Pink Floyd: Remasters 1994 versus 2011

Well, if that is the case, my 1992/4 CD wrongly accused Doug Sax as the man behind that mastering.

 

The 2011 is still good though, I am not writing it off

 

Wow !!

Just done a shoot out with Animals and IMO the best is the UK 1992/4:

1. UK 1992/1994 Guthrie/Sax Remaster
2. 2011 Remaster
3. 32DP 360

 

You should try the original UK mastering:

EAC #'s: 48.3 / 82.7 / 64.8 / 75.7 / 32.4

Some of us like this one the best for Animals.

http://pinkfloydarchives.com/DUKCDPF.htm#Anim1

 

Love the 2011 masters; the only one that doesn't offer any upgrade is the live disc that comes with Ummagumma. I'm also kind of on the fence about Piper as to whether I like it better than the 2007 stereo CD, but I prefer the mono version anyway.

I think for the 2007 stereo remaster Guthrie used DNR to scrub the weird tape artifacts an earlier poster described, so if you don't like hearing those things then it might have the edge. If you prefer to have the music presented exactly as it is on the master tape, then go with the 2011 disc.

 

Differs by title. Some for all three.

 

While listening to most Floyd, I'm sure people wouldn't tense up. I'd worry about falling asleep.

 

2011...

 

He has, the UK 1992/1994 Guthrie/Sax "remaster" is the same as the original EMI master.

 

Yup. I momentarily got the US remaster and UK "remaster" confused.

 

Nice to see those numbers

 

I've compared only the 2011 remasters of Animals and A Saucerful Of Secrets to their European 80s counterparts yet, and I'm pretty sure that in both cases the increase in loudness by about 2-3dB isn't due to compression per se, but just a result of peak shaving (which of course is a kind of compression as well, if you want). Here's a close-up of the 2011 Dogs waveform:

 

That's interesting, as you're in the US, I haven't studied the subject but thought it was just European CDs that had this problem (Meddle and Saucerful individual "remasters" too are not Sax as labelled) ..is your Animals a US one Col?

 

I cancelled my May pre-order for the Discovery box as I wanted to find out if it was worth the upgrade (kept the DSotM Immersion though... very happy with that!). I already have all the original, Doug Sax remasters and Shine On & Oh, By The Way boxes, so I'm still on the fence about going another round... money's pretty tight these days.
I've read the replies, but since I haven't voted yet - can't really do that fairly - where does the Poll stand thus far?

 

They really sound smooth then

 

I'll check when I get home later tonight and post. I remember buying it new from a CD Warehouse in Cape Girardeau, MO in either 1999 or 2000. It did not, to my recall, have an import sticker and it was priced at around 10.99/11.99 price point.

 

Some European 1992/1994 CDs are incorrectly labelled as Doug Sax, they are actually original masterings (level-shifted in most cases). "Animals" is one of these cases and very easy to spot: its mastering is much closer to the vinyl, while the Sax is brighter and closer to the early American/Japanese mastering on CD. Other cases are:

- "A Saucerful Of Secrets", which sounds atrocious as it's heavily NR-ed;
- "Meddle", which is the same as the raved-about early Japanese mastering;
- "Dark Side Of The Moon", which is the first EMI mastering, to me it's harsh and the worst mastering I've heard of this album;
- "Wish You Were Here", see DSOTM.
- "The Final Cut", which is maybe a different mastering from the original european one, but it's different from the '97 Doug Sax

On the contrary, the european "The Wall" is a rebalanced Sax mastering, different from the US version and a forum-favourite.
It seems like a "real" Sax Remaster for Europe has a typical symbol (a kind of circle) on CD spine, which the non-Sax remastered albums do not carry.
Hope this helps.

 

With all the buzz about new PF remasters I was prompted to get out all my versions of DSOTM and compare them again.

