Pink Floyd RSD 2018 (mono Piper)

Spinning my copy for the second time today--nice dead silent, centered pressing. I obviously don't have an original pressing of any origin, so for me it sounds good for a lower fidelity mono mix from the late 60s, despite not having a dedicated mono cartridge or a mono switch on my tube amp.

Oh, and little to no sibilance in the Gnome on my setup (there's one part, 'another way for gnomes to say!' where the 'sssssss' is a little hot, but not totally distorted), but like some of the other Bernie Grundman vinyl reissues, I think the sound is a little hot at times. All in all this is a great pressing of the rarer mono mix and essential to any fan of the material who wishes to have it on vinyl without paying exorbitant prices on a vintage copy.

 

What do you mean hot? Like the volume is too high?

 

Thank you very kindly. Ordered one -- now they're down to 7 copies.

 

Yeah, right on the cusp of breaking up. It also might be how the original album was mixed or recorded in this case.

All in all it sounds probably as good as it could considering it wasn't cut directly from the analog masters.

 

Now only 5
They do some good deals at banquet records now and again, when Kraftwerks 3D the catalogue on 2xLP you got a free A1 poster with it (they have 1 left)
kraftwerk - 3-D The Catalogue
Also the vaccines new album is signed by the band
The Vaccines - Combat Sports

 

As a follow up, my copy just arrived today from amazon.co.uk. It was shipped in an lp mailer inside of a box with packing paper. The disc and sleeve are flawless. I’m looking forward to listening to it tonight.

 

Spinning this for the second time, sounds fabulous! I haven't compared it to the 1997 Mono vinyl or the 2007 CD release (although it's not on vinyl, yes) I also have. Anyone? The vinyl is so silent, this has to be a good pressing! Right?

 

'97 mono vinyl? I have a yellow marbled vinyl copy sourced from the '97 cd (obvious from the missing measure at the end of Flaming), and it sounds great, but I always thought it was a boot. Reaction to that? Anyway, the new reissue is definitely hotter and, yes, a bit more sibilant than the yellow marble. Also more warped and harder to track, unfortunately (the major problem is the organ chord in 4ths after the "whistling" effect in Astronomy Dom, which sounds like tape warble because of the warp). Still happy to have it, though, and I love the packaging.

 

Prices have come down big time on Discogs. 114 copies, starting at 26€.

 

Ok, I have compared this again to my early UK stereo copy (5th or 6th reissue) and can confirm that the early UK stereo is much better than this MONO reissue which I find to be grainy and bit messy. The only reason to get this if you have an early copy or one of the nicely done reissues from 70s Is for the MONO mixes which are interesting.

 

To be fair, I think the mono mix is precisely what we're all here for.

 

So an apple is much better than an orange - unless, of course, you like apples and oranges.

 

I figured some would also be interested in overall quality. I had provided my review earlier but needed to check my equipment before providing a final review. No need to fight against my opinion by trying to define what everyone is concerned about.

 

I don't that this applies to this post. I have compared a UK Parlophone Beatles White Album top loader stereo to a top loader mono. Different performance mixes aside, the stereo is far more dynamic than the mono. Yes, you can talk about the more coherent mono presentation.

So the OP talked about how the stereo seemed cleaner with less grain. Fair enough.

 

Sure but comparing an original Stereo to a reissued Mono and coming to the conclusion that the 1967 pressing is better is basically not especially helpful.

 

I think all opinions count and should be welcomed in this very subjective matter.

While I appreciate PATGOD been released in mono, I am still unsure which version, stereo or mono, that I prefer the most. I have no original to do fair comparisons but as for pressing both are recommendable.

 

So what next? Should someone compare the RSD mono "Piper" to.... take your pick... the RL cut of "Led Zeppelin II"? Lou Reed's "Metal Machine Music"?

Because comparing a 1967 stereo pressing to a 2018 mono reissue doesn't tell you much about the latters "quality". It's not especially revealing.

What if the perceived drop in "quality" is down to the mix?

 

That would be extreme and pointless. Some people are looking for the best regardless it is mono or stereo. I don’t but can understand that someone would.

 

Yeah, it's EXACTLY what a lot of people will look for about every pressing. Also have no idea why a comparison can't be made between the overall quality of a mono vs stereo version of something. Its done all the time. The only thing perplexing is people defending this reissue as if it was their first born.

 

Of course you can compare mono/ stereo. But then you should make statements about the mix. And not put down one version. In order to do that you needed to compare it to another mono pressing. Get? That?

What I especially like about your "review" is this passage:

Or 7th or 8th reissue perhaps? 13th maybe? It's great when people know what they are talking about!

 

I don't have any problem with this statement at all but it does seem like you post something that you know will really provoke responses and then have a go at everyone who replies.

BTW did you buy the Dylan and the Dead RSD release ? Any views on that ?

 

The guy don't like the mono mix, big deal.. Doesn't ruin my enjoyment of it.

 

OK, I posted about sound quality difference between 2 different versions of this album, giving the only comparison to the original copies to the reissue and it has upset people that I like an earlier, original version more? What has happened to these forums? I was actually attacked for it too. And no surprise that the challenging responses are from people who have not made that comparison and who also state that they don't care about sound quality. It's really a shame when this is the response to a comment that would be exactly what most people are looking for about this reissue. It's no mystery that the mono mix is different. I am truly embarrassed about what these forums have become.

I did not hear the reissue of the Dylan/Dead album yet.

 

Who is upset that you like an earlier version more? That's totally not what this criticism is about. Nobody would have said anything if you would have compared the RSD version to another mono version. Or would have done a mono/ stereo comparison.

You put down the new mono pressing without reference. That's the thing. What if all mono editions sound like that?

But: This discussion is already boring. This is why I'm out!

 

Well I read your original post and thought wow that's going to draw some responses due to the claim and the tone. So it seemed all rather predictable rather then a sad reflection of this forum.