Dismiss Notice
We are making some updates and reconfigurations to our server. Apologies for any downtime or slow forum loading now or within the next week or so. Thanks!

Pink Floyd Discovery Box is here... (part2)

Discussion in 'Music Corner' started by MilesSmiles, Oct 8, 2011.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. MilesSmiles

    MilesSmiles Oenologist Thread Starter

  2. zoldar

    zoldar Well-Known Member

    Location:
    Rotterdam
    all is said and done :)
     
  3. CaptBeyond

    CaptBeyond Well-Known Member

    Location:
    Above the Ozone
    In that case, might as well just shut down the whole dang Internet and be done with it once and for all. :shake:
     
  4. Wmacky

    Wmacky Forum Resident

    Question for the mini LP replica fans:

    Can anyone give their thoughts on the packaging as compared to the OBTW box? After picking of the Beatles, And Led Zep Boxes, I would rather all my full discography box sets be in the mini LP replica format. The lack of plastic liners are not an issue for me as that can be rectified, but are these close enough to Mini replicas to satisfy?

    Would the difference in SQ be to big of a price to pay if going with the OBTW set for those true LP replicas?
     
  5. Mike McMann

    Mike McMann Forum Resident

    I have both sets and the OBTW mini sleeves are very well done. Discovery's are basically gate fold digipaks. The sound however on Discovery is far superior to OBTW though.
    It would have been nice if the box itself were done like the Beatles mono, Led Zeppelin and Eagles sets with the mini sleeves. I imagine it was just too large a discography to have it that way.
     
  6. Runt

    Runt Forum Resident

    Location:
    Motor City
    Would have loved to have the Discovery box CDs in nice, high-quality mini-LP sleeves myself.
     
  7. Norm Apter

    Norm Apter Well-Known Member In Memoriam

    Location:
    Worcester, MA
    I'm finding these remastered discs to be crankable. I'm not sure I would agree with those who have remarked that the 2011 remasters are louder than the Sax remasters, which I've held on to. I've got AHM (the title track) turned way up now and it sounds fantastic. Especially that middle section in which Gilmour and Wright dual on guitar and organ...my favorite part of the song.
     
  8. reb

    reb Money Beats Soul

    Location:
    Long Island
    Based upon what I've heard so far. I'd say this is the best sounding batch of digital remasters I've heard in a long time. In no way IMO can these be compared to The Beatles remasters (which some folks have). These Floyd remasters have been done the right way- no obvious flaws-just great "audiophile" caliber sound:thumbsup:
     
  9. Maidenpriest

    Maidenpriest Setting the controls for the heart of the sun :)

    Location:
    Europe
    How can they be if they are clipped and too loud, I have the new 2011 ones and I still can't see how they sound better than the Sax 1994's and original CDP's, I find the 2011's sound to harsh and digital, please direct me to examples so I can compare because i don't get it?? :confused:
     
  10. bonjo

    bonjo Forum Resident

    Location:
    USA
    Why don't -you- provide an example of where they are clipped/too loud/harsh compared to the Sax versions?

    Since you keep bringing this up it should be easy: Just provide the track time/info, and explain exactly what you're hearing on the '94, vs. what you hear on the 2011. That way everyone can know what you're talking about.

    Otherwise your criticism is just boilerplate 'remasters are too loud' SH Forum noise.
     
  11. Maidenpriest

    Maidenpriest Setting the controls for the heart of the sun :)

    Location:
    Europe
    Ok, I find the compression has bought up background noise, Scarecrow and Fat Old Sun as examples, I am comparing those songs at the moment, i am listening on headphones, even when the volume is reduced i find they give me earache compared to the 1994/Cdp's. I really want to like these 2011 (I have paid my money, right?) and dump the rest but at the mo I don't hear what everyone is saying about how wonderful they are ?
     
  12. oregonalex

    oregonalex Forum Resident

    Try the final Dramatic Theme on More. Listen carefully to Gilmour's guitar. In this one I have found the opposite to be true - Sax was harsh, digital and cringeworthy, Guthrie smooth and pleasant.

