Pink Floyd Dark Side of the Moon - Best sounding CD (updated)

Me bad....the DR 14 was in fact before de-emphasis using foobar. Here is the Dark Side CDP 7 46001 2 which is the same as the Black Triangle ( I have both) AFTER de-emphasis

foobar2000 1.3.6 / Dynamic Range Meter 1.1.1
log date: 2015-04-24 21:11:23

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Analyzed: ? / ?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

DR Peak RMS Duration Track
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
DR11 -8.63 dB -22.50 dB 3:57 ?-01. Speak to Me - Breathe
DR10 -8.30 dB -23.32 dB 3:32 ?-02. On the Run
DR9 -8.09 dB -20.52 dB 7:05 ?-03. Time
DR9 -7.43 dB -21.88 dB 4:47 ?-04. The Great Gig in the Sky
DR11 -5.03 dB -19.97 dB 6:24 ?-05. Money
DR10 -8.26 dB -22.39 dB 7:49 ?-06. Us and Them
DR12 -5.92 dB -19.66 dB 3:26 ?-07. Any Colour You Like
DR11 -6.89 dB -22.78 dB 3:50 ?-08. Brain Damage
DR10 -5.49 dB -19.04 dB 2:09 ?-09. Eclipse
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Number of tracks: 9
Official DR value: DR10

Samplerate: 44100 Hz
Channels: 2
Bits per sample: 16
Bitrate: 1411 kbps
Codec: PCM
================================================================================
Sorry guys, I gotta eat some humble pie on this one. Same DR as the 2007. I have the Sax remaster and the original Sony mastering is way better IMHO. For me I just wanna turn my integrated amp up to 12 o'clock to get to a comfortable volume level, instead of 8 o'clock.

 

You are correct, sir.

 

So do I. EAC values tell you nothing about how a disc sounds.

 

I have a Black Triangle (Japanese CP35-3017 1A1 TO), 1985 Capitol CDP, MFSL UD1, and the 2011 Immersion Set. My favourite one to listen to is the MFSL. The 1985 Capitol CDP is no slouch either.

 

So to sum up, which version of the Black Triangle CD is the one to get , TO or non-TO? What's the difference in sound?

 

The same happened with the 2 track WYWH cd...in the DR database web page there's the analysis and explanation done by some guy

 

The non-TO pressing is considered the "holy grail". It's a completely different mastering.

 

Black face Harvest non TO will do the trick for less money. Same mastering as the Black Triangle (non TO). If you read the thread from the beginning, the poll is incorrect and confusing (Black Triangle TO and non TO are together, and the Harvest is separate).

 

Non-TO is the one to get. I have the TO and it is very good but not the Holy Grail.

 

If I read correctly, the TO is brighter than the non-TO (due to equalization)...is that correct or is it really a different mastering?

 

Picked up the Capital at
a garage sale for a buck ,
is this one generally slagged ?
not even on the poll

 

Japan Harvest blackface for me, then the 2011 CD.

 

How do you think it sounds?
I enjoy it enough not to search out anything else

 

I have about sixteen copies of this album, everything from the CP35 through the MFSL and SACD, the 1992 remasters and all else in between.

It really comes down to two choices: the CP35 Sony pressing (if you have the money) or the 2011 remaster (if you want something more financially reasonable).

Either of these would give you a very good listening experience.

People beat themselves up over this album but the truth is that none of the various masterings are really that bad.

 

I have the 20th anniversary on CD and an 80's colorband on vinyl. They sound great to me.

 

I recently acquired a CP35-3017 31A9 non-TO Harvest Blackface for $40, which has the Sony mastering (confirmed via EAC logs) and I think that one sounds about the best of the discs I have. I thought the 2011 was very good too.

 

I am a bit of a latecomer to this. I've listened to the MSFL, the 2003 SACD, and just now finally have heard the original CBS/Sony Japan mastering (the "grail").

