Dark Side of the Moon SACD?

Want to review the latest CD reissue? Or a 30 year old LP you just picked up? Discuss it all here.
Alandovos
Posts: 6
Joined: Fri Apr 04, 2003 10:34 am

Dark Side of the Moon SACD?

Postby Alandovos » Fri Apr 04, 2003 10:37 am

Well Luke you're the only one I know with a SACD player, I'd like to see your review vs. the ones I've seen with the freaky fans who are camped outside of David Gilmour's house.

User avatar
lukpac
Top Dog and Sellout
Posts: 4591
Joined: Wed Apr 02, 2003 11:51 pm
Location: Madison, WI
Contact:

Postby lukpac » Fri Apr 04, 2003 11:35 am

I've contemplated picking it up, but the fact of the matter is I just don't like that album all that much. It's kind of like "I never listen to the copy I've got, why should I go buy another?"

I guess what I'm saying is that if anyone wants to send me $14 via PayPal I'd be happy to give it a spin...

Alandovos
Posts: 6
Joined: Fri Apr 04, 2003 10:34 am

Postby Alandovos » Fri Apr 04, 2003 11:57 am

Well I've turned into a pretty big Pink Floyd fan so maybe I'll pick it up with the hopes that either:
1. I'll get an SACD player in the future
2. The stereo mix is worth the cost
Then I can just bring it with the next time I'm back in Madison.

User avatar
lukpac
Top Dog and Sellout
Posts: 4591
Joined: Wed Apr 02, 2003 11:51 pm
Location: Madison, WI
Contact:

Postby lukpac » Fri Apr 04, 2003 12:12 pm

That works.

The general word I've heard is that it is pretty good, although I'm not sure how many people were paying close attention to the CD layer.

User avatar
Ed Bishop
Posts: 159
Joined: Sat Apr 05, 2003 9:14 am
Location: The New Lair

Postby Ed Bishop » Sat Apr 05, 2003 10:32 am

So far I've been listening to the 5.1 layer, primarily, as I find multi-channel mix a nice diversion from the usual mono/stereo listening. It's not the final word on mixes, by any means but, if taken in the proper spirit--that is, you don't expect quite the same tone and spirit of the old mix you've lived with for a lot of years--you'll come to enjoy them for what they are. I tend to be more liberal with mix differences in 5.1, simply because I don't expect even the most seasoned and experienced engineers who know an album inside and out to get it perfect.

DSOTM is no exception but, to my surprise, it isn't all that far away in its style of mix and instrument placement compared to the old '70s Quad Lp/8-track release. It's isn't the same, either: here, there's a tendency to keep some things up front, and some things placed in back--with a recording this complex, a pretty good idea. Even so, many elements from the old mix remain: the 360-degree footsteps/out of breath sounds of "On The Run" and the chime intro of "Time" to name just two examples. Which is to say, DSOTM and multi-channel fans in general will enjoy this one a lot, though I must admit I've heard too much of this title of late, in any format, and I'm just about worn out. But if you love the album and have the setup, by all means worth the $14 or so you'll spend.

As to the stereo hi-rez and redbook layers, I must confess I haven't given either any critical listening yet. I do note, however, that unlike the 5.1 mix, the odd fade-out music heard at the very end of "Eclipse" is not readily apparent in 5.1, but the redbook has it(my brother finally heard this after years of hearing me talk about it--always a shock to the uninitiated), as do other CD editions and the old MFSL vinyl, which is where I first picked up on it. But whether you should buy a copy for the redbook layer, I really can't say. My preference over the years, on CD, has been the MFSL gold edition, which, while lacking a little at the top, has some distinct bottom end that I prefer over other versions save the MFSL vinyl. It's also a *warmer* sound than the old Japan-pressed CD, which has a bit more top but not quite the clarity of the MFSL, and I alway felt it was a tad harsh. One of these days I'll have to give the new redbook a serious listen but, given as I bought this for the 5.1, can't say it will happen anytime soon.

Hope this helps a little. And I would say, at the least, if you do have an SACD player, the stereo hi-rez will certainly be a different listening experience than you're used to; whether it's better, you'll have to decide.

ED
When remixing vintage tapes, imagine you are back in the time those recordings were made, and mix accordingly. forget Today's Sound Sensibilities....

britre
Posts: 94
Joined: Sun Apr 06, 2003 9:54 am

Postby britre » Sun Apr 06, 2003 7:23 pm

I can add two cents here... First my credentials..

