no way, thats weird
i've got a cd version, SACD and also the HDtrack of this album and the SACD/HDtracks versions really pee all over my cd version
I'll have to dig out which version my CD is

it's never easy with the stones audio is it

Quote
Captainchaos
no way, thats weird

I think what Kowalsky meant is that the ABKCO CDs nowadays are regular CDs using the same DSD source as the 2002 hybrid SACDs - They sound much better thant the original Decca CDs sold in the 80s and 90s. Of course they do not sound as good as the SACD layer which has higher resolution.

There at least three different versions of Let It Bleed on CD. The first release on CD from the 80's, a second remaster from the 90's and a third remaster by Bob Ludwig released in 2002. Rolling Stones SACD's were made from Bob Ludwig remasters.

I vote for a petition sent to RS.COM for HD files audiophile 192/24 to be sold online (since I do not have anymore SACD player )

"we know it's a bit late but we hope you don't mind if we stay"

Here's a screen shot of Let It Bleed booklet available with the HDTracks version :




HDTracks files are from the same remasters as the 2002 reissues.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2011-12-15 18:19 by kowalski.

Quote
kowalski
There at least three different versions of Let It Bleed on CD. The first release on CD from the 80's, a second remaster from the 90's and a third remaster by Bob Ludwig released in 2002. Rolling Stones SACD's were made from Bob Ludwig remasters.

There was no remaster in the 1990s of Let it Bleed on CD. The 1986 ABKCO CD was the last CD issue before the 2002 remaster by Bob Ludwig. There was also a 1986 London CD, made in West Germany, which may have been the same mastering as the ABKCO, only for the european market.

Quote
tkl7

Quote
kowalski
There at least three different versions of Let It Bleed on CD. The first release on CD from the 80's, a second remaster from the 90's and a third remaster by Bob Ludwig released in 2002. Rolling Stones SACD's were made from Bob Ludwig remasters.

There was no remaster in the 1990s of Let it Bleed on CD. The 1986 ABKCO CD was the last CD issue before the 2002 remaster by Bob Ludwig. There was also a 1986 London CD, made in West Germany, which may have been the same mastering as the ABKCO, only for the european market.

My mistake. It's because in the 90's ABKCO catalog was reissued in Europe with the banner "digitally remastered". These were actually the same as the 1986 remasters which were only released in US before 1995.

The London CD's made in West Germany don't sound the same as the ABKCO CD's made for US market as they were made from different masters by Mobile Fidelity Sound Labs (MFSL) and their sound is excellent for most of them, particularly tracks in stereo.

To sum up there 3 different digital remasters :
-ABKCO remasters made in the 80's for US market (and distributed in Europe in the mid 90's)
-London remasters made in the 80's for Europe market
-ABKCO remasters made in 2002 for worlwide release



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2011-12-15 23:19 by kowalski.

Quote
kowalski
My mistake. It's because in the 90's ABKCO catalog was reissued in Europe with the banner "digitally remastered". These were actually the same as the 1986 remasters which were only released in US before 1995.

The London CD's made in West Germany don't sound the same as the ABKCO CD's made for US market as they were made from different masters by Mobile Fidelity Sound Labs (MFSL) and their sound is excellent for most of them, particularly tracks in stereo.

True that. I purchased all the West German releases back then; and thought they were great. Then I decided to pick up some of those "digitally remastered" releases in the 90s; just to compare. And the difference was amazing. Never played those "digitally remastered" CDs of mine more than ONCE. .....because they sound so dreadful compared to the West German releases. It was a complete scam. Wonder why people actually bought those poor products? Didn't they listen to what they've bought ?

Quote
Erik_Snow
Wonder why people actually bought those poor products? Didn't they listen to what they've bought ?

Most likely because it was written "digitally remastered" on it. Maybe people were hoping to have the same sound quality as the post '71 catalog that was remastered and released in 1994...

Quote
kowalski

Quote
tkl7

Quote
kowalski
There at least three different versions of Let It Bleed on CD. The first release on CD from the 80's, a second remaster from the 90's and a third remaster by Bob Ludwig released in 2002. Rolling Stones SACD's were made from Bob Ludwig remasters.

There was no remaster in the 1990s of Let it Bleed on CD. The 1986 ABKCO CD was the last CD issue before the 2002 remaster by Bob Ludwig. There was also a 1986 London CD, made in West Germany, which may have been the same mastering as the ABKCO, only for the european market.

My mistake. It's because in the 90's ABKCO catalog was reissued in Europe with the banner "digitally remastered". These were actually the same as the 1986 remasters which were only released in US before 1995.

The London CD's made in West Germany don't sound the same as the ABKCO CD's made for US market as they were made from different masters by Mobile Fidelity Sound Labs (MFSL) and their sound is excellent for most of them, particularly tracks in stereo.

To sum up there 3 different digital remasters :
-ABKCO remasters made in the 80's for US market (and distributed in Europe in the mid 90's)
-London remasters made in the 80's for Europe market
-ABKCO remasters made in 2002 for worlwide release

The Mobile Fidelity masterings aren't on all of those West German (Some also pressed in France and Japan) CDs, though. The earliest Hot Rocks 1 & 2, Beggars Banquet, Aftermath and Between the Buttons are, but I am not sure if the London Let it Bleed is distinguishable from the ABKCO. Later pressings of the London CDs have the ABKCO mastering. I do think the 2002 SACD hybrid smokes the West German Let it Bleed head to head, both SACD and redbook layer.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2011-12-16 19:01 by tkl7.

Also, on topic, I greatly prefer the Japan SHM-SACDs to the Virgin/CBS/Universals. Especially IORR, GHS and Sticky Fingers. Black & Blue also sounds great. Tattoo You, Emotional Rescue and Dirty Work are also improvements, but are such clean recordings anyway, it's not as much of an improvement, considering the money, plus TY has the shorter Slave.

on IORR, Fingerprint File is normal speed, for the first time, and sounds great. TWFNO is also a bit longer, but just on the percussion at the end.