    I am sure this will be very system/room dependent.These differences may not be significant in many listening situations. If the Saxes work for you, hey, be happy. You can sell the new ones and recover a few pennies on them or just file them away and give them a spin in a year. Maybe something will click then.
     
  13. Maidenpriest

    Maidenpriest Setting the controls for the heart of the sun :)

    Location:
    Europe
    Yes, i think there is such a lot of music to do comparisons that it is very difficult, one song on the 1994's can sound better, but then the next song on the 2011 is better, with The Beatles Remasters 3 songs bothered me, with 2 songs being better on the original 1987 Cd's IMO, its gonna take a long time with these 2011 to decide which songs are better, i do think the PCM DSOTM on the Immersion set is the best I have heard though so far for this album, but i find also the added 'Compression' on the new 2011's has made 'sound effects' less natural such as the intro to 'Fat Old Sun' which is much less realistic because it brings up the hiss levels and you can hear its source is from the EMI tape library, saying that Alan's Psychedelic Breakfast sounds better in its 2011 version !!
     
  14. oregonalex

    oregonalex Forum Resident

    They felt louder initially and I trimmed the volume when comparing them to Sax, but then realized, they are not louder, just fuller sounding. I now listen to them at the same or a bit higher volume than the Saxes.
     
  15. oregonalex

    oregonalex Forum Resident

    I also think the mini LP replica is the only way to go package wise.
    When I caught wind of the new Discovery packaging and the early reports of not much SQ improvement over Sax, I bought the OBTW box. I was pleasantly surprised at the quality of the replicas. Not quite on a par with the Japanese ones, but very good. I'd say if the Japanese are 10, the OBTW is 7. Thick cardboard, good quality printing, faithful replicas for the most part. On the bad side - the disks are more difficult to retrieve an insert, a couple of the gatefolds do not line up square when closed and the insides of the gatefold spines have a tendency to collapse funny.

    Soundwise, I thought I will just have to supplement a few of the non-Sax versions in the box with 2011s and be all set.
    I, however, ended up buying most of the 2011s anyway up to The Wall except Piper and DSOTM. But I am not at all sorry I got the OBTW. Having the box makes me not mind the new packaging as much and the new pictures are sort of fun to look at. The new one in AHM is hillarious.

    Would I rather have a Japanese made mini LP replica box with the 2011 masters? You betcha. Would I buy one now and sell what I have? Probably not.

    Added: Oh, I also "improved" the 2011 packaging - I put the disks in slightly trimmed Japanese round baggies and put the digipacks in Japanese resealable bags. They now look almost respectable next to the mini LP collection.
     
  16. Wmacky

    Wmacky Forum Resident

    I guess I'm on the fence then. I like what I'm reading about the new box, but rather have the "Original" replicated art. However, the new art does look nice. I'm one of the few here that DOES like the organic, natural feel, and look of well done cardboard covers versus cheap looking plastic jewel cases. As long as the discs are, or can be protected with scratch limiting liners!
     
  17. LeeS

    LeeS Martini Time

    Location:
    Atlanta
    Been listening to More today and really like it. Still $9.99 at Best Buy.
     
  18. GreenDrazi

    GreenDrazi Truth is beauty

    Location:
    Atlanta, GA
    I don’t hear any compression artifacts at all in “Fat Old Sun”. Below are 3 wav forms of the track from the MFSL (top), an EMI and the 2011 (bottom) and you can see the track had unused 2 - 3 dB’s of unused headroom to begin with (and 6 - 7 dB’s in one of the channels) on the MFSL disc.

    Additionally, the difference in RMS value for the 2 albums (MFSL vs 2011) is only 2.73dB’s and is identical to the EMI. A RMS album value of -4.28 dB’s is not a loud album at all - many audiophile albums are at this level or higher. The primary difference is that the track value for the song has gained a lot more (4.84 dB’s louder) compared to the MFSL but it is very similar to the EMI.


