Pink Floyd - DSOTM - Holy Grail

I have a JPN for UK Black face and that's good enough for me.

 

Interesting. Thanks for the info. Do the two discs sound the same to you?

Also, do you happen to know if Sax used the original master tape in '92?

 

It's really bad. Not sure what happened on that one.

 

They sound the same to me. My go-to disc lately has been a Japan for UK Black Face, but I love the Sax remaster too.

My understanding is that Sax used the original master tape for the 1992 remaster and again for the 2003 remaster (there's an ICE magazine article that confirms this which I can dig up). According to Vernon Fitch's (SH member "PFA") excellent website, the very first time that the original master tape had been used for a DSOTM CD release was for the Mobile Fidelity issue.

http://www.pinkfloydarchives.com/Articles/DSOTMCDM.htm

 

I would choose the correct tapes. You cant add ambiance, high frequency detail and remove tape hiss. Black triangle may have a slightly better EQ ( thats honestly debatable as we all disagree on here ) but using the actual master tape seems a tad closer as far as ambiance and detail goes.

Honestly I think the SACD is the winner.

Depends on what your reference is,...if its to sound like the original vinyl, there is one issue. The original vinyl most likely DOESNT sound just like the master tape, as im pretty sure it had eq changes specifically for the vinyl versions in the 70s. So to say the MFSL is not what the master sounds like....may be actually wrong.

 

Totally agree. No drawbacks with the SACD. I cant remember which ones I have now.....im too lazy to look, but I have a harvest one for sure..an older one and it sounds quite great for a run of the mill pressing!

 

I own the US version. My favourite version of all time is the quad vinyl.

 

Now you're freaking me out.

 

I get that a lot.

 

I've been listening to the 5.1 & forgetting about the stereo SACD layer.
Thanks for the reminder. Work! Now I've got to adjust the SACD player.

 

On my system, definitely yes. On another system I have no idea until I spend a few hours with it, but yes depending on the system.

 

Too lazy to search right now, but this is exactly what pig whisperer and I did and posted about it here in the past.

 

That would simply amaze me. Let's do it! I'd love to see it.

 

I'd be highly interested in the results as well. As far as I know, no one has ever successfully completed such a listening test with independent supervision and confirmation.

 

Well, you know, if it's that close in sound, let's all enjoy what we've found.

 

I'm definitely pro-enjoyment.
(You should know that by now, old friend )

 

I've got original 70's , 80's, Anniversary and MFSL LPs, plus MFSL CD

and do you know what?...
they all sound great!

I've never heard a bad sounding version of this record.

One day if I am really bored I'm gonna print out EVERY DSOTM thread
ever on SH.TV, make it into a book and take it to a publisher. It's anorakism
to it's extreme, and I love it!


ps don't really rate the album that much, so 'Lord knows why I have so many copies, but all were less than £15 so I won't lose any sleep.

 

A book? HA! You mean re-wallpaper your house, all your friends' houses, in fact your whole neighborhood, right?
You'd have the paper.

 

"I can't think of anything to say except...
I think it's marvelous! HaHaHa!"

 

Hi,

i just received my BT yesterday, it has CP35-3017-7 1A1 in the matrix so according to Vernons site it's a Sony pressing. I paid 53EUR (65USD) was that an ok price?

As for the sound: it's nice but i got new speakers yesterday too so i can't say anything as to whether it sounds better or worse than my MFSL UDII. I'll do an A/B comparison this weekend.

Regards,
Fabian

 

I believe only you can answer that question for yourself.

Enjoy the disc and report back with your A-B comparison with the UDII.

 

I've compared the UDII to the non TO BT before. I didn't care for the UDII becuase it sounds like they added way too much bass and super high treble. I think BT's EQ is about the closest it gets to the original UK LP as far as the CD releases go. I assume that since the Japanese mastering engineer that did the BT just did a flat transfer, that means he basically used Alan Parsons' EQ, which also explains its superior sound.

 

Somebody explain the market to me !?!? THIS isn't up in the 100s, but rather $50 - $90 !?!?!? Out of print for 20 years, first pressing, Japanese import, legendary status, discussed here over and over...
yet lesser recordings cost up in the 100s, and I'VE PAID IT !!!

I have the 1973 vinyl, the 2003 SACD, and the unauthorized Parsons DTS mix, but at such a low price I think I'd be remiss not to grab a copy.

 

Collector's markets are weird sometimes. I have a late 70s Harvest US pressing, the original MFSL vinyl, the blackface Japan for US Harvest CD, and the SACD. The Harvest CD is my favorite version. I bought it for $14.99 in 1986 at a record store.

 

I would be careful about assuming they are flat transfers or that they are an engineers EQ. I’ve seen more than one person assume that Barry made flat transfers of his LZ CD’s and he has made it clear that they were not.