Pink Floyd "The Wall" on Columbia C2K

How about these?

http://www.stevehoffman.tv/forums/showpost.php?p=459748&postcount=54

http://www.stevehoffman.tv/forums/showpost.php?p=38775&postcount=13

I would also site your numerous references to your ears being trained by Steve Hoffman himself, and how those ears, plus your brutally revealing system, make your opinion fact. I'm afraid that's just not the case.

You have a well-informed opinion and vigorously defend it, which is great, but it's really condesending and arrogant to suggest that the way you hear music is the only correct way to hear it.

BTW, in case you are wondering, I happen to agree with much of what you say about shotty modern mastering techniques -- but that is my opinion, it's not a fact.

Peace.

 

Nice try, but I'm still not seeing where I say my system is better than anyone else's Rudy just that mine is brutally revealing, which it is. Some members have much much better equipment than I do and have said so in the past.

Apologies if I seemed to be condescending and arrogant, but this is a simple case of it either is or it isn't. After hanging around with and asking numerous questions of Steve over a 5 year period my knowledge of these mastering details has increased exponentially. Enough where I feel confident to help members with their understanding. Please excuse me while I attempt to cover the majority of bases in this reply Rudy. I've never said my way is the only way. Vinyl pressings alone would negate this.

To listen to praise over something like this where members are being given false information to a clearly inferior mastering just makes me nuts. I seriously get tired of all the false praise for masterings I know aren't as good as another and when I try to help educate people I get nothing but criticism from those that believe they know and in reality don't. I'm glad that certain members believe they are right, but in this case of Pink Floyd they are not and I guarantee it.

If you like, not you personally here Rudy, eq. and compression futzed with masterings, so be it, I don't and neither do a lot of other Forum members because it takes away from the original engineers and the albums intent along with less than stellar sound. Please read, or reread as the case may be, how many SACD masterings over the last 3 years have at first been touted as the end all and be all that are later trashed by the same members who were praising them at first where I did not and said so. Also read JeffMCarney's comments above. He gets it.

My equipment at best is good, but no where near what some members here own. It doesn't matter not even one iota because the knowledge comes from the brain and not the equipment that only assists in this learning process. I can hear the differences between masterings in headphones for goodness sake, but without the education from someone who genuinely knows like Steve, I wouldn't have been able to. Quite often, and probably more than most know, I'm just parroting what's already been said years ago.

BTW, Dolby is just a brand and the originators of noise reduction in analog. There are many companies that use the same theories in digital noise reduction. Any NR is bad and Steve himself has said so FWIW. Whether I know one from the other is irrelevant as long as I can hear what it's doing.

RicP, my apologies to you as my intentions were never to insult you, just to help educate. You did take a pretty hard stance and hopefully one day you will see, or hear I should say, where I'm coming from.

 

http://www.stevehoffman.tv/forums/showpost.php?p=1079957&postcount=10

http://www.stevehoffman.tv/forums/showpost.php?p=506175&postcount=8

http://www.stevehoffman.tv/forums/showpost.php?p=506185&postcount=10

http://www.stevehoffman.tv/forums/showpost.php?p=286441&postcount=45

 

Exactly! Dolby is just a company that invented it. I just meant it's bad in the mastering process is all and wasn't referring to mixing using Dolby A.

 

The mini LP Animals sounds much better than my copy of the 1992/94 remastered CD, so I'm guessing it's actually the 1997 remaster. Which leads me to believe the Wall is also the 1997 remaster. However, I haven't done a serious head to head between the 2 Walls, so I'm not 100% on this.

 

I don't have the C2K, but I have the CBS/Sony 48DP pink obi Wall, and I definitely prefer the '94 remaster. It's not even close. Is the 48DP just the Japanese release of the C2K?

 

Something you still fail to grasp Dave is that opinions on which discs sound better to a particular person cannot be wrong, they are opinions.

I can appreciate that you are single minded and stubborn in your "cause" but you completely fail to see your condescending arrogance when you -- as you just did again -- attempt to quantify someone's preference as wrong.

You are not the end all and be all arbitrator of what is good and what is not, I suggest you really try to comprehend that. Your system is not the "ultimate reference" by which all should adhere, nor are your ears the "golden standard" by which all things are judged. A CD is going to sound quite different on a SET/Horns rig than it does on yours, does that make the other system "wrong?"

Lastly, you are not in a position to "guarantee" anything. I can play a 20 year old cassette and call it the best version I've ever heard and that's that.

The only person who has been consistently wrong in this thread is you, for thinking that stating your opinion and insulting those who disagree somehow makes you "knowledgeable."

 

FWIW, I've compared the MFSL, remastered, and orig Columbia made in Japan pressing of The Wall and much prefer the open sound on the Columbia CD. There's more "air" around the drums. I remember someone here disagreed with my opinion recently and stated that my equipment wasn't as good as his so he must be right and I must be wrong. But I didn't see Dave doing quite that. He stated his opinion strongly but I'm glad there are different opinions about releases.

It's the same thing as reading journalistic reviews of movies. If USA Today loves a movie then I know to wait to read a review from someone who's opinions are meaningful to me. If the NYT reviewer likes it then I'm more likely to see it, because I know my opinions are more in line with that publication. Same with, say [insert sh.tv member who's opinions I typcially disagree with], and Dave whose opinions are usually similar to my own re: sound quality.

