best sounding Dark Side of the Moon CD

Hi,

I'm surprised the redbook of the SACD is getting so many votes. It's probably my third choice behind the EMI and MFSL. Then again, it may be my fourth choice.

-Jeffrey

 

MOFI still sounds best to me.

 

I'm surprised to see that so many people like the 'new' Redbook layer when it has been compressed and maximized (and had the balance between tracks change).

 

Voted for the MFSL (UDI). Haven't heard the SACD redbook layer - never felt the need. The SACD stereo sounds a like hi-rez version of the Toshiba EMI. The MFSL does not have the detail of the SACD stereo OR the Toshiba EMI, (at times sounds kind of muddy in comparison) but it presents a HUGE soundstage (in my room anyway) and puts a smile on my face that the others don't. The MFSL sounds the most like the things I like most about the original LP (although it is a little warmer and sounds like it has been futzed with a bit) and is the version I reach for.

 

"You really like the redbook on the SACD?"

Yes.

 

I own the Toshiba / EMI of "Meddle".

According to the liner notes, mastering is the same as in the 1992 "Shine On" boxed set.

Wouldn't this mean DSOTM has the same mastering as the 20th Anniversary Disc?

Oh, and for the record... nothing beats DSOTM MC. One I listened to it, I couldn't go back to stereo Be it Parsons, or Guthrie... DSOTM was *meant* to be heard in MC

If it's stereo we are talking about, though, I like the SACD the most. Redbook audio? I don't have the Toshiba or the MFSL to compare to, so I'll go with the redbook layer of my SACD.

 

Me too!

 

Javier, not the same animal at all. The DSOTM Toshiba that I'm speaking of was made in 1983 or 84.

Heard the redbook SACD and yuk! Waaaaay too much compression. The MFSL is very detailed but it has been futzed with in much the same fashion as The Wall on MFSL, great definition, nice and smooth, but sounds that shouldn't be have been brought too foreward in the mix. All IMHO of course.

 

Elaborate, please

I'm not sure I follow about the "forward in the mix" part.

 

Tough to physically describe Sam but I'll try. When certain sounds, instruments, voices are made a little louder in a song than the original there is something lost in the cohesion of the song itself. Certain emotional aspects of the music are lost when this happens. Example: On the song Another Brick In The Wall (Part 1) On the first edition aluminum pressing (Canadian edition cat # C2K-36183) you actually get drawn into the song where on the MFSL the 3 dimensioning of this experience is lost because of cohesion loss from certain sounds being brought too far fore-ward in the mix.

Hope that helps somewhat Sam.

 

Different animal, indeed! The one I have is the mini-LP edition. That's the one that has the same mastering as the Shine On set (or so it seems).

 

Hmmm. I haven't listened to my copy (CD-R) in a while, but I was initially thinking the opposite in regards to the MFSL. Kinda like the old talk we have 'bout MFSL "midrange suck-out". So you feel MFSL Wall has the opposite effect?

 

My favorite is the MFSL UD1 followed by the original Toshiba/EMI . The redbook layer of the SACD does not sound very good to my ears. Of course, YMMV.

When I was still in Japan, I noticed several copies of the Toshiba/EMI DSOTM floating around. The copy I purchased is in mint condition. I also have a Toshiba/EMI of "Meddle" from 1986. Sounds pretty good to me. Matter of fact, all of the Black Triangle Toshiba/EMI CDs I purchased in Japan sound pretty good.

 

I'm with Dave and Bob and Gardo on this one!
AFAICT, the original Toshiba-EMI cd (CP35-3017) is the only 'honest' sounding release of the album available on cd/sacd.

So, I could not vote in the poll!


FFF
------------
Mike Patrick

 

Sam, IIRC, and it's too late to put it on right now, the MFSL is boosted in the voice as well as the top-end frequencies, though not in a harsh sounding way, and also the bass drum where the difference is not a small one. The MFSL sounds too big, too round, too bloated.

 

For me, an interesting variant on this thread would be which CD version best approximates the orig. vinyl. I suppose UK vinyl would be the one to match or beat, yet my stock US LP, bought in '73, sounded better to my ears than any CD I've yet heard. All the audio technology from then till now seems *IMO!* scarcely to have bettered the plain old run-of-the-mill liqorice pizza, as we used to call it...

 

The funny thing is, who knows how the original master tape really sounds right now? And whether it has deteriorated to the point that new releases will sound inferior to older ones? That's sad.