Got these second hand - $40 incl. postage.
To the Bone, in particular, has spectacular sound quality.
3 Likes
I’ve gone down a bit of a rabbit hole thanks to AI. I was researching the sound quality of The Alan Parsons Project’s Pyramid, which is due to arrive this week on the Bluray audio format. It transpires that some of Parsons Bluray audios have different dynamic ranges according to which audio mix you play, with the 5.1 and Atmos layers having better dynamics. So indeed, listening to some of these, the difference is quite noticeable. The folded down” DTS layer” over optical on “Ammonia Avenue” is actually better than the hi-res PCM layer through the HDMI de-embedder, even though the optical playback is limited to 48kHz. Crazy stuff.
This is even more obvious on my Marillion Bluray of “An Hour Before It’s Dark”. The hi-res PCM has a woeful DR of 7 or even 6, whereas the 5.1 layer has a remarkable unlimited DR of 13 to 14! Researching this, and indeed, the mastering of the hi-res format of this album is highly compressed!
Apparently the Atmos layer of DSoTM beats the PCM layer of the 50th anniversary as well, but I’ve yet to check that.
Something to watch out (listen out) for…..
3 Likes
I used to be heavily into Blueray concerts Mike. I had a 7.2 surround home theatre with Dynaudio speakers, JL Audio Fathom 112’s (2) and a Cary Audio Cinema 12 Pre/Processor. Look up the Cinema 12, it had a bunch of preouts,HDMI inputs etc.
I always looked for DTS Master Audio, which to me blew the rest of the formats out of the water.
Some discs I own have 7.1 DTS mixes, others 5.1, but by far these were the best sounding.
2 Likes
If you look at the history of music concerts and videos on DVD since the late 90’s and Blu-rays since 2006, I too have prefered originally DTS 5.1 over Dolby 5.1 on DVDs and then DTS Master Audio over Dolby TrueHD on Blu-rays on my 5.1 surround sound system.
However, I much prefer the stereo tracks over 5.1 on my system, so Mike’s post that newer Blu-rays maybe prioritising ATMOS/5.1 sound quality over stereo is very concerning.
Very difficult to compare sound quality of 5.1 against stereo as the sound presentations are so different, but, I rarely play music in 5.1 so have had no need to check it against stereo.
I don’t have the Alan Parsons or Marillion discs Mike is refering too so can’t check, but I do have DSOTM 50th Anniversary and it sounds excellent in Hi-Res stereo on my system, but I will check the 5.1 track to test it out (dont have an ATMOS speaker system so cant check that).
I would not think the record companies would compromise the Hi-Res stereo tracks on recently released Blu-ray discs, but you never know, if their main purpose is to sell ATMOS and thus make it more appealling / sound better than stereo, in which case I will be a very unhappy customer, because Im buying the discs for the Hi-Res stereo, which was the original point of Pure Audio Blu-ray discs back in 2012 when they first started to release them.
2 Likes
Just to clarify, this is very recording specific. My Steven Wilson and The Pineapple Thief Blurays have pure un-compressed PCM audio tracks. I’ve only researched the few audio Blurays that I have and it seems that in my collection the Parson’s one have some minor volume limiting/compression on the PCM layers that aren’t on the surround layers. The real outlier is the Marillion one, which never sounded great on PCM, but is really good on the 5.1 layer down mixed to stereo on the Panasonic DP UB9000 and sent by optical to my ND555.
If you google “compare the DR ratings and mix differences between the stereo and surround sound mixes on the Marillion’s “An Hour Before Its Dark” audio Blurray” and you get this story:
On the Blu-ray audio disc of Marillion’s An Hour Before It’s Dark, the dynamic contrast varies significantly between the two primary mixes.