I have been listening to Darkside since age 11 (I am now 36), I also have owned all versions from the first 1973 issue vinyl, the Quad both German and U.K., the MFSL LP, and Gold CD, 20th Anni CD, Capitol reissue CD, and now the new version. The only two distatasteful versions were the Capitol CD, and the 20th Anni version. Both out of my collection.

On to the review. I only listened to the redbook version as I do not have SACD. The resolution on this version is stunning to say the least, the mix is different than all previous versions having a much better midrange, and breath. You can actually hear Clare Tory breathing as she sings. Interesting... I thought.

"Money" is no where near the effect of the quad version and neither is "Us And Them". "On The Run" has a much different channel separation and it was in a good sense. James Guthrie has done very good work with the remastering of not only this, but all the Floyd remasters.

And it is correct, the infamous classical piece is heard at the end as well as better resolution of the snippets of the Rod the Hat interview.

Overall I was pleased with the listening, and it did not get shut off and thrown on the shelf like other CD releases of the album.

1 to 10 I got to give it a 9.5. Well done, I am very interested to hear the 5.1 mix but mostlikely it will piss me off due to the fact I know the quadraphonic mix like the back of my hand. But I am open minded on this one...

User avatar
Ed Bishop
Posts: 159
Joined: Sat Apr 05, 2003 9:14 am
Location: The New Lair

Postby Ed Bishop » Sun Apr 06, 2003 7:43 pm

When it comes to any kind of remastering, you have to go in with an open mind. Thanks to some of the disasters in the redbook realm alone, that can be hard(MY GENERATION, anyone? :roll: ). Any time you go back and play with the tapes for any medium, original or remix, the sound will never match the original source you remember. Most listeners have no reference points or, if they do, just don't care. The success of the Beatles' 1 and Presley's 30#1 HITS is proof enough that you can sell a great, legendary act and a concept compilation, and the hell with how the sound quality really is; so much label propaganda touted these as great before anyone had even heard them did the trick--except to a small minority(as we are, let's face it)who have the reference points and heard sonic garbage and manipulation immediately.

When it comes to 5.1 mixes, like holiday music, I just tend to be more liberal and cut a lot of slack because both are a different animal compared to the mainstream. Only a fool would expect a 5.1 remix to match the original stereo in the basics; catching that lightning in a bottle a second time is never very likely. I'm much more bothered by stereo remixes when no remixing is really necessary, and not all that helpful. The work on IMAGINE, without NR, would have been fine; some of those needed remxing. But not JL/POB, an album that obviously didn't benefit from the remix simply because it was meant to sound rough in the first place.

Having said all that, any PF 5.1 is welcome at this address. Their music works perfectly in multi-channel, and I expect more to come.

ED
When remixing vintage tapes, imagine you are back in the time those recordings were made, and mix accordingly. forget Today's Sound Sensibilities....

britre
Posts: 94
Joined: Sun Apr 06, 2003 9:54 am

Postby britre » Sun Apr 06, 2003 11:18 pm

Interesting! And agreed, you do need to enter into any multi-channel mix with an open mind and ear. Also, it is an important point you make about stereo remixing by tin eared producers who think they know what they are doing with classic recordings.

What I would personally like to see is the multi-channel mixes of Animals, and The Wall, released. These are rumoured to exist in promo form only as the Quadraphonic craze was over by 1978, and hopefully someone out there has the decency to introduce these classics to us in a interesting new form.

I would additionally like to see other 70's quad in 5.1 with accurate reproduction. As hard as this would seem to do, it could be done and there is a huge market for it. Why, I personally just sold a CCR Album in Quad for $50 on Ebay. Tell me there is no demand...

User avatar
lukpac
Top Dog and Sellout
Posts: 4591
Joined: Wed Apr 02, 2003 11:51 pm
Location: Madison, WI
Contact:

Postby lukpac » Mon Apr 07, 2003 1:31 am

BTW, just so there isn't any confusion, the mix on the CD layer is the same stereo mix everyone has heard for the past 30 years. The only thing remixed was the 5.1 content on the SACD layer. The stereo content on the SACD layer is also the original mix.

User avatar
Ed Bishop
Posts: 159
Joined: Sat Apr 05, 2003 9:14 am
Location: The New Lair

Postby Ed Bishop » Mon Apr 07, 2003 7:05 am

The least the labels can do is leave the original stereo mix intact, unless there's an overriding reason to do a remix. The Dead redid the stereo mixes of WORKINGMAN'S DEAD and AMERICAN BEAUTY. They sound fine, but I couldn't figure out why they bothered, as the originals always seemed good enough to me. On the other hand, after hearing the 1971 remix of AOXOMOXOA, I understood why they redid it: the '69 mix is really unbalanced, with vocals sent off to one channel(they were centered for the remix). If that one comes out on DVD-A, no doubt they'll remix yet again, meaning there will be three different stereo mixes of that title.