    Atom Heart Mother - “Fat Old Sun”

    MFSL
    Official DR value (album): DR11
    replaygain album gain -1.55 dB
    replaygain track gain +1.04 dB

    EMI (mid-90's?)
    Official DR value (album): DR11
    replaygain album gain -4.28 dB
    replaygain track gain -3.56 dB

    2011
    Official DR value (album): DR10
    replaygain album gain -4.28 dB
    replaygain track gain -3.80 dB
     

    Attached Files:

  19. Skyflash

    Skyflash Forum Resident

    Location:
    Mexico, NY
    As of today 10/8, I just got back from my local Best Buy and they still have all of the
    single disc discovery editions on sale for $9.99. I was thrown at first as they all have the $11.99
    stickers on them but the displays and end caps have the $9.99 on them. I didn't see TDB
    and AHM and just then the beautiful cute blonde just happened to walk up with her arms
    full of more copies to stock on the shelf. She was really nice and helpful too.
     
  20. bellbrass

    bellbrass Forum Resident

    Location:
    Kentucky, USA
    I have been comparing my Dark Side of the Moon 2011 remaster to my MFSL gold disc version. So far, the 2011 version seems louder, and that's it. I can't see any clear winner, sound-wise, between the two, and that's saying a lot for the 2011 version.

    For what it's worth, I have state-of-the-art equipment.....a custom-built solid-state headphone amp, Cambridge CD player, and Beyerdynamic headphones.
     
  21. rockclassics

    rockclassics Forum Resident

    Location:
    Arkansas, USA
    And this was at Best Buy? Really? Sure wish things were looking better at the local BB here.
     
  22. Blu Falcon

    Blu Falcon New Member

    Location:
    Near Washington DC
    The Discovery discs are NOT mini-LPs replicas.

    As far as presentation, the OBTW mini-LP packaging is top quality (I have the EU box set). The OBTW set does a great job of faithfully reproducing the original LPs. Albums that were originally gatefolds are also replicated as CD gatefolds (Ummagumma, DSOTM, Animals, The Wall, TFC, TDB). Opinions vary, but I find the SQ of the OBTW set to be generally very good. While there are some titles that have better masterings available (e.g. Animals), there are also stand-outs (The Wall), but nothing just outright bad. Personally, from a collector's standpoint, if there was only one PF box set I could own it would be the OBTW set. The Discovery set might be more consistent in terms of SQ, but the individual CD packaging is very weak, and there's nothing collectible about it really. I would only supplement select OBTW CDs with better masterings from the 2011 set if need be.
     
  23. bonjo

    bonjo Forum Resident

    Location:
    USA
    How exactly is the Discovery CD packaging weak? The sleeves are well made/glossy/vibrant/etc, or at least they are in the Japanese edition. The cover art is (mostly) faithful to the original albums, and the booklets are very high quality just like the Beatles remasters.

    I have all the original Japanese mini LPs, and while the packaging is great it's also a pain in the a** when all you want to do is put on the CD. All the extra work just to get the disc out of the elaborate miniature LP, trying your best not to damage anything, etc. I actually prefer the new packaging for this reason alone. It's simpler and still looks great.

    As for collectibility, they made a ton of those OBTW boxes, if you're expecting them to really be worth something one day I wouldn't hold your breath...
     
  24. Blu Falcon

    Blu Falcon New Member

    Location:
    Near Washington DC
    Yes, when compared to the faithful reproduction of the OBTW box set the packaging of the new remasters are weak. The OBTW set actually look like mini-LPs the way they were meant to be. The print on the CD themselves are even faithful to the original LP labels for the most part. The OP says he likes mini-LP replicas, which save the pretty glossy packaging, the 2011 remasters are not. So from a mini-LP packaging standpoint, if that's what they're supposed to be, they're not of the same standard as the OBTW set in that regard. And unlike some people, I'm not after music for the perceived worth in the future, so I can give a rats *** if my box set gains value or not. I value the content within and put more stock into what it's worth to me now not later. As a Pink Floyd collectible, it is a nice set to own given the attention to detail to make these look like mini-LPs. It's something you can hold onto and pass along to your kids and retains its cool factor. As far as packaging for the new remasters, I'd take the hard jewel case and artwork of the Doug Sax remasters over these any day. Enjoy the rest of your weekend.
     
  25. bonjo

    bonjo Forum Resident

    Location:
    USA
    Thanks, I will!
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page

molar-endocrine