HiRez Poll Pink Floyd - WISH YOU WERE HERE [SACD]

[ar surround]

Given the latest discussion regarding James Guthrie potentially re-mixing The Wall into 5.1, I gave this one another listen last night. Some of us complain about James Guthrie's 5.1 mixes being big-stereo rather than aggressive surround. With this disc, I find that listening to it with the surrounds at +0dB does indeed give that impression. However, there is most definitely aggressive content back there as revealed by cranking up the surrounds to +6dB or even a bit more. So the issue here apparently is not the mix itself but rather the balance between the front/center and surrounds...the surround level at +0dB is just relatively way too low. Try it.

 

[grill]

Given the latest discussion regarding James Guthrie potentially re-mixing The Wall into 5.1, I gave this one another listen last night. Some of us complain about James Guthrie's 5.1 mixes being big-stereo rather than aggressive surround. With this disc, I find that listening to it with the surrounds at +0dB does indeed give that impression. However, there is most definitely aggressive content back there as revealed by cranking up the surrounds to +6dB or even a bit more. So the issue here apparently is not the mix itself but rather the balance between the front/center and surrounds...the surround level at +0dB is just relatively way too low. Try it.

FYI
Here is the wave form of the original quad mix from the BDA:



And that of JG's 5.1 mix:

 

[Almen]

FYI
Here is the wave form of the original quad mix from the BDA:

[---]

And that of JG's 5.1 mix:

[---]

Also note the compression/limitation of the peaks in the front channels in JG's mix. This will probably add to to the feeling of a front heavy mix.

 

[GOS]

Well, here is one I hadn't voted on yet...but have listened to the disc many, many times. Listened again last night. Absolutely wonderful!

I vote a 10 - such an immersive, clean, punchy sound. Sometimes it's even frightening...especially Welcome To The Machine....man, if you have it turned up - get ready for it. Jarring!

 

[salsdali]

Astonishingly good. 10

I actually was transported back to when I was a kid and heard this 33 lp on my neighbors audiophile setup. (I remember hearing The Doors when I was 10 on the same setup thinking what the hell was that, that's awesome!)

I haven't been "touched" by "sound" like that in a long time, until this SACD.

 

[JediJoker]

Is a hi-res issue of the 2015 stereo remix available somewhere?

I can find no information on such a remix. How was it released?

 

[rtbluray]

I can find no information on such a remix. How was it released?

There is no stereo remix of "Wish You Were Here".

 

[Franklin]

Maybe he wishes it was here.

 

[key_wiz]

Giving this one a "9". Content is, of course, a "10" and the packaging is great. But the surround mix left some to be desired. It's Pink Floyd, for petes sake! Let's have a bit more fun, Mr. Guthrie!

Maybe only an "8" for that. Overall sound quality is very good though

 

[BeoProf]

I got the recent reissue of this SACD and I have to say I am blown away! Sound quality is fantastic and the mix is great! A few people commented earlier in the thread that the mix is not discrete enough - I have to say I am baffled. There is a LOT of discreteness here! This is certainly the case with all the special effects but the instruments are also nicely separated and move between the front and rear channels.
I don't know if it makes a difference but my setup is quadrophonic rather than 5.1 and I have 4 identical full range speakers. Perhaps if one is using some small satellite speakers for surrounds it sounds worse? No idea. In my setup this SACD provides an engaging and completely immersive experience. Absolutely fantastic!!! Gave it a 10, obviously.

 

[LuvMyQuad]

I got the recent reissue of this SACD and I have to say I am blown away! Sound quality is fantastic and the mix is great! A few people commented earlier in the thread that the mix is not discrete enough - I have to say I am baffled. There is a LOT of discreteness here! This is certainly the case with all the special effects but the instruments are also nicely separated and move between the front and rear channels.
I don't know if it makes a difference but my setup is quadrophonic rather than 5.1 and I have 4 identical full range speakers. Perhaps if one is using some small satellite speakers for surrounds it sounds worse? No idea. In my setup this SACD provides an engaging and completely immersive experience. Absolutely fantastic!!! Gave it a 10, obviously.

In the deluxe set, the original Quad mix was also provided in addition to the 5.1 mix. The Quad mix is considerably more discrete.

 

[BeoProf]

In the deluxe set, the original Quad mix was also provided in addition to the 5.1 mix. The Quad mix is considerably more discrete.

Sure, I can imagine it is. I would love to be able to compare them, never had the chance to hear the quad mix. All I can say is that this 5.1 mix is fantastic, definitely not lacking in terms of discreteness.

 

[Strilo]

I asked my housemate if I could replace my surrounds with full size floor standing speakers and he just looked at me and said "no."

 

[timothyemerson]

I asked my housemate if I could replace my surrounds with full size floor standing speakers and he just looked at me and said "no."

Gotta recommend the Elaine Marie Benes approach there, my friend!

 

[J. PUPSTER]

I asked my housemate if I could replace my surrounds with full size floor standing speakers and he just looked at me and said "no."

Your housemate must know my wife; except add a "fuck" in front!

 

[Strilo]

Eventually my boyfriend and I will get a place together and I think he will be a lot more open to having four full size speakers. He loves the idea of a home theater/listening room.

 

[humprof]

I owe this insight to a friend--and I'm sorry if it's already been discussed. (I didn't have the patience to go through all six pages of this thread.) But how is it that Van Morrison never sued Pink Floyd?

 

[JediJoker]

I owe this insight to a friend--and I'm sorry if it's already been discussed. (I didn't have the patience to go through all six pages of this thread.) But how is it that Van Morrison never sued Pink Floyd?

Legally and substantively, that's really nothing like "Wish You Were Here." It would be even more tenuous than the Spirit/Led Zeppelin suit. Just because both songs use prominent 12-string acoustic with a repeating ascending line (in solfège: do-re-mi-sol-la), and singing along with solo acoustic guitar (a common practice among many instrumentalists who improvise), that doesn't make them even similar enough to make it to court, most likely. Keep in mind that the intellectual property at stake here is the song, not the recording or the production. which is why the passing (but striking) similarity between "Taurus" and "Stairway To Heaven" was not enough to establish copyright infringement. The songs here use different chord progressions, have different main melodies, and share only a background melody fragment (with implied chords).

 

[Lord British]

Legally and substantively, that's really nothing like "Wish You Were Here." It would be even more tenuous than the Spirit/Led Zeppelin suit. Just because both songs use prominent 12-string acoustic with a repeating ascending line (in solfège: do-re-mi-sol-la), and singing along with solo acoustic guitar (a common practice among many instrumentalists who improvise), that doesn't make them even similar enough to make it to court, most likely. Keep in mind that the intellectual property at stake here is the song, not the recording or the production. which is why the passing (but striking) similarity between "Taurus" and "Stairway To Heaven" was not enough to establish copyright infringement. The songs here use different chord progressions, have different main melodies, and share only a background melody fragment (with implied chords).

I never thought I would see the word "solfège" typed in this forum. Bra. Vo.

 

[humprof]

Legally and substantively, that's really nothing like "Wish You Were Here." It would be even more tenuous than the Spirit/Led Zeppelin suit. Just because both songs use prominent 12-string acoustic with a repeating ascending line (in solfège: do-re-mi-sol-la), and singing along with solo acoustic guitar (a common practice among many instrumentalists who improvise), that doesn't make them even similar enough to make it to court, most likely. Keep in mind that the intellectual property