Also the forum is nice enough to have the lovely Ignore function which I have made liberal use of and which I'm sure people have included me on too

 

I'm expecting bricks to be thrown at my head for saying so, but here goes:

I haven't been a Pink Floyd fan since the Syd days, and I'd never heard The Wall in its entirety until yesterday. I bought a copy of the C2K DADC version for $16 and played it through. I think the sound is great, although I have nothing to compare it to. But the songs are very tiresome, and I don't think I'll listen to it again.

Anyone need a C2K copy?

 

Still want those links, Dave?

Look, your message is valid. It's how you deliver the message that could use some work. Nobody likes to be told that they're not hearing what they're hearing.

 

Will you guys quit bitching at Dave. I consider his opinion to be a treasure trove of information, weather he is "Wright" or "wrong" in peoples opinions. It makes me wonder, if the MFSL wasn't worth so much, would people still be praising it and sticking to their guns as much as they are. I own one myself and would probably seek out a C2K, but I don't listen to the LP enough to warrant it. Play nice now kiddies.

 

Sent you a PM, Jim. Thanks!

I'm always ready to learn! Just dislike being lectured to...

 

Well, just for the sake of argument, here's what -I'd- say:
"Who told you this? Were they there when the album was mastered?"

I've not heard too many accurate pieces of 'insider' info related to Mobile Fidelity coming from this site, that's for sure.

 

Michael, this one was a red herring as I believe it was sourced from the original master tapes. However, there are others I do know about and will be happy to discuss with you privately.

 

Is this some big trade secret? These discs are all now out of print, and the original company that produced them is out of business and now under new management. What's the harm in discussing their business practices from 15 years ago?

In fact, on another thread here, we've been discussing how the new MFSL actually has apparently done this exact same thing - with the new Zappa disc. If there are other instances of this happening in MFSL's past, I'm sure the rest of us would like to hear about it, as well.

 

We don't discuss these things openly out of respect for our host. At least that's what I think.

 

Well, we're not discussing DCC or AF releases, and as far as I know, Steve never did any MFSL releases (right?). And like I said, the apparent use of a digital master is a hot topic over on that thread about the new Zappa MFSL release. Seems like it's fair game to me.

If we can't discuss source material for remasters... doesn't that kinda defeat the purpose of this board? Particularly if we're talking about a company that did and still does splash "Original Master Recording" across the front of every CD they released.

 

I have read this thread with interest. Any tips on "how to listen properly with the correct audio clues"? No doubt it would be best to listen in the same room with you or Steve and have you point out the "clues". But is there anything you can put in writing re: how to spot futzed-up mastering? Most of us don't have access to the original master tapes to compare...

And on a related note: in this thread you've mentioned not liking the MFSL DSOTM. What is the best digital version, in your opinion? If the SACD is best, then what's the best Redbook version?

 

Yeah, next time I'm in LA, I'll just drop in Professor Hoffman's class

 

IMO I don't like the SACD, it sounds too digital and clinical to me. The best redbook version I have heard is the Japanese Toshiba/EMI black triangle first pressing without TO in the matrix number.

As for listening to what clues the downside is that you have to be able to turn up your volume and forget the computers and headphones. I found out it isn't as easy as turn it on and listen unfortunately. I had to put in the hours of comparison between multiple copies, while following certain things Steve has posted here and at the old DCC Forums. Each and every one is on an album by album basis until you ingrain in your memory what the certain bad sounding versions have in common because they all don't share the same problems. Heh, it took me 3 years to be able to say I can identify exactly what the breath of life is that Steve's been discussing for years.

There are of course the more common things that most of us can readily identify with being smiley faced eq., no bottom end, exaggerated treble boost, over-compression, etc.

Admittedly it is getting harder to tell with todays mastering choices, but the one that always gets to me on these newer mastered versions, and is easily identifiable to me, is the over use of compression to gain volume that literally sucks the life out of the music. A lot of people seem to like these and believe they are better so I say rely on yourself. If you think it's good that's all that really matters.

 

Re: Dark Side Of The Moon.

I have to agree with Dave here. That early Japanese mastering is the smoothest, fullest and most pleasant one.

By the way, my copy is on a black-faced CD with the Harvest label. Catalogue number CDP 7 46001 2. Inner ring: CP 35-3017 20A1.

 

Andreas, if you get the opportunity to grab the actual black triangle version I discuss above I'd be interested to hear your evaluation of the two when compared side-by-side. FWIW I have actually done this and found the black triangle to be better.

 

Dave,

you know that my discs has the same digital content, i.e. mastering as yours? Look at the matrix number.

Let's not get into the discussion if two CDs with the same digital content can sound different. We will always disagree on that topic.

 

Dave,

That's classic...made me laugh. I've been meaning to put one of these up for sale but don't feel like "researching" what the heck conclusion we came to call it. I think it should be shortened to "JTEMIBT1PW/OTO".

 

... or if it contains the same mastering. Dave - we hammered this one. We sweated to get this Black Triangle/Harvest info into the archives, but we got there in the end. Let's move on - it's done.