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...

Discussion in 'Music Corner' started by TONEPUB, Sep 16, 2011.

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

    quicksrt Senior Member

    Location:
    City of Angels
    A bit of compression can bring up the lowest level information, and make the whole program sound cleaner and more detailed.

    It sounds like they did this tastefully.
     
  2. fredgsanford

    fredgsanford Forum Resident

    Location:
    Toronto
  3. fitzysbuna

    fitzysbuna Forum Resident

    Location:
    Australia
    picked it up today!
     
  4. Masza

    Masza Forum Resident

    Location:
    Finland
    Yeah, and the saddest thing is that it squashes the sound on that loud part a little bit. Of course that's only my opinion but that's how I feel and hear it.
     
  5. swanlee

    swanlee Active Member

    Location:
    Alpharetta
    AMLOR sounds bad in this set I would seriously avoid it if you are buying the cd's individually. Every other CD version I have sounds better an a Vinyl Rip I have destroys it.

    This is the only disc in the set that I think they missed on. Every other disc is either on par with the best CD versions, or sounds better.

    ASFOS, More, Ummagumma Studio side, Obscured by Clouds Sounds tons better then any other cd version out there.
     
  6. jumpinjulian

    jumpinjulian Forum Resident

    Maybe they want people to by the de-80's version of AMLOR when it comes out!
     
  7. Metralla

    Metralla Joined Jan 13, 2002

    Location:
    San Jose, CA
    what have you heard?
     
  8. Masza

    Masza Forum Resident

    Location:
    Finland
    I think it sounds good. Little more open than the original EMI release. Bass has also more definition
     
  9. rpd

    rpd Senior Member

    Location:
    Nashville
    Anyone?
     
  10. rpd

    rpd Senior Member

    Location:
    Nashville
    are you referring to the 96 or the 2011?
     
  11. Masza

    Masza Forum Resident

    Location:
    Finland
    I opened Dogs of War and Terminal Frost from 1997(?) remaster and from 2011 remaster in Audacity, raised the volume of the 2011 versions so that the peaks hit 0dB, and listened them side by side. They look almost the same and they sound almost the same.
     
  12. Mike McMann

    Mike McMann Forum Resident

    :cry: Man, that's too bad, that and "Division Bell" I was looking forward to.
     
  13. Lyle_JP

    Lyle_JP Forum Curmudgeon

    Location:
    Danville, CA, US
    The Division Bell (2011 vs Columbia)

    Previous comparisons:

    Animals (vs Shine On Sax)

    Meddle (vs all Sax versions)

    Okay, time for The Division Bell. This is a comparison to the Columbia Records CD. All issues of this album on Columbia are identical. I do not have the EMI version (available in the OBtW box) for comparison.

    First of all, this comparison has the most readily apparent differences yet. These masterings sound very different from each other. On the other hand, I'm further away than ever in deciding which is the keeper. Anyway, let's begin.

    The first track I compared was "What Do You Want From Me". The Columbia version has a somewhat thin sound on this track. The 2011 disc has more midrange and mid-bass boost in the EQ, and it put some meat on the bone, so to speak. There is also some high frequency roll-off apparent, which didn't seem to hurt this track. However, despite what the peak levels may show, there's been some compression here. Not an extreme amount (it's still far from brickwalled), but enough to be noticed. As quicksrt mentioned up-thread, a little compression tastefully applied can be beneficial. That seems to be the case on this track. All in all, the 2011 version is a more "full" listening experience. So far so good.

    Moving on, my next comparison was "Take It Back". The compression bothers me a lot more on this track. Although the EQ changes are less pronounced here than on "What Do You Want From Me", the mild mid-bass boost makes this track sound a bit bloated, and overall the track just sounds less defined and dynamic. Not bad on the 2011 disc, but the Columbia version has a slight edge.