Even RUMOURS, where the 5.1 has a lot of differences compared to the stereo version, at least has the upgraded(if that's the word)stereo master. Unfortunately, this means the original version(same mix but with some early fades on a few tracks, and "Gold Dust Woman" faded in)is relegated to early CD pressings.

Getting through this maze can make your head spin. But I would welcome MEDDLE or WISH YOU WERE HERE on SACD if someone gets in the mood to do them. The rumors of an ABBEY ROAD DVD-A are still that-rumors--but an enticing one, though I still think SACD is more likely, so as to get it into the WalMart's of the world.

ED

ED
When remixing vintage tapes, imagine you are back in the time those recordings were made, and mix accordingly. forget Today's Sound Sensibilities....

britre
Posts: 94
Joined: Sun Apr 06, 2003 9:54 am

Postby britre » Mon Apr 07, 2003 4:25 pm

Ed Bishop wrote: I still think SACD is more likely, so as to get it into the WalMart's of the world.

ED

ED


Thats a very good point. It seems all the audiophiles I know are looking for good music to listen too, shop their local Walmart for high end audio titles :lol:
Sarcasm has been issued...

Really, unfortunately the music industry forgets constantly who really pays $16 - $25 for reissued titles in a fruitless attempt to get the best possible sound quality period. They would rather sell Britney at $11.99 to teeny boppers with only their parents income to pay for it.

User avatar
Ed Bishop
Posts: 159
Joined: Sat Apr 05, 2003 9:14 am
Location: The New Lair

Postby Ed Bishop » Tue Apr 08, 2003 6:59 am

The good news for audiophiles, however, is IF SACD can take off to the point where a WalMart carries them on a regular basis, ordering them as if they would anything else. It's worked for the Stones and PF so far; that's a good sign, not a bad one. If the Beatles' catalog were ever to be put out in 5.1 and stereo/mono remastered, SACD hybrid is the only logical way to go(though there are those in other forums who disagree, since they have a bias toward DVD-A that I, frankly, find inexplicable). With a band as big as the Fabs, I don't see EMI choosing anything but SACD. And, as they've remastered so many tracks in 5.1 for ANTHOLOGY, one would guess they're not going to stop there. So SACD it probably is, and that means all stores will be able to carry them with confidence, provided the redbook option is there, which is all that's really needed.

ED :P
When remixing vintage tapes, imagine you are back in the time those recordings were made, and mix accordingly. forget Today's Sound Sensibilities....

User avatar
CDJones
Posts: 8
Joined: Mon Apr 14, 2003 7:53 am
Location: New Jersey
Contact:

Postby CDJones » Mon Apr 14, 2003 10:48 am

I second any recommendation for SACD, only I, personally, don't see any need for Beatles in 5.1. Give me mono/stereo hybrids, from the original mixes (not the Help and Rubber Soul '80's remixes), done right. That's all I ask.

User avatar
Ed Bishop
Posts: 159
Joined: Sat Apr 05, 2003 9:14 am
Location: The New Lair

Postby Ed Bishop » Mon Apr 14, 2003 6:35 pm

Yet the ANTHOLOGY DVD set is a strong indicator that Beatles multi-channel is in our future. Given how much they remixed for that 5-disc box, very unlikely it isn't on EMI/Apple Corps thoughts. Since SACD is going to be the logical way to go, and the sales of DSOTM indicate if you can get the product into the big chains you'll get the sales, the Beatles, as primo rock act of their time, are going to have titles going that route as well. I don't expect any en masse deal ala the Stones, but I also don't see stereo/mono hybrids, either. Indeed, what we do get is still an uncertainty, though if the first title is in fact ABBEY ROAD, I wouldn't be the least bit surprised. It's a great show piece, and a 5.1 natural. I'd look for that first by the end of the year.

ED 8)
When remixing vintage tapes, imagine you are back in the time those recordings were made, and mix accordingly. forget Today's Sound Sensibilities....

User avatar
lukpac
Top Dog and Sellout
Posts: 4591
Joined: Wed Apr 02, 2003 11:51 pm
Location: Madison, WI
Contact:

Postby lukpac » Mon Apr 14, 2003 7:29 pm

I'm not sure the remixes of Anthology are a strong indicator of anything, other than that somebody wanted the songs mixed to true 5.1 sound. Wasn't most of the music remixed previously for the original TV/video release?