Pink Floyd: Remasters 1994 versus 2011

Any reasons to seek out other copies if you have the 2011 remasters? Apparently they are the same as the Immersion Box Set.

 

As I already have 1993 MFSL UDCDII and 2003 Guthrie/Sax Jap SACD for DSTOM, and 1994 Sax/Guthrie MasterSound gold and the 2011 Guthrie SACD hybrid for WYWH, I'm not too concerned about getting the latest 2011 remasters for those titles, being fairly content with what I already have digitally, in addition to my vinyl.

However, I am wondering about the 2011 remasters for Meddle (I have 1993 MOFI UDCDII and 1987 EMI Capitol), Animals (I have 1994 EMI "Sax", and 1997 Columbia anniversary Sax/Guthrie) and The Wall (I have 1994 EMI Sax and 1999 Columbia Anniversary Guthrie, which says 1997 on the back).

In the case of Animals, the problem I am having with this thread is that everybody keeps talking about comparison with the "Sax remaster", when in the case of (at least) Animals there appear to be TWO Sax remasters (1994 and 1997), or at least two that CLAIM to be Sax remasters. Then somebody points out (either here or on another Animals thread) that the 1994 claimed "Sax remaster" is actually just the inferior older European master "in disguise". Then another chimes in that the 1994 European EMI "Sax remaster" is in fact the older inferior European mastering and NOT Sax (even though it claims Sax), BUT that the 1994 US not only says Sax but indeed IS Sax. That's fine, except, my 1994 says EMI, I don't know if it is domestic US or not, and Discogs doesn't even SHOW a 1994 US version, but only a 1996, which is not EMI but Columbia (AND with NO mention of Sax).

In sum, for Animals we have a 1994 remaster that says Sax but may or may not be Sax, especially if it is European AND says EMI, but POSSIBLY is Sax if it is a US 1994, and on top of that a 1997 Columbia that says Sax and maybe even IS Sax, but it also says James Guthrie, who is also prominently mentioned on some of the 1994 remasters as" supervision".

In light of all that, when we talk about comparing the latest 2011 remasters to "the Sax remasters" could we be a little more precise about WHICH (alleged) Sax remasters we are comparing to, especially when some of the "Sax remasters" may or may not even be Sax remasters at all?

And for those that DO specify the 1994 Sax remasters (thank you for that, even if it turns out they may not even be Sax remasters at all, though they claim to be), could we also have SOME discussion comparing the 2011 remasters with the 1997 remasters which ARE Sax, even though they also prominently mention Guthrie? The 1997 remasters aren't even included in the poll, even they may or may not even be the ONLY Sax remasters of Animals, and even though they also mention Guthrie.

For Meddle, I also wouldn't mind some comparison of the 2011 remasters with the 1993 MOFI UDCDII. And for The Wall, some comparison of the 2011 remasters with the 1994(which at this point I can only ASSUME to be) Sax remasters, as well as the 1999 Guthrie remasters with 1997 on the rear.

 

I have 80's EMI + 1997 Sax Columbia + 2011 Guthrie for both Animals and Meddle.

I prefer 80's EMI for both, for some reasons (more relaxed, natural sound), these two EMI are really great.

The 2011 beat the 1997 Sax though.
The 2011 are something between the EMI and the 1997 Sax, and they are great too, very detailed, and very smooth at the same time.

Talking Animals and Meddle of course.

I have not compared the Wall editions yet (have the same three editions as well).

 

Edit : Meddle is 1994 Sax Capitol not 1997 Sax Columbia, but the conclusion is the same.

 

I realize this is a very old thread, however maybe someone can clearify my copy of Meddle for me in terms of remastered or direct transfer from analogue tapes, along with how to understand the lack of info? I picked it up used for $2.99, which seemwed like a great deal at the time. It is on a Capitol label that identifies the recording as AAD and the copy states; "1971 Original Sound Recording made by EMI Records Ltd." There are no other dates that I can see. Is this a direct transfer from the analogue tapes? Around the center it says; "CDP 7 40634 2 Capitol JAX 6", whatever this all means, but no date other than the 1971, so I know this is not when this CD was made. Any info on what I have would be appreciated and how would one determine its date? Sound quality is very good, definetly is not brickwalled. Very easy to listen to at all volumes.

 

It seems that your CD is 2nd US issue, 1st US pressing (the 1st US issue was pressed in Japan), 1987, using the same digital master than the 1st Japan issue.
One of the first digital transfer from analogue and one of the best.
That's why it's so smooth ;-)

 

2011 for everything but WYWH.
I still prefer the mastersound for this title.

 

On this forum some blind tests on Pink Floyd albums were made in the past months. The results were varied.

• The only case in which the 2011 release was the favourite one was Animals: the Guthrie/Plante remaster won hands down.
• For Meddle the 2011 remaster was considered good but the first Japanese mastering was the most voted and the Doug Sax the runner-up.
• For Dark Side Of The Moon the 2011 remaster was defeated by the Doug Sax, the first Japanese mastering and the MFSL.
• For Wish You Were Here the 2011 mastering was in good position but the Mastersound and the EMI Sonopress masterings prevailed.
• For Final Cut the Sony base II mastering won hands down, the 2011 mastering was far behind.