I have to say, I'm with @Jerry on this: I prefer the SACD layer of the SACD release. It's very clean, holographic, and utterly crankable (I know the redbook layer is louder and not nearly as well-regarded). The dynamics, IMHO, also are excellent - the initial transition from the heartbeats to the beginning of Breathe had my eyes going wide.

I get the appeal of the grail Japan mastering, but I have to say, I was a little underwhelmed after finally hearing it. Yes, it's smooth, mellow, and very crankable. But to my ears it's a tad flat - not EQ-wise, I don't mind the the tame high end, but rather lacking a bit of depth and transparency in the soundstage. But the biggest issue I have with the original mastering is that it seems to have a slightly grainy high end. The ride cymbal is much cleaner and more dimensional on the SACD, and sounds a bit distorted and one-dimensional on the grail mastering.

The guitars are nice and up-front on the grail, but seem slightly "smaller" than on the SACD. My guess is that the grail mastering has more midrange relative to the highs and lows, and less "air" in the upper harmonics. I readily admit that this particular difference between the SACD and grail is really a matter of taste.

I only have one issue with the SACD, and I'm curious that (AFAIK) it hasn't been mentioned here yet: The grail mastering and the MFSL both begin out of near-total "black" silence when the heartbeat kicks in at the outset of the album. With the SACD, by contrast, there's immediately some tape hiss and I believe a slight hum (I've triple-checked and the hum is not coming from my stereo system). My guess is that this is down to the EQ of the mastering or perhaps the detail captured when they did the digital transfer from what I take is the original master tape. But whatever the cause, it's the one thing that lessens the experience for me compared to the other masterings - and the one thing that keeps me on the lookout for an affordable copy of the MFSL (because I've heard the MFSL but don't own it).

Anyone have any comments on this aspect?

 

I personally think the SACD mastering has too much bass. I would try the 90's Doug Sax mastering if you don't like the first Jpn mastering.

 

Thanks for the tip! I'll see if I can audition the Sax. I certainly like his work in general.

Though I must say, while I definitely hear tons of bass on the SACD, on my system it sounds prominent but well-controlled.

 

It's not balanced enough for me, but I definitely prefer more bass over too much treble. I think you will like the Sax mastering. When they did a blind shootout recently on the forum for Dark Side digital masterings, it won.

 

Listening to the Sax mastering now - very nice! I still like the holographic quality of the SACD, but I think I will pick up a copy of the Sax mastering too, for three reasons:

1. It has the quieter background I'm accustomed to at the very beginning of the album, and generally has a more familiar (though not quite as good IMHO) overall sonic "feel" than the SACD.
2. This is now my favorite-sounding redbook version of this album (really highlights the smiley face EQ on my previously favorite reebook version, the MFSL) - and I don't want to be stuck with the redbook layer of the SACD when I'm playing this on my secondary system or through my iPhone/car system, etc.
3. This mastering seems available in a couple of different pressings, all of them dirt-cheap, like $4 to $6 plus shipping for VG+ used copies.

I'm certainly not complaining since one can get the SACD and the Sax remaster for less than $25 total shipped, but if there were a hybrid SACD with the 2003 Guthrie mastering on the SACD layer and the Sax mastering on the redbook layer, that would be something!
At any rate, thanks again for the tip!

 

Glad you like it. You also might want to try the Blu-ray mastering if you can handle that in your setup. I haven't done any major shootouts with it, but I also think that is sounds very good. It might be a bit more holographic than the redbook Sax mastering since it is in high-res.

 

Thanks - my disc player is an Oppo 105, so I can do the Blu-Ray.

 

I think, you're slightly exaggerating the bass differences (at least for Money track). Below is the Sax' CD vs SACD spectrum delta at equal perceived loudness (both my canadian C2-46001 & japanese TOCP-65740 TDSOTM CDs share the same Sax' mastering, BTW):



Sax' CD master definitely has more highs in 10...15kHz area than SACD...