Pink Floyd "Dark Side Of The Moon" UDI/UDII Comparison Results

With a decent sample, it could invalidate the theory that one (or both) release had different versions released, and that not every UD1 DSotM is the same, and so on.

Obviously, it doesn't address possible jitter/pressing issues and so on.

Personally, I do believe in the placebo effect. Or "power of suggestion", or whatever you want to call it. And I do suspect it accounts for any perceived differences between the two discs.

 

Guys, this whole analysis is flawed. You all get an F in science!!

You CANNOT take a COPY of a UD I and compare it to an ORIGINAL of a UD II. Furthermore, you have changed the integrity of the songs by CONVERTING them to WAV files. You're telling me this is a native CD format???

Stop being subjective and saying UD I still sounds better even though we all know they are probably identical. Listen to yourselves. You are trying to find stupid reasons why they should sound different. IF IT'S THE SAME DIGITAL COPY -- IT"S IN YOUR HEADS!!

OK, let's get scientific and prove it. Theory: MFSL UD I and UD IIs are IDENTICAL. How about for starters, we keep the tracks in CDA format with no format conversions, AND NO CDR's! Then we can compare the files (tracks) digitally. I suggest using MD5 (Message Digest 5) This program will generate a 128-bit string so we can compare the two tracks to see if they are truly bit-wise identical. This has been around for 12 years and has proven track record used in many applications today. To quote the author, an MIT professor: "MD5 is a way to verify data integrity, and is much more reliable than checksum and many other commonly used methods."

For information: http://userpages.umbc.edu/~mabzug1/cs/md5/md5.html
For download: http://www.fourmilab.ch/md5/

So download MD5. Pop in your original UD I or II's into your computer's CD-ROM drive. From DOS, type "MD5 d:track10.cda" (where d: is your CD-ROM drive letter) and post your MD5 result for Eclipse. Let's see where this takes us!!

Pat

 

This is a better link for MD5...

http://www.fourmilab.ch/md5/

 

FWIW, my UD1 seems to be similar but with lower numbers:

MANUFACTURED BY UTC SMF8006-1A 1A1


FFF

 

Why not? If a copy of a UD is *identical* to a UDII (copy or otherwise), how could the original be different?

You're not really "converting" anything when you save to WAV, AIFF, SDII, etc. The audio itself is identical to what's on the CD, it's just arranged slightly differently (for starters, it's in a file instead of a stream).

http://www.cdrfaq.org/faq02.html#S2-36

As I've mentioned before, CDA is NOT a "format". When you see "files" on the computer with .cda extensions, those are nothing more than pointers/indexes to the tracks on the CD. Such a file format doesn't exist. Please see above.

A big problem with that (beyond the fact that CDA isn't actually a file) is that the two discs have slightly different indexing. As such, you're not really comparing the same thing. Such a test would *only* work if the indexes were *exactly* the same, which they are not.

 

PL,

Yes. Luke and I are not trying to covince anyone that a UDI and a UDII are the exact same digital files in a computer manner. We acknowledge that there are tracking differences that distiguish the two. These differences probably even occur from different batches of UDI's and UDII's. What we're trying to get everyone to realize is:

The MFSL UDI & UDII DSotM releases are identical bit-for-bit once the actual music track starts.

This is an acknowledged, tested, proven fact. If they still sound different to you, well, enjoy your preference

 

I wish there was a UD3 that we could throw in the mix just for sh*ts & giggles.

 

The original Audio CD and CD-R copies are not completely identical. While the data areas may end up the same, there are many portions of the CDs that are different. For one, there is NO error correction in audio CDs and there is in CD-R's. Also, there are changes in subcodes and manufacturer identifiers. All of this translates into differences at the bit level. Some of this changes may be audible, most probably not.

OK, so we were taking a stream (start indicated by a pointer) and creating a computer file with an extension WAV. If CDA isn't a format WAV certainly is. And if when creating the WAV file, we're rearranging bits (i.e. changing the byte ordering), how can this result be identical to the original source? No longer identical bit for bit...

Don't knock it until you try it. Have you actually checked to see that all the indexes are in different locations for all 10 tracks? And, there could be another track we can test with besides #10.

We're on the same page. I've always maintained that UD I's & II's are the identical. Just like DCC's from Japan vs. US pressings. However, when people are still out there saying they hear differences, well prove it! Otherwise, don't just tell me the UD I sounds better!

 

Come over to my house with a UDII and put it on and I will tell the difference blind test or whatever. Then maybe you will forget the computer program.

 

Ditto!

Gentlemen, this seems to be getting a little too personal for some participating in this discussion. We need to keep it cool.

May I remind everyone that there are way too many variables at work here. Those of us who have stated that there is a difference have agreed on what those differences are. If you do not hear it there are a few factors to consider. 1) Are Dave, Gary, Todd, MagicAlex, and others who I cannot remember right now, known to be liars? 2) Am I running a comparable system to what they have and does it make a difference? 3) Are there more than 1 or 2 recordings on this label? 4) Can a computer in fact hear better, or read as the case is truely, better than a high-end system and the human ears? 5) Does it really matter?
My answers are as follows:

1) No.
2) I can't answer this one unbiastly.
3) Well we know of at least 4 including the vinyl, there could be a 5th.
4) No I personally don't believe that an inexpensive or even a higher cost audio extracing/burning program can reproduce what my considerably higher cost audio system can reveal and the human ear, IMHO only, is better than a computer.
5) If you like it, what does it really matter.

