Rick Wakeman & The Six Wives Of Henry VIII

3 Sep

Am sitting here listening to Rick Wakeman’s album ‘Six Wives Of Henry VIII’  (quad version of course) and i got to wondering just how many members actually bought the recent ‘Deluxe Edition’ put out by Universal earlier this year.

 

Advertisements

25 Responses to “Rick Wakeman & The Six Wives Of Henry VIII”

  1. oxforddickie September 22, 2015 at 22:48 #

    Many thanks to those that replied to this. This topic is now closed.

  2. Derek Gally September 7, 2015 at 15:15 #

    Bought it.Like it.Always enjoyed the SQ quad album.

    All negatives don’t bother me regarding this issue.

    I have worse in my collection.I always find I’m my own best or worst critic when I get to review something first hand.I’ve read many a negative review on surround recordings only to find the disc was reviewed by someone who probably did not appreciate the genre or the surround presentations.

    I guess I’m someone who looks at a glass as half full rather than half empty.

  3. K Douglas September 4, 2015 at 17:41 #

    I am normally gung ho about supporting any surround release, but I read in advance that these were sourced from you, and since I don’t need the other deluxe features I gave this one a miss. Am glad to now read that theirs is worse than yours due to their intervention, so that my decision is reinforced.

  4. sullis02 September 4, 2015 at 17:16 #

    I bought it. I wasn’t thrilled with it on first hearing, and having heard snippets of the Q8 and CD4 since then, I’m even less thrilled now.

  5. rockysquirrel September 4, 2015 at 07:39 #

    Did’t buy it. Your version is as good as it could get. Bought Arthur, though.

  6. joeerand September 4, 2015 at 07:01 #

    I bought them both. I buy most of the commercially available quad releases, but these didn’t impress me too much. I liked Henry VIII better than King Arthur.

  7. Highlander September 4, 2015 at 05:16 #

    I was planning on it. But then after seeing AoQ’s video, I decided that the CD-4 would be the one to have….if it’s out there. However, I still may buy the release for the 24-96k stereo aspect. 🙂

    • oxforddickie September 4, 2015 at 06:21 #

      The 24/96 copy of the stereo master-tape is ok, compressed but ok.

      • kilg0retr0ut September 5, 2015 at 06:37 #

        That’s the very reason I didn’t buy it: dynamic compression. I’m very sensitive to that and have to turn it off after ten minutes because my ears feel claustrophobic. Dynamic compression is fine as long as the music isn’t too dynamic to start with, but with these sort of recordings it’s too damaging to the music. As a file based user I ReplayGain all my files anyway, so gone is the loudness, but it can’t unfortunately put the dynamic range back to it. Why do they do that by the way? To sound louder than the rest when aired or played on a jukebox? As if it were the kind of music played ten times a day on radio these days.

    • Owen Smith September 4, 2015 at 21:32 #

      The CD-4 is a Japanese only release and is rather rare I believe.

  8. sacdtodvda September 4, 2015 at 02:59 #

    I chose not to purchase these after reading reviews on Amazon and the chatter on the forum-that-shall-not-be-named (although the chatter was not entirely accurate the underlying gist was on the right track).

    I understand there is a general principle of supporting surround releases to encourage more in the future, but when the relatively expensive record company version is the exactly same – or not as good as – what’s available through unofficial networks, then I’ll save my money.

    I appreciate that the original masters may not be available any more, but there have been some exceptionally poor choices made by the record companies about the sources they have used – the prime example was the official release of Paranoid sourced form a poor condition CD-4 when there was a Q4 that could have been used.

    It is a sad indictment that amateur hobbyists can produce better results than recording conglomerates with the technology resources they have at their disposal.

    This issue is not confined to quad – there have been some appalling official releases in the stereo world as well. EMI NZ, I’m looking at you for that awful re-issues of the La-De-Das’ The Little Prince.

    • sacdtodvda September 4, 2015 at 03:11 #

      I meant to add: the continued persistence by the record company that a master tape had indeed been used in the face of contrary evidence was ludicrous in the extreme.

      • oxforddickie September 4, 2015 at 06:19 #

        It would appear that the person (who will not be named due to his status in the music business) who did the mastering, etc is the one who claims that the master tape was used, Universal (as far as i know) have said nothing.

        • sullis02 September 4, 2015 at 17:20 #

          Abbey Road is the entity claiming that the master tapes were used.

          • oxforddickie September 4, 2015 at 19:36 #

            Doesn’t say a lot for them, does it

            • sullis02 September 4, 2015 at 20:21 #

              No indeed. They seem really lost in the weeds on this one.

    • Owen Smith September 4, 2015 at 21:30 #

      I am a huge Queen fan. The album CDs have been re-mastered and re-issued several times and yet the best sounding remain the original EMI UK CDs which were a direct transfer of the vinyl masters. Every subsequent re-release has reduced the dynamic range, and the 2011 40th anniversary remasters are among the worst (though they cleaned up the Queen II cover artwork beautifully).

      Record companies generally have no clue what they are doing in my experience. Artists that release their stuff directly to the public are doing the right thing in my view, they retain total control.

      At least Queen own their own back catalogue and can do what they like with it, unlike many bands who got screwed on that frong as well.

  9. zaphod2359 September 4, 2015 at 01:56 #

    It’s on my wish list. Did the degrade your decode very much?

    • oxforddickie September 4, 2015 at 06:13 #

      Let’s say that i sent them a god decode (unfortunately not ‘Phoenix’) and they muddied it and compressed it beyond recognition. I’ve not spoken about it as i’ve not wanted to affect sales in any way, but i felt it was time to say something.

    • Owen Smith September 4, 2015 at 21:22 #

      OD is correct, the decode was hammered by “loudness wars”. As if sounding louder on the radio is of any relevance to quad!

  10. Paul Haze September 4, 2015 at 00:13 #

    Bought them both ages ago but haven’t had time to take the shrinkwrap off them yet.

    • oxforddickie September 4, 2015 at 00:14 #

      Wow!

      • Paul Haze September 4, 2015 at 13:21 #

        Just not enough hours in the day. Thank heavens I don’t sleep otherwise I’d never get anything done 😉

  11. cheezmo September 3, 2015 at 23:54 #

    I did.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: