Pink Floyd: Remasters 1994 versus 2011

Depends on the disc. Personally, I thought Meddle and Animals are the two biggest improvements. WYWH and DSOTM are somewhat improved.

There are several threads on the forum where improvements are discussed.

 

I don't mean to spoil the party, but I think such a poll will be more reliable in a year or two. The wave of excitation might affect the results at this point. I listened to some of the albums and, so far, the 1994 sounds generally more balanced to these ears. But, I must admit, it's by no means night and day. The 2011 versions might end up being the most popular also in the long run, but poll results suggest a huge difference and, in my opinion, this is not the case.

 

Im pretty sure that people that have the EU 1994 pressings, in most cases take the 2011 as equal or slightly better ones.

 

I'm pretty sure of the contrary (at least based upon people I know and whose ears I trust). Difference is not a big one, anyway

 

The only reason I've bothered with the Experience versions is for the live discs. The 2011 DSOTM doesn't sound radically better than the previous James Guthrie version, but that live disc is sublime!

 

+1.

 

And in my opinion, you are very, very wrong.

Have a nice day.

 

1994 remasters for me

 

As already mentioned here, some of the dics from 1994 EU pressings contain wrong (older) masterings..why want those if can have better ones?

 

But not by much.

Well, that is everyone's personal decision, but the new remasters are much better - in my opinion.

Case in point: Dark Side Of The Moon - Money

Listen to the first few seconds until the bass comes in. In the new version, it has wonderful clarity, that is missing from the Sax remaster. The bass resonates fully. The old remaster is not bad, it just lacks clarity. "Nothing special" fits it well.

Please make that comparison and report back if you hear the same.

 

Can someone point me in the right direction as to where I can confidently buy a new copy of Obscured By Clouds with the Doug Sax remastering !!

 

Someone please correct me if I'm wrong, but I've always understood that if there's a "R" (remastered) logo on the spine, it's a Sax remaster. Not sure if this answers your question though.

 

Can you order from Amazon U.S. from your location? If so,

http://www.amazon.com/Obscured-Clou...=sr_1_1?s=music&ie=UTF8&qid=1323178556&sr=1-1

Look for a 1996 copyright year.

This all said, I've had the Sax for years and I find 2011 vastly superior, especially after comparing them on my newly upgraded CD player. Good luck either way!

 

Great, thanks for the advice

 

I've not found any comments on this thread re The Division Bell

Having lived with the latest version for a while I've finally got my hands on an original. The original sounds less etched & more natural & enjoyable to listen to. The original is less good in a hi-fi sense (eg less detail) but better in a musical sense (eg I want to sing along in places).

 

I think the 2011 remasters are overly clean, dark and veiled. For example, when the drum groove starts on Us and Them (Dark Side album), I almost can't hear the cymbals. The '94 Sax versions are brighter and they sound much better to me. (I don't really understand those who dislike this version. Maybe they didn't hear the real 1994 remasters because of the wrong releases: http://forums.stevehoffman.tv/threa...tered-in-europe-my-empirical-analysis.231317/)

 

It depends. From the titles I have heard, the Doug Sax remaster of Piper is perhaps the better of the two, but the 2011 is very good nonetheless. The 2011 DSOTM and WYWH are both better than the 1994 as far as I'm concerned. And the 2011 remaster of More has a more balanced-sounding version of "The Nile Song", which is fake stereo on every version that I've ever heard but has been balance-corrected on the 2011 remaster.

 

I found Rick Wright's keyboards to be more prominent on the 2011 versions.

 

Didn't vote as I have only heard one of the 2011 remasters, 'The Wall'. To my ears the 1994 (7243 8 31243 2 9) sounds better. Liked the 2011 one too.

 

My comparison is between the 2011 and the Doug Sax remasters (from 1994). Most of the 1994 EU "wrong" pressings have a worse mastering (e.g. "Obscured by Clouds", "Dark Side Of The Moon", "Wish You Were Here"). An exception is "Meddle", as the 1994 EU mastering is actually the old Japanese mastering and some people consider it preferable.

 

Not quite sure what originally happened as the 90's remasters were correct releases in US but somehow individual EU-releases and also "Oh By The Way" had older different remaster released instead.
This was talked about earlier here, but cant quite remember how it went down..
Anyways, I got few different pressings of the albums on cd (and vinyl too), but I kinda almost forgot about doing any comparisons as now with the 2011 issues,
we have all the normal studio-albums in equal mastering and those became really sort of my main go to editions.

I think I have to read this topic carefully when got time (or perhaps few others aswell):
http://forums.stevehoffman.tv/threa...tered-in-europe-my-empirical-analysis.231317/

 

There's really many topics on the matter with 1994 etc masterings and I could not really put too many links on the previous message.
And I put that one only as little example there.

 

An original Vinyl pressing, which I have on most releases.. they sound superb.

 

I've only got DSOTM and WYWH and they both have 1992 copyright dates on them. They are UK/EU issues. What are the 94's, are they different to what I have? Do I "need" the 2011's?

 

The Alan Parsons 4.0 mixes on the BDs of DSoTM and WYWH.

Would love to see similar treatment of Meddle or Animals next.