Fairly standard version, surprisingly OK for the price - http://www.pinkfloydcd.com/DARKside/Australia7460012reissue.html

Mofi UDCD 517, best in MHO - http://www.pinkfloydcd.com/DARKside/USUDCD517ultra2.html

20th Anniversary EMI Made in Holland, kinda OK - http://www.pinkfloydcd.com/DARKside/holland20th077778147923.html

2003 remaster hybrid SACD which has the ugly reworked cover, un-listenable - http://www.pinkfloydcd.com/DARKside/JapanCDP724358213621.html

Short answer is the Mofi is the only one that I can enjoy from start to finish. The rest are just plain annoying to listen to and I have never made it all the way through any of them.

I'm making a big assumption here (and will probably get attacked for it) but I suspect none of these newer remasters that are the current buzz will beat the listening enjoyment I get with the MoFi.
I can listen to the Mofi continuously all the way through and just get lost in the music.

Sure the other versions reveal details which you may hear differently on the Mofi. But again the Mofi just sounds right to me and gives me the most enjoyment.
Therefore I could not be bothered to waste more money on new versions only to be disappointed when I am already fully satisfied with the Mofi version.

 

2011 CDs for all except The Wall which I prefer a high end needledrop I had done for my copy of the Japanese 40AP CBS pressing on vinyl.

2011 Bluray Stereo 24bit mix for DSOTM.

 

So far I have only bought DSOTM and WYWH from the new 2011 remasters and here are my thoughts on the discs.

Something about them just doesn't sound right to me. I have bought DSoTM on various formats over the years, vinyl, cassette, CD, SACD, iTunes and so forth. I have listened to pretty much every version and every remaster you can name.

To my ears the new remaster, although certainly not the worst, just doesn't sound right. It differs from track to track for me. Some of them sound great, especially "The Great Gig in the Sky", which I really like on the new remaster, but then others sound really weird and maybe even a bit "harsh", particularly "Speak to Me/Breathe" and "On the Run".

If anyone has seen the waveforms then maybe they will understand where I am coming from on this. I wouldn't go as far to say as the new discs are "brickwalled", but they certainly aren't "warm" and there is not much "room to breathe".

Vinyl is still the best way to listen to Dark Side of the Moon for me. The only way if I'm honest.

 

Hi

If your CD is an EMI release then it's not a Sax remaster. The "real" Sax-remastered Animals was only released in 3 shapes:

- Shine On Box
- Columbia 1997 "Anniversary Edition"
- Capitol 2000 - 2004 reissue of the 1997 edition

All EMI (hence, european) "Animals" 1994 releases have the Remasters artwork, state that they are remastered by Sax, but they are sourced from a previous european mastering from the 80s.

This also happens to other titles as well, as grandegi correctly stated, the most notable being "Saucerful of secrets" (the european "remaster" is sourced from an old and unlistenable master instead).

So, I really think, in this post we should be aware that we are really comparing 2011 remasters to real Sax remasters and not to old european masterings.

In terms of comparison, I think that the improvement between the Sax remasters and the new ones is very little, at least fot the albums I've heard. Since I have the Sax remasters I won't be buying any other 2011 remaster. I'll try to get some FLACs to compare the other albums and the only reason for me to buy another 2011 remaster of a given PF album would be that the sound is clearly superior to the Sax remaster.

Also, I really HATE the packaging... those crappy "ecopacks"... that only can be a deal breaker for me... sorry hehe

 

Exactly the same here. I'd like to have your opinions when you have time to listen and compare. My collection is Sax, except for WYWH (US "1B"), Meddle (early EU=JP), Animals (early US=JP). The raved-about OBC will be my first attempt to a comparison.

 

It's a landslide!

I think it's safe to say The Beatles ushered in a renaissance in catalog remastering.

 

1994 - no contest.

 

It seems that the 2011 remasters are clearly better, according to the poll.

I always regarded Pink Floyd cds as sounding pretty good. I have most of the Doug Sax remasters from 1994. When the Beatles remasters came out, I clearly hear the difference. Are the Pink Floyd remasters as good?