Dynamic Range (DR) Ratings
** Hi-Res PCM Stereo Layer: The dedicated two-channel stereo mix has a compressed presentation. It registers an average DR rating of DR7 to DR8, with a few individual tracks dropping as low as DR6 during highly congested, dense musical climaxes.*
** 5.1 Surround Sound Mix (DTS-HD Master Audio): The multichannel mix provides a significantly more open and dynamic experience. Audiophile measurements of the decoded 5.1 streams generally reveal a much healthier average DR rating of DR11 to DR13, with some expansive passages peaking even higher.*
Why the Ratings Differ
The stark difference between these numbers comes down to mastering choices and how each mix handles the dense production style of Michael Hunter:
** Stereo Peak Limiting: The stereo layer suffers from standard modern brickwall limiting. When the heavy bass, multi-tracked keyboards, and layers of guitars hit at the same time, the stereo field runs out of headroom. This causes vocal clarity to drop and creates a subtle acoustic congestion.*
** Multichannel Headroom: The 5.1 surround mix distributes these instruments across six separate channels instead of forcing them into two. By separating the center-anchored vocals from the rear-channel ambient keyboards and choir textures, the individual elements have room to breathe. The mastering engineers did not need to apply aggressive peak limiting to the multichannel track, preserving the natural impact of Ian Mosley’s drums and Pete Trewavas’s bass lines.*
If you are trying to bypass the compressed nature of the stereo layer on your two-channel system, playing the 5.1 mix downmixed to stereo over a clean digital path (like an optical connection) often yields a less congested, more lifelike performance than the native stereo track.
I think that is really bad for a Bluray release and is hopefully an outlier. Apparently it was mastered for popular mid-fi playback!
3 Likes
Don’t forget in the early days of DVD, Dolby Digital only had 448Kbps of bandwidth, there was a ‘trick’ that not all players supported that allowed 640Kbps (significant because it didn’t mess around so much with the sound as 448) and was used on the original Pink Floyd Pulse release, but DTS was preferred as it has a whopping 1.5Mbps, and could do 24/96 (lossy). Queen used the latter on their DVD releases.
In terms of the stereo mix, I suspect it all comes down to whether they did anything unique for the disc or simply dumped the nearest one to hand on it. I suspect many will be the latter sadly, much like a lot of the hi-res downloads out there. Very little information on which master was used or if they created a new one for the release.
2 Likes
Really Blueray was meant for surround sound videos originally. Two channel was kind of thrown in there as an afterthought if you ask me.
I was all in back in the early 2000’s, I just loved watching live concerts on my 60 inch rear projection TV, that also sounded like you were there. Regular movies were pretty cool too.
I love the scene from Reservoir Dogs when they leave the restaurant…CRANKED!
3 Likes
The coaxial and optical digital ouputs of my Panasonic UB9000 Blu-ray Player are disabled when you plug an HDMI cable into the HDMI-Audio connection, so I cant easliy do a back to back check of Hi-Res Stereo output on HDMI vs a 5.1 downfolded stereo output on coaxial or optical. The only way to do it is pull my AV rack out and keep disconnecting and reconnecting the HDMI-Audio connection whilst I have optical or coaxial outputs also connected and I cant be bothered to do all that just for a test/check, as the 24/192 Hi-Res stereo track of the DSOTM 50th Anniversary disc, is just so good and I doubt it will be improved upon by a folded down stereo track ( from the 5.1) at only 16/48.
Also interesting to note that my Panasonic UB820 in my Study System has to be set up in the menu for either HDMI-Audio output or RCA Analogue Output with Digital Optical Output, so again the HDMI-Audio disables the optical digital output, so I cant do a comparision test on that system either without a load of hassle of pulling that AV rack out and connecting in an optical cable, far too much trouble for probably no benefit.
1 Like
I’m all over the place with this rabbit hole 
With a few listens, the hi-res PCM layer of Pyramid won for me. I used “In the Lap of the Gods” as the test track. The down-mix of the 5.1 PCM layer over optical has a wider and more open soundstage in the orchestral and choir sections, but the hi-res PCM over HDMI has more weight and scale and wins overall for me.
On the 50th anniversary of the Dark Side, I’ve just compared the 192Hz hi-res and DTS 96Hz stereo layer and the PCM wins. Sounds amaze balls really. Interestingly, I earlier said I prefer the SACD, but have since learnt that it is a different mastering and the Bluray version is fantastic.
Anyway, the Marillion is way better on the folded-down surround layer thanks to the woeful compression of the hi-res PCM layer, which is just a weird mastering decision.
Okay, everyone, as you were.
3 Likes
Hi Mike, its good that you were observant enough to pick up the sound differences and investigate what was going on.
As has been said, many times before, the mastering on a particular release has so much influence on the ultimate sound quality you hear.
Appreciate you sharing it with the forum, its certainly something to look out for in the future.
3 Likes