I don't think those tests spoke the last word on this subject (especially for DSOTM), but it's clear to me that when it comes to Pink Floyd CD masterings it's impossible to find the "best mastering for all albums". First of all, "best" is obviously subjective. Apart from that, it's an album-by-album case. The Discovery box is a quick and inexpensive way to get a bunch of masterings which rate from good to very good in one package, but this poll in my most humble opinion misses an important point: each album might have a specific subjective "best" mastering on CD.

 

Can't decide tbh. I bought several (re)masters over the years and like them all.
I own mostly 1990s CDs (and one 2011 remaster of More to fill the gap).
Exceptions are Piper, Dark Side, WYWH and Animals where I have several master versions. Not counting the vinyl records here.

 

It depends.

Meddle - MoFi CD
Dark Side of the Moon - Original UK Harvest CD
Wish You Were Here - Sony Mastersound CD
Animals - 2011
The Wall - MoFi CD
Momentary Lapse of Reason - 2011
Division Bell -2011

Those are the ones I consider my favorite. The 2011/2016 ones are fine if it's all you can afford.

 

Can someone tell me, is the "EMI Sonopress" just another name for the original UK Harvest CDs for Wish You Were Here?

 

Unless you absolutely have to have the all the forum favorite ones, then no. The 2011/2016 discs are good and affordable.

 

Pink Floyd Archives-West German CD Discography
Title: Wish You Were Here
Record Company: Harvest Records
Catalog Number: CDP 7 46035 2
Bar Code: 0 77774 60352 2
1) Matrix Information:
Bottom: SONOPRESS C-7272 / CDP7460352 A
Release Information: Original West German pressed issue. 8-page booklet.
Total Time: 44:10
Track Peak Levels: 94.9 / 100.0 / 95.1 / 90.5 / 88.5
Label: Black label with text in grey. LC 1305. Harvest logo at the top.
STEREO
CDP 7 46035 2
Made in West Germany

 

A lot of the 2011 reissues are great (soundtrack albums, Saucerful, Animals) but the Sax remasters of Meddle, Dark Side, WYWH... these have the mojo

I also like the MFSL UltraDisc CD version of The Wall

 

Is it true that the 2011/2016 Ummagumma live disc is the Sax remaster? The credits on the 2016 booklet say 'mastered by James Guthrie and Joel Plante at Das Boot Recordings, 2011' for both discs.
Anyway, I'm glad if it is the Sax remaster, because we would have something from everyone who's been involved with the Floyd in the box (Guthrie, Plante, Thorgerson, Sax, etc...).

 

If you're thinking of two jewel cases in a green cardboard die-cut sleeve — that's the 1994

 

100% agree. Any uk or even German pressing up to the end of the 80's will blow away any of these multiple digital releases.

 

Honestly, I don’t own a bad sounding Pink Floyd CD. I own the Shine On, Oh, by the Way and Discovery box sets and have no issue with the audio quality with any of these sets. But, as to what I prefer, I couldn’t answer as I just play what I’ve ripped from the Discovery set, which are, obviously, the 2011 Guthrie remasters. They sound quite fine to me.

 

what's wrong about the 2011 remaster of a momentary lapse of reason?

 

The only way to get the real 1992 Doug Sax remasters is by buying any version of the Shine On box set, AFAIK.

 

The peak levels on the US box are different from those on the UK box. And the peak levels on the UK later editions are different from those on the UK 1st edition, according to the Pink Floyd Archives website. Are all they still the same mastering?

 

All the masterings are good in their own way but for most albums I prefer the shine on box set mastering.

 

So the Sax's weren't available in Europe individually? Confusing...
Thanks to @Dr. Funk for the gift
US individual's
*Animals-D.S.
DR14 -5.38 dB -25.78 dB 1:25 01-Pigs On The Wing 1
DR13 0.00 dB -16.02 dB 17:08 02-Dogs
DR12 0.00 dB -13.79 dB 11:28 03-Pigs (Three Different Ones)
DR10 0.00 dB -14.02 dB 10:20 04-Sheep
DR14 -4.92 dB -24.12 dB 1:26 05-Pigs On The Wing 2
*A Momentary Lapse Of Reason-D.S.
This one is tough to identify, same barcode, design as the original US mastering. It's possible CMU Pitman had exclusive manufacturing for the Doug.
DR12 -8.66 dB -25.45 dB 4:24 01-Signs of Life
DR12 -4.80 dB -19.85 dB 4:53 02-Learning to Fly
DR11 -5.42 dB -19.53 dB 6:09 03-The Dogs of War
DR12 -5.79 dB -20.60 dB 5:07 04-One Slip
DR11 -6.20 dB -20.54 dB 5:42 05-On the Turning Away
DR13 -4.80 dB -22.70 dB 7:28 06-Yet Another Movie/Round and Around
DR12 -12.57 dB -30.08 dB 1:46 07-A New Machine, Pt. 1
DR12 -4.81 dB -21.22 dB 6:17 08-Terminal Frost
DR10 -12.82 dB -28.95 dB 0:39 09-A New Machine, Pt. 2
DR13 -5.42 dB -20.85 dB 8:47 10-Sorrow