pink floyd wish you were here CD

Which is better sounding, the limited edition 2001 UK 25th anniversary edition or the gold Sony SMB mastersound CD? The anniversary edition is certainly less expensive.

As to my tastes in sound - I like the 1994 Doug Sax remaster of The Wall far better than the MoFi version and I pursue accuracy, not "soft and analog." (This is a side note, but The Wall got remastered in the U.S. in 1992 and 1997 and in the UK in 1994, when US Columbia lost the copyright sometime about the turn of the millenium Americans started to receive the 1994 UK remaster).

 

I like the US Columbia/CBS 1997 Remaster of The Wall. It IS different than the one available now on Capitol/EMI(from 1994), contrary to what most people think.

 

I have that one coming in the mail, but now I have to decide what the esnipe for Wish You Were Here.

 

Doug Sax says it's not different according t0o some article. We had a whole thread on this like 3 years ago BUT I never compared the 2.

I like the 1997 Sony remaster as well. The gold disc sounded really good too.

I know people love that 2 track 1st pressing but I dont think it's worth all $$$.

 

This subject has been discussed ad nauseum. A search should yield pertinent information.

 

Is this thread about Wish You Were Here or The Wall?

 

Wish You Were Here originally, but then reference was made to The Wall. Both have been discussed extensively.

 

When I did a search I only found one reference to the Sony gold CD of Wish You Were Here. Maybe I should have been less precise than Sony SBM mastersound.

I see a lot of references to the Sony mastersound edition, but I don't see anything addressing the specific issue of a shootout with the 2001 anniversary edition. That's the most important thing to me at the moment. Whatever becomes of this thread, please don't bring up obscure original pressings of anything from Pink Floyd. That's the problem with most Pink Floyd threads, the devolve into an incoherent discussion of obscure pressings from different countries. The Pink Floyd remasters, alone amongst rock bands with the sole exception of the Spinal Tap soundtrack, have truly hi-fi remasters and chasing original pressings from them is pointless.

 

The SBM Mastersound version of Wish You Were Here is IMHO the best-sounding one; but the differences between the versions available are VANISHINGLY SMALL. I give the SBM the nod, because it seems the snare drum on "Have A Cigar" has more definition and heft. That's it though. What I don't like is that wasteful, box-set sized packaging; what were they thinking?

 

here's a couple:

http://www.stevehoffman.tv/forums/showthread.php?t=87670&highlight=pink+floyd

http://www.stevehoffman.tv/forums/showthread.php?t=98060&highlight=pink+floyd

later, chris

 

I believe Steve Hoffman has said that he likes the Sony Mastersound Gold CD best, so I assume it sounds close to how his remaster would. I picked one up and I must say that it sounds exceptional. As far as I know, there haven't been any truly horrible CD's of this album...so you're basically trying to find the best of a good batch, which can be difficult. It definitely brings out the more anal retentive members of the board, for better or worse.

 

The 25th anniversary edition seams like an unknown quantity.

 

I think that's because it's not a unique mastering - it's just a clone of whatever was already available at the time - it may even be the same as a disc you already have.

 

Ah. I don't have a WYWH disc yet.

Changing topic slightly, were Momentary Lapse, Division Bell, or Pulse remastered? If the question about Pulse or Division Bell seams silly, Ozzy's No More Tears and Live and Loud got remastered 3 and 2 years after their initial release.

 

This is the one I listen to on CD...maybe once every couple months. I have no complaints. If I find the 2 track version in a used rack somewhere I'd certainly snatch it up, but there is no way I'd blow a significant amount of $$$ on it.

 

Momentary Lapse and Division Bell were Digital Recordings anyway-so re-masterings would not be appropriate

 

Pointless?

Different strokes for different folks....

 

He also said he hasn't heard the early Japanese 2-track CD.

These two seem to be the forum's favourites.

 

To answer the original question, the Sony Mastersound is the better of the two IMO.. It's more expensive, so it depends how much you enjoy the album, whether it's worth it to you. Also, what kind of system you'll be playing it back on would make a difference to me...a main rig system at home, or mostly though say, your computer or IPOD type device? (I have and enjoy both types)

I would say without hesitation, the $$$ original 2 track pressing is better than both, but thats big bucks, and again, it depends on whether it's worth it to YOU. (It was to me-but I'm a Floyd nut)

 

Because I spend all of my money on software my main listening system is a set of Sony MDR-7506 headphones plugged into a M-Audio Revolution 5.1 soundcard (better DAC than 7.1 with a dedicated headphone "amp" IC) and I use PowerDVD for playback with the output mode on Dolby Headphone, medium sized room. My stereo system is rather pathetic and given that hardware technology is in serious flux I feel no need to buy a better system at the moment, though I could easily spend $3k tomorrow if I felt there were something worth getting. My computer speakers are Samson Resolv 50a speakers that have better high end than my headphones, which I constantly think about replacing with Westone Labs ES2's, the problem is that I don't think I'd get much benefit from doing that unless I also buy a dedicated outboard headphone amp with USB connector, which costs another $900.

However cheap my gear is, I can readily hear the differences between different versions of the same recording. I got into this because I noticed that with laserdiscs I was collecting the ones made in Japan seamed to consistently sound better even on my cheap stereo than USA pressings, so then I started to replace the USA ones with ones made in Japan, and then I thought that I'd try Japanese CD's...

Cost is an issue, and for all my love of Pink Floyd I don't think that the Mastersound disc would offer enough bang for the buck for me.

Digital remaster inappropriate for digitally recorded work? If that were true there wouldn't be a difference between XRCD and XRCD24.

 

Well then I think you answered your question.

 

Momentary Lapse has been remastered and sounds great. Everything up to that album has been. Delicate and Division Bell have not been because Sony still has the rights. When those 2 albums move to Capitol then they will probably get remastered at some point.

 

I do not understand this. Brothers in Arms was a digital recording, and it has been remastered a few times, with each version sounding different. Maybe you are assuming that the original issues of Momentary Lapse and Division Bell represent the best possible mastering efforts, but I don't know that we can assume that.

 

Well I'm not saying that we have the best versions possible-but if it was digitally recorded, mixed and mastered then presumably all we could end up with is a "re-mix"? But someone who knows more about the process would need to comment. Quite a lot of the work done in the remastering process seems to center around the analogue to digital conversion, and as this stage is missing...

 

Applying equalization does not equate to re-mixing, so there's room for infinite variability when remastering a 'DDD' recording.