Alice Cooper's “Muscle of Love” On 4.0 Quad SACD

[pitkin88]

One difference is that on the song MOL after the first:
Holy muscle of love
Yeah, I got a muscle of love
Yeah
Ooh

On the original you can just about hear Alice say "the birds and the bees". On the Quad it's clearer.
http://sickthingsuk.co.uk/molclip.mp3

Not the biggest difference I agree but it's the one Renfield used to point to (with thanks to Hunters list archive where I finally found what I was looking for )

I think I posted someones view on the differences but god knows what thread it's in. Just checked my word files but not there. Maybe Crayon might have it.

[Toronto Bob]

The instrumental break on MWTGG is noticeably different mix where you can here a keyboard (almost theremin sounding) part. Background vocals on WM and MoL are a bit more pronounced where you can hear the bg voc sing "hallelujah". I find the banjo in CLC more prominent and there's some lead guitar work on WM that is buried on the stereo mix. Vocals are more out front in general too. I don't recall any lyric changes but I don't have the greatest memory

[Si]

The instrumental break on MWTGG is noticeably different mix where you can here a keyboard (almost theremin sounding) part. Background vocals on WM and MoL are a bit more pronounced where you can hear the bg voc sing "hallelujah". I find the banjo in CLC more prominent and there's some lead guitar work on WM that is buried on the stereo mix. Vocals are more out front in general too. I don't recall any lyric changes but I don't have the greatest memory

So I think what we are saying, correct me if I'm wrong, is that the Quad version is the same actual performances (unlike B$B) but a difference mix to the standard album. A mix which accentuates some instruments/vocals more then in stereo.
I think I can go along with this. I'm not any sort of audio expert but from listing to it last night [taken from Quad Reel To Reel mixed down to stereo] it did seem "clearer" and "sharper" in some ways and there were things that I didn`t recall from endless listens over the years to the normal version (Metal Blade CD mainly).

[Toronto Bob]

Yeah that's it. The original stereo version we're all more familiar with, has back ground vocals all layered on top of each other, with the Quad it seems that things are seperated more, the staging is different so you can hear the separate tracks not so buried. Just like the "birds and the bees" line from Alice. It is there on the stereo version but buried so it's barely audible, but with the quad version it's clearly there. So not really extra material like B$B but more of an unpacking of MoL so small elements are more discernible.

This actually has lead me to listen to the old quad version a lot more closely than I ever have and I really like what they did.

[Toronto Bob]

posted on the SH forum by someone named pdenny


It's the original quad mix, I assure you. I've had a DVD-A conversion of the quad reel for years and know it intimately.



he know not what he talk about

[Si]

posted on the SH forum by someone named pdenny


It's the original quad mix, I assure you. I've had a DVD-A conversion of the quad reel for years and know it intimately.



he know not what he talk about

Interesting I have the same "DVD-A quad reel conversion" haha.

In the interests of finding out the I have atually bought a copy of AF disc. Haven`t actually put it on yet but I'll take a look and see what I can see.
To be honest, not being an audiophile, I'm guessing it won`t sound exactly like either old mix but maybe I can find a way of comparing the channel seperation. I would guess that would be the best way? ie if everything is seperated into the same channels that should confirm/refute it.

[Toronto Bob]

I find Muscle of Love and TMWTGG the easiest to discern. The stereo version has tightly packed background vocals on MoL and the barely audible "Birds and the Bees" line. The Quad version you can easily hear "Birds and the Bees" and the background vocals are more seperated and you can clearly hear them singing "hallelujah". TMWTGG instrumental breal is different and you'll easily tell the difference from the regular stereo version we're all more familiar with.

It's another missed opportunity as the Metal Blade version was fine and this one doesn't sound much better than that one. However I think all of us would prefer a pristine version of the old quad mix. We almost have one of the BDB DVD-A disc where they used some of the quad versions (HH, Raped & Freezin', ILTD) or unique hybrids (Elected) and even gave us a unique clean ending of Sick Things with no cross fade into Mary Ann while still using the stereo versions for both tracks. That BDB DVD-A needs a full analysis there's a few differences that are unique to the DVD-A.

[Si]

I find Muscle of Love and TMWTGG the easiest to discern. The stereo version has tightly packed background vocals on MoL and the barely audible "Birds and the Bees" line. The Quad version you can easily hear "Birds and the Bees" and the background vocals are more seperated and you can clearly hear them singing "hallelujah". TMWTGG instrumental breal is different and you'll easily tell the difference from the regular stereo version we're all more familiar with.

