Archie Shepp – Attica Blues

6 Oct

Archie Shepp - Attica Blues DS523s frontAllmusic

Release: DS523s

Source: QS CD

Process: ‘Sphinx’



15 Responses to “Archie Shepp – Attica Blues”

  1. moonstarstudios April 29, 2017 at 01:01 #

    I’m really enjoying this one a lot. I’m glad you’ve offered this. Thanks for the great work on this seldom mentioned album!

  2. atq April 11, 2016 at 10:09 #

    Music is slightly avant garde, but basically mellow, bluesy jazz. It’s true that the child song at the end is ‘difficult’.

    I found it near impossible to get any sensible surround sound. All sound was mainly coming from the rear right until I turned that speaker down by its max amount and the fronts up by their max amount in order to get some separation. Then I could get stereo from the fronts with one sound from centre rear. But mainly it was just stereo from the front.

    If anybody can give me examples of rear speaker action to look out for – i.e. “check out the sax solo in track 3, it’s coming from rear left” – I’ll give it another go.

    • oxforddickie April 11, 2016 at 20:42 #

      Your comment regarding your inabiliaty to get any sensible surround sound from this release did worry me, so i’ve had to give this a listen again.

      Unfortunately i can’t reproduce what you’ve heard. It certainly isn’t a ‘Four to the wall’ style mix, it follows pretty much what this label puts out, although i’ve yet to hear if ‘Chimera’ is capable of cleaning it up any.

      Track 3 has the percussion mix around ‘the square’ so you should get some form of surround effect. As to why you need to alter the balance so heavily i’m afraid i’m at something of a loss to explain why.

      Anyone else had issues with this title? Must dig it out for a reissue.

      • atq April 12, 2016 at 09:46 #

        OD, please do not worry, it must be me. I can see that Owen says that track 1 has a great quad mix, and I am sure that if you hear quad, it must be there. My set up is not ideal – I sit between the two rear speakers (i.e. in centre rear position), rather than in the centre of the square, so I find that I often have to adjust the rear vs front levels, but never anywhere near this much.

        I will listen again to track 3 and report back.

        At the moment, I’d say don’t worry about a reissue, I’m sure there are others that are a higher priority.

        • oxforddickie April 12, 2016 at 09:51 #

          Thanks for explaining a little about your listening set-up. As to reissues, it’s true there are many others needed to be done but now i’ve taken the chance to relisten to it, i,m hoping “Chimera” would clean it up bit.

          • atq April 12, 2016 at 13:50 #

            I’ve re-tested:
            Re-calibrated speakers using the auto setup with microphone.
            Checked setup using manual calibration – altered nothing.
            Played track 3 again – basically sounded like mono coming from SR with a bit of ambience in other speakers.
            Adjusted volumes so that fronts increased a lot and SR reduced a lot – Got stereo front and phantom centre rear.

            Then the interesting bit: I took disc from my DVDA player and put in my BluRay. Played the DTS stream. Could instantly tell there was more going on. I still adjusted the fronts up a bit and RS down a bit, but nowhere near as much, and then I got some proper surround: FL – Strings FR – Clarinet(?) SL – Rhodes piano (?) SR – Vox + drums. So the difference was very noticeable compared to the MLP stream via the DVDA player.

            Now, I always play your discs on my DVDA player, so I’m happy that they normally work together, but for some reason this disc does seem ‘incompatible’ with my player.

            From the DTS stream played on my BD, I found the sound a bit muddy and the placing rather indefinite – but I assume that’s a QS problem. (It’s not a DTS problem, I’m normally very happy with DTS.) I know, for example, that your decode of Don Sebesky’s Giant Box has great separation and sound quality, but it’s from an SQ CD, so that’s what makes me think that the QS source is the reason for a lacklustre quad experience.

            Even if this was a perfect quad mix, it wouldn’t be in my top 10, so please don’t worry about a new decode on my account. But if you do make one, I will retry.

            • oxforddickie April 12, 2016 at 14:21 #

              Luckily you found me working in the “studio” so i’m able to do quick MLP/DTS comparisons. I’ve been using very high quality sample conversion and DTS encoding programs which has led to the DTS stream sounding very close to the MLP. I have to use DTS in my living room as it’s the only HQ format than can be streamed easily, and i’ve never had any issues.

              This problem your having sounds as though it’s possily a lot deeper than the decode. As i’ve found out, not all DTS decoders give the same performance. I use my amps decoder instead of my players built in one as it sounds noticably better. The fact you need to drastically alter the speaker levels does, to me at least, point to an issue in the hardware, but where is impossible to say.

              Anyone have any ideas?

              • atq April 12, 2016 at 14:31 #

                To clarify:
                I think the DTS stream is working fine, I suspect any imperfections I hear are due to the non-discrete QS source or even the mix.
                The MLP stream sounds bad to me, it’s probably a hardware issue. However, all other of your MLP streams work fine for me on the same setup.

                In an ideal world, it would be useful/ interesting to know why this is, but I think your time is better devoted to digging out more quaddy goodness elsewhere 🙂

  3. Owen Smith November 7, 2015 at 16:55 #

    Very eclectic. I liked some tracks a lot eg. the funky first track with a great quad mix. Other tracks were poor, I didn’t like the ones with him talking. And the last track with some child singing out of tune is just dreadful.

  4. bigheadrascal October 8, 2015 at 00:35 #

    My first impressions leaned toward “muddy mix”. Further on it seemed I was at a film or a play, but blindfolded. Perhaps what I thought “muddy” was intended to make me feel like I was in a small-ish space as this performance took place. Sphinx shows that, though SQ may be the champ, QS is no slouch, either.

  5. Glen S. Fleetwood October 6, 2015 at 23:19 #

    Why Spinx? No Phoenix? And how did you find another sq CD?

    • oxforddickie October 7, 2015 at 00:20 #

      Issued on Impulse, part of the ABC group and released in QS

  6. joeerand October 6, 2015 at 21:15 #

    Nice. I’m looking forward to hearing this passionate music in quad!

  7. Beechwoods (@Beechwoods_) October 6, 2015 at 18:11 #

    Sounds excellent, judging by the samples. Looking forward to this one. Thank you.

Leave a Reply

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

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

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ 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 )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: