pink floyd wish you were here CD

Logically, that makes perfect sense. Yet, many of the forum favorites, the black triangles for instance, are like that. . . .

I can't say whether it was digital compression or analogue.

See how in the '95 vs the '92 so many of the small peaks are closer to the -5dB line? Also that the black middle band is fatter? (It is not as night-and-day as a modern master, but look closely.) Yet, the maximum peaks are the same, -0.2dB. That would mean the quieter sounds are louder, yet the loudest are just the same, no? What would you call that, other then compressed?

That also agrees with what I hear, so I stand by my analysis.

 

There is at least a '97 remaster for WYWH as well and probably a '94 remaster too. As was stated earlier in the thread, much of Pink Floyd's material was remastered in '92 and '97 in the USA and '94 in the UK. Sometime about the turn of the millenium, most of the '97 USA remasters were replaced with '94 UK remasters (exception being Momentary Lapse, which is still the '97 remaster). However, the latest remaster of Meddle is a '92 remaster and the current (Best Buy) remaster of DSotM is a '90 remaster (with the 20th anniversary edition having a '93 remaster).

 

dongle, as with Kind of Blue, I appreciate your analysis here. I still prefer the Japanese two-track mastering of Wish You Were Here over the others, but you did excellent work. Thanks!

 

I personally prefer the '85 over the Mastersound.

 

This particular one is marked "(c) 1994 Pink Floyd Music" and "Digital Remaster (p) 1992". So I'd imagine '92 & '94 are one and the same.

This site:
http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/PFArchives/DUSCDLP.htm#WYWH1
Lists a "1997 Anniversary Edition" and a "Capitol Records 2000 reissue" yet above in this thread Juan Samus notes that the anniversary issues are just clones of the previous masters. Do you in fact know if they are different?

 

Yep, just my opinions, nothing more. Always glad to hear yours too.

 

No, the '92 and '94 remasters were done by completely different record companies. They are not one and the same! It is possible, however, that WYWH never got a '94 remaster. The Capitol records 2000 reissue will be the latest remaster that Capitol did in the U.K. The '97 issues are definitely a different remaster, done exclusively for Sony/Columbia, that's the series of remasters that advertises itself as being overseen by the band.

The 25th anniversary edition of WYWH is a UK issue, and it does not have a seperate remaster so it will be identical to the 2000 Capitol re-issue.

 

Thanks for posting your findings dongle!

Here's a quick rundown on my copies of wywh from worst to best (this is not an attempt at making a definitive list, just my opinion on the versions that I've heard):

6. Portugese vinyl pressing: Nice eq/balance, but sounds veiled and lacks detail.

5. Dutch cd from the mid-eigthies: Has a pinched, stressed midrange that i don't like at all.

4. Doug Sax Remaster: I have this cd, but through this forum I've discovered it is in fact digtally identlcal to the dutch pressing. So I guess I've never heard the doug sax effort on this one

3. German vinyl (second pressing): Very nice and fluid midrange, but a bit boosted on the frequency extremes, this is my choice for late night low volume listening.

2. Mastersound cd: Very detailed, the quiet parts has amazing detail, but the loudest parts can be a bit harsh (not much at all though), which makes my choice:

1. UK vinyl (shvl 814 a-1/b-3): Just about perfect to my ears, very nice eq (if any) and it makes me want to turn the volume up

 

OK, starting to sort this out, but it's making my head spin.

Just to confirm, the site I linked above lists; Columbia Records 1997 Anniversary Edition, CK 68522, December 16, 1997. That would be the "band approved" one? Is that also the Doug Sax version? I guess I need that one. . .

They also list; "Capitol Records 2000 reissue" as having the exact same "Digital Remaster (p) 1992 . . . (c) 1994 Pink Floyd Music Ltd" text. So, that would mean the Capitol 2000, the UK 25th anniversary, and the version I rank last are one and the same mastering?

And what the heck is with "1997 Anniversary Edition" anyways. The 22nd anniversary?

 

Nicely done dongle thank you !

I have among other versions (BF Japan) the 2 track japanese version and the "now made .." version and prefer the 2 track.
The reason for this I think is, I have the Grado RS1 and also had the Sennheiser 650 (which should be fairly close to the 600s) and I must say, that the Senns sounded more smooth and "muted" and therefore the already smooth sounding CDs were too much of that, but the Grados really give you detail and clarity at the cost of being VERY sensitive to minimal amounts of compression or boosted highs, so going with the Grados makes the smooth masterings really shine. But with the Senns I always preferred the slightly less duller versions ....

 

I have a pair of Grado SR80s. I liked them at first, but grew to hate them after a time. I am squarely in the smooth and euphonic camp, not the hyped detail camp. Not so when I was younger. That said the HD-600s do not sound recessed or dark at all to me.

The '85 US disc was on it's way towards being harsh, and like I say in another mood I may prefer the softness of the two-track. On this audition it didn't step over the line, and I liked the extra clarity and dynamics. The later ones did step over that line for me.

 

Next up for dongle: Steely Dan Aja on CD.

 

Okay...so, I've tracked down an early WYWH cd pressing on the net. It's either the '84 2 track or the '85 5 track. I've scanned the other threads on this topic, and I'm still a little confused. It's listed as CK 33453, with a matrix # of DIDP 50004 11A10. The back of the cd case says made in Japan, and there is no "Now Made In The U.S.A." on it.

If I'm reading the previous threads correctly, this could be either the '84 or '85. Is that right? The only way to tell definitively is if it says 35DP-4 on the inner ring of the cd or by putting the cd in a cdp and seeing if it shows up as 2 tracks. Do I have all that right?

 

Yes, and this is most likely the 5 track version.

 

Thanks. That's my guess too. I'll probably get it either way, but it affects how much I'm willing to pay.

 

I should have been more careful. The 20th anniversary edition of Dark Side of the Moon is a 1992 remaster just like the one at Best Buy. It looks like 1992 is a baseline remaster. In addition, both The Wall and Atom Heart Mother have a 1994 remaster. I have the 1994 remaster of The Wall, remastered by Doug Sax, and I think it is fantastic, beats the snot out of the MoFi gold CD. Wish You Were Here -> Momentary Lapse were remastered in 1997 by James Guthrie supervised by Pink Floyd. However, Doug Sax claims the 1997 remaster of the Wall is identical to his own (haven't heard it yet).

The redbook layer of the 30th anniversary edition of Dark Side of the Moon is a new remaster and it sounds awful.

There is a 2004 remaster of the Final Cut. I just got it and it sucks, although it doesn't suck as bad as most remasters this decade. What this means is, when Columbia loses the rights to Momentary Lapse -> Pulse they will inevitably be remastered and the remaster will be terrible.

 

I have compared the Dynamic range (RMS) of my 3 different WYWH discs. This is the Waveform statistics from Adobe. All from the title track.

3 place:
USA CK 33453 five track (Same as Australian CDCBS 80955)

 

2 place:
UK silverface ( This is the same? as the 1 place only different/louder volume)

 

1 place:
Japan blackface. I have done some listening tests between this and the USA disc and I think I prefer this one. A little lower in volume and a little less tape hiss. It sounds like it comes from a slightly better tape.

 

Correct. With that matrix number, it is likely the 5 track.

 

dongle, thanks for the great review. I can follow your points clearly. The 2-track sounds very very smooth and nice, but the early US 5-track also has a certain quality, definitely more bass and fuller sounding than the 2-track. It's definitely a good mastering. I am going back and forth between the 5-track and the 2-track, although I really like the smoothness of the 2-track.

I also agree with you on the mastersound. The wav-forms only looks slightly compressed, and it is overall not really much louder than the 5-track, but it still has a somewhat compressed sound to it. Sounds to me almost like if everything below around -10 dB was a little raised in volume (compressed), and everything louder than -10 dB was not changed with regards to the volume level. Not sure if something like that can be done in the digital domain, or if that kind of sounds is maybe part of the SBM mastering trademark (although some other SBM masterings don't necessarily have that trademark sound).

 

I also have the UK original vinyl with cellofan sleeve. The USA CK 33453 sounds very close to the LP. IMO it has a little more "body" with more (too much?) punch in the low end than the LP. The Japan blackface is even closer in sound to the LP than the USA disc. The main difference beeing that the USA disc has more bass than the Japan blackface (and the LP).

 

Just buy it!!!

As I've mentioned before, this is a damn fine sounding pressing. It's not like you're going to listen to it, and say "that sounds like sh#t". Far, far from it. If you can get it for $10 or less, you did good.

 

Sorry, not a big fan of the Dan. . . .

 

Even tho it's my favorite, and is a first USA pressing, it's important to note it is not valuable. Multiple copies available at Ameoba for $4.99 & $5.99. Where the two-track can go for 100s. So, don't overspend for an early five-track.