    The third and final track I compared was "A Great Day For Freedom". Here the high-frequency roll-off is very apparent. The vocals had a natural sounding echo on the Columbia CD, like they were recorded in a large empty room. That effect is mostly gone on the 2011 disc, but what I'm hearing on the new disc (and this is the part where I think I might be going crazy or need my hearing checked) is a light artificial-sounding flange (?!?) instead. Is anyone else hearing this? And again, the loss of dynamic range, while not egregious, is audible. Here the Columbia version is my runaway favorite.

    So, here's the part where I don't trust my judgment much. The overriding question should be, "What recording best suits the music?". But how does one approach this without the bias of what they think the recording is "supposed" to sound like. With Animals and Meddle, it was easier, since I have heard so many different versions of these over the years and finally settled on the Shine On versions as my "go-to" discs (before this week, that is). In other words, I've never been "married" to the sound of any one recording on most of the older albums. But I've only ever heard Columbia's Division Bell for going-on 17 years, so my bias to this version being what it's "supposed" to sound like is strong.

    This new Division Bell has a very different EQ, and also has had modern mastering sensibilities applied to it (for better or worse). However, the original always had a very "digital" quality to it, and one could argue that the roll off of the high frequencies has cut some of the original album's harshness, and now brings these recordings more in line with their older sound.

    So I think I'll try an experiment this weekend. I'm going to let my nephew (an aspiring musician), who has never heard this album in any form before, listen to both in a blind test and tell me which he thinks "sounds better". I think this album needs some fresh ears.

    Still coming soon: Obscured By Clouds 2011 vs Sax (but I have yet to find a 2011 OBC in the wild!)
     
  14. Galaga King

    Galaga King "Drive where the cops ain't"

    I miss the days of the 50% off Borders coupon. I bought the John Lennon Signature Box that way.
     
  15. Myke

    Myke Listening

  16. jeffrey walsh

    jeffrey walsh Forum Resident

    Location:
    Scranton, Pa. USA
    Great site! Thank-you.
     
  17. Lyle_JP

    Lyle_JP Forum Curmudgeon

    Location:
    Danville, CA, US
  18. Masza

    Masza Forum Resident

    Location:
    Finland
    I bought The Division Bell for the first time over a year ago, it should be using the old EMI mastering.

    These are the waveforms for the track 7, Take It Back. First 2011 remaster, then 1994 EMI pressing: http://img7.imageshack.us/img7/9003/tdbb.jpg

    They look almost the same. Maybe there was compression used already in the old EU pressing of the album
     
  19. Myke

    Myke Listening

    Thank you Sir. Listening to the rip of the Columbia at work right now. God, I DO love this album !!!
    But then, that Gilmour/Wright chemistry never failed me.
     
  20. swanlee

    swanlee Active Member

    Location:
    Alpharetta
    The 2011 version is miles ahead of any other version of obscured by clouds. Same goes for More, ASFOS and Ummagumma studio side.

    Piper is a little better than previous versions but not by much.

    The rest of the discs are at least as good as other versions out there and preference will depend on personal taste.
     
  21. rpd

    rpd Senior Member

    Location:
    Nashville
    My question here was in reference to Obscured...
     
  22. jonboy71

    jonboy71 Forum Resident

    Location:
    Oxnard, CA
    Did you happen to listen to Poles Apart? I'm interested in the dynamic when the song comes back in after that "carnival" break.
     
  23. tlake6659

    tlake6659 Senior Member

    Location:
    NJ
    Animals is one of my favorite albums of all time. That being said I still prefer the original UK cd the best. The 32dp sounds too bright, the Sax remaster too harsh and the 2011 too bloated. All IMO of course.
     
  24. Myke

    Myke Listening

    Great. Now I'll be chasing an original UK...:help:
     
  25. Lyle_JP

    Lyle_JP Forum Curmudgeon

    Location:
    Danville, CA, US
    The life of a Floyd fan in search of the perfect CD. :laugh:
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page

molar-endocrine