Jump to content
JoshM

Article: The Best Version Of… Peter Gabriel’s So

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

Nice article.  You make mention of the 2002 SACD, but you never use it in your sq comparisons, only the (inferior, of course) redbook layer.  Why?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Great article.... I have never done the technical analysis as shown above but would definitely agree with the conclusion.  Most importantly it is a fantastic album...


Stereo Source: Auralic Aries + Mytek Brooklyn DAC+

Surround Source: Windows PC

Pre-amp: Mark Levinson ML380s, Anthem D2v

Speakers: ATC SCM50A (L/R/C), C4 (Sub), SCM20-2A (LR,RR)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting that So is regarded like this - to my ears this is far less interesting than album IV; the latter is a remarkable creative triumph, that still blows me away every time I listen to it; before and after albums have nowhere near the impact, for me.


Frank

 

http://artofaudioconjuring.blogspot.com/

 

 

Ahhh, Mankind ... Porsche intellect, Trabant emotions ...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 hours ago, ted_b said:

I often use Tony's stick and the percussion at the last minute of Don't Give Up to set up one of my comparisons.

 

Yep.


One never knows, do one? - Fats Waller

The fairest thing we can experience is the mysterious. It is the fundamental emotion which stands at the cradle of true art and true science. - Einstein

Computer, Audirvana -> microRendu -> USPCB -> ISO Regen (powered by LPS-1) -> Ghent JSSG360 USB cable -> Pro-Ject Pre Box S2 DAC ->

Spectral DMC-12 & DMA-150 -> Vandersteen 3A Signature.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 hours ago, barrows said:

perhaps petitioning PG via his FaceBook page for releasing the download to HDTracks or similar is a good idea?

 

Or similar - the thing I've found with HDTracks is that unlike pretty much every other download site I've ever dealt with, it's a tremendous hassle getting them to allow you to download your purchase again if something was wrong with it (including on their end) the first time.

 

PG's Real World label used to offer downloads (got some great stuff that way, including a terrific Blind Boys of Alabama Christmas album - they don't seem to be on the label now), but no more.


One never knows, do one? - Fats Waller

The fairest thing we can experience is the mysterious. It is the fundamental emotion which stands at the cradle of true art and true science. - Einstein

Computer, Audirvana -> microRendu -> USPCB -> ISO Regen (powered by LPS-1) -> Ghent JSSG360 USB cable -> Pro-Ject Pre Box S2 DAC ->

Spectral DMC-12 & DMA-150 -> Vandersteen 3A Signature.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, fas42 said:

Interesting that So is regarded like this - to my ears this is far less interesting than album IV; the latter is a remarkable creative triumph, that still blows me away every time I listen to it; before and after albums have nowhere near the impact, for me.

 

I like So a lot. But yes, I agree with you 100% - IV/Security is more interesting, more impactful, and just better all around in my book. Different strokes I guess.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/28/2019 at 10:38 PM, ted_b said:

I've seen PG 8 or so times, the first being the Lamb tour with Genesis back in Cleveland.  I think both his tours and his albums peaked at Melt, but that's like saying the Beatles peaked at Revolver.  :)  The remaining catalog is still a treasure.  I go back and forth between the 24/48 and the SACD rip (DSF).  I am interested to hear Josh's comments (or anyone else who has both).  I often use Tony's stick and the percussion at the last minute of Don't Give Up to set up one of my comparisons.  The dsf rip seems to have a blacker background, the 2448 a warmer tone.  Both are great IMHO, especially given that my Holo treats each format differently.

So do I the bass notes are gorgeous. I have both the SACD and the 24/48. 

When I did a ranking, I ranked the SACD first but will reassess with my system as is now


I❤️ HQP and convolution (REW + RePhase -- 384 Blackman -- designed filters ; correcting frequency and time domains is a must IMO and makes my comparatively cheap digital front end* sound much more "analog" than my vinyl setup) 

* minimum server Windows 2012R2 on mid 2012 15" rMacBP> (right usb port) 2.0 certified Supra > Green Regen >TEAC UD 501> (balanced output) >Cardas Golden Ref> JRRG all balanced pre> Cabasse system with clean deep LF extension via 36 cm active drivers, played live loud

 

 

 

Proofing B&K C @ -9 copie-Modifier-2.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/28/2019 at 11:39 AM, ted_b said:

Nice article.  You make mention of the 2002 SACD, but you never use it in your sq comparisons, only the (inferior, of course) redbook layer.  Why?

 

The 2002/2003 CDs and SACD share the same mastering. When I did my listening, though, I listened to the SACD layer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...