It's another missed opportunity as the Metal Blade version was fine and this one doesn't sound much better than that one. However I think all of us would prefer a pristine version of the old quad mix. We almost have one of the BDB DVD-A disc where they used some of the quad versions (HH, Raped & Freezin', ILTD) or unique hybrids (Elected) and even gave us a unique clean ending of Sick Things with no cross fade into Mary Ann while still using the stereo versions for both tracks. That BDB DVD-A needs a full analysis there's a few differences that are unique to the DVD-A.

From my recollection the DVD-A is a distinct different mix to any other. It has vocal and instrumental takes that are definitly not the same as either Stereo OR the Quad versions. I believe, again trying to remember from years ago, that Ezrin created the 5.1 from the original tapes and did a new mix from all the available material, not just the specific takes original used on the album.

[Toronto Bob]

From my recollection the DVD-A is a distinct different mix to any other. It has vocal and instrumental takes that are definitly not the same as either Stereo OR the Quad versions. I believe, again trying to remember from years ago, that Ezrin created the 5.1 from the original tapes and did a new mix from all the available material, not just the specific takes original used on the album.

Yeah, I would go along with that. In some cases the vocal track was taken from the quad but the instrumentation was from the stereo version - all in a 5.1 mix of course. I think of the dvd-a of BDB and WTMN as essential discs for the average AC completist.

[pdenny]

posted on the SH forum by someone named pdenny


It's the original quad mix, I assure you. I've had a DVD-A conversion of the quad reel for years and know it intimately.



he know not what he talk about

Not to be contentious with my very first first post on SickThings, but "yes he do" Unless of course the quad reel was a distinctly different mix from the quad LP (which admittedly I have never heard, but I find that scenario highly unlikely). When AF released their SACD late last year I cozied up with my headphones and listened to the front channels by themselves and then the rears same way; I then compared it to the quad reel conversion I've had for many years using the same clearly obsessive method. Dang if I heard any differences between the two mix-wise. Frankly I find the conversion more dynamic-sounding but that's a separate discussion. If anyone wants to pick up the gauntlet and cite specific examples of where the AF differs from the original MOL quad mix, I'd love to hear about it. Like I said, nothing obvious jumps out to me at all. It's not an upmix from the Metal Blade or any other CD source; very discrete, and as I said IMO matches the reel conversion I have. As far as AF going to the bother of remixing the quad elements, all I can say is they can't afford a capable proofreader for their printed materials let alone pay Hoffman or anyone else to go to such trouble

MOL always been a special record to me--I bought the LP the day it was released. Brought joy and giggles to this 13-year-old boy's heart --over 40+ years I've never tired of it. And it was the best being able to see the original band twice as a jerky teenager back in the day!

Glad to be here and hope to contribute where useful.

[mestreech]

posted on the SH forum by someone named pdenny


It's the original quad mix, I assure you. I've had a DVD-A conversion of the quad reel for years and know it intimately.



he know not what he talk about

Not to be contentious with my very first first post on SickThings, but "yes he do" Unless of course the quad reel was a distinctly different mix from the quad LP (which admittedly I have never heard, but I find that scenario highly unlikely). When AF released their SACD late last year I cozied up with my headphones and listened to the front channels by themselves and then the rears same way; I then compared it to the quad reel conversion I've had for many years using the same clearly obsessive method. Dang if I heard any differences between the two mix-wise. Frankly I find the conversion more dynamic-sounding but that's a separate discussion. If anyone wants to pick up the gauntlet and cite specific examples of where the AF differs from the original MOL quad mix, I'd love to hear about it. Like I said, nothing obvious jumps out to me at all. It's not an upmix from the Metal Blade or any other CD source; very discrete, and as I said IMO matches the reel conversion I have. As far as AF going to the bother of remixing the quad elements, all I can say is they can't afford a capable proofreader for their printed materials let alone pay Hoffman or anyone else to go to such trouble

MOL always been a special record to me--I bought the LP the day it was released. Brought joy and giggles to this 13-year-old boy's heart --over 40+ years I've never tired of it. And it was the best being able to see the original band twice as a jerky teenager back in the day!

Glad to be here and hope to contribute where useful.

thanks mate