Be nice to each other.

 

No proof is required. Each person judges for themselves. Since you feel that UD I's & II's are indentical your MoFi collecting is simplified.

 

I've had no personal experience comparing a UDI to a UDII, but I've enjoyed following this thread. There's one thing I'm not clear on, however: Did MFSL advertise UDII's at the time as being better sounding than UDI's of the same disc? I remember reading the press on UDII's of new material, but didn't understand at the time that older UDI titles were coming out as UDII's as well. Were MFSL themselves claiming a difference?

 

Well, I don't really agree with that statement, Dave. If your system were in fact "better", it will play the two CDs exactly the same, ignoring any possible imperfections in the disc itself. That's what computers do! If the data on the two discs is in fact identical (which it is), why would a "better" CD player play them differently?

I would argue that computer CD-R drives *are* in fact better, since they can adjust for jitter and other anomalies present on some CDs that audio players can't seem to do.

 

MD5 Results

Here are the MD5 results, FWIW:

These are taken off of my two ORIGINAL Mofis

Ultradisc:

C:\md5>md5 d:\track10.cda
CF0A35C20A51FF74F26C61722F02D72E

Ultradisc II:

C:\md5>md5 d:\track10.cda
674961B9FEC8C6EEE7B8C28285C83705

I'm not sure just what this proves yet, but I must say, I was surprised to see a difference... I will try to get the version numbers off of these two discs for comparison purposes.

 

MD5 Results - Part Two

Here are the numbers:


Ultradisc: MANUFACTURED BY ULTECH UDCD 517 SMF 8006 - 1C

Ultradisc II: MFD BY JVC UDCD 517 4C II

Well?

 

Re: MD5 Results

I don't think this will work as the tracks are not the same length. Cues times are different between the two releases.

 

Re: Re: MD5 Results

I was afraid of that. Oh well. It was a fun little experiment anyway...

 

Tullman,

Trust me, I wanted to hear a difference! I spend several hours with original (not CD-Rs) copies of UDI & UDII and couldn't reliably distinguish them. So, my next step was a more analytical approach. The computer results just confirmed what I heard on my system.

Hey, maybe it is system dependant. In that case, there may even be systems that favor a UDII

Good discussion, but like Dave says, "keep it cool". In fact, I think I'm gonna start a fun 'lil thread right now.....

 

Yes it would play them exactly the same.....if they were the same, sorry they're not. They maybe the same when a computer reads them but not when I hear them.

It's one of those things in life Luke where you have to see it, in this case hear it, to believe it. The only way to put an end to this is for all those who can't hear it, take their UD2's and go over to another members home, who does hear the difference, and listen. I know that you are being straight up with your computer details, as much as I'm being straight up about what I hear. All the talking about it by me will not change yours or anyone elses opinion who doesn't yet hear it and all the computer details in the world aren't going to change the minds of us who do hear the difference.

So, you feel like seeing Canada in the winter?

 

it's the media, I say!

It was a recent cd burn of vinyl that re-confirmed my old suspicions that different makes of blank cd's sound differently from each other.

There was an irish lp in 1979 with U2 and other garage bands of the day. My buddy who burned the cd's from his OOP vinyl burned his 700mb black Memorex right before burning my silver white-label Memorex copy. I played the two back-to-back on my trusty JVC 1010TN (11 years old) and my Sennheiser 410's (22 years old) and these disks sounded very different, especially low level passages. the low vinyl noise sounded more like a "crackle" on my silver disk, and more like a "percolation" on his black cd. Different soundstage shape too. It was freaky, and obvious to the fella who burned them as well. That's why he switched to black discs.

 

Dave,

Help me understand this statement. Is your UD I the same as everyone else's or you think yours is different? In the prior append, your mention that you believe there are at least three versions on CD (forget vinyl). Well so far I count two with the only difference being indexing. Your thoughts...

Better yet, since you have the only odd-ball UD I, why don't you run the MD5 test against track 10?

Pat

 

Well at least we can all conclude that there is no need to hunt for the UD1's only, and/or pay extra prices for them [] .

 

Well Dave's UD1 isn't unique as there is another copy here

http://pinkfloydcdscanz.bizland.com/DARKside/JapanUDCD517.html

All the best - Andrew

 

Sure snowman, if you want to rely on computer programs instead of your system and your ears.

Pat, for some reason I seem to have a uniquely numbered disc as everyone elses UD1's have a certain conformaty in the numbering on the inner rim of the CD. I have never done any visual graphs or readings, that I'm aware of any how, although I do have the WAV. file loaded in EAC right now if anyone wants to walk me through it, although I don't really expect any difference in comparison to what Luke's done already.

 

Yes, they *are* the same in that the musical data encoded on them is identical. *That* is what your CD player should be playing, not any time based differences the CDs might have. The computer is reading them correctly. Isn't correct better?

I think I'd liken the "differences" between the two discs to using two different fonts to print a document. Only you're not reading the document, you're listening to somebody read it out loud. A good speaker (in this case, a computer drive) will realize the font differences are superficial and read the two versions the same way. A poor speaker (some audio CD players) will have trouble reading one of the fonts for whatever reason, and will incorrectly pronounce some words. Make sense?

As I've mentioned before, this is all system dependent. While your CD player might make the UDs sound better, another might make the UDIIs sound better, and yet another might not show any differences at all. Since the digital data is the same, I don't really think it's fair to make a blanket statement saying "UDs sound better than UDIIs". On *some* systems they might, but on others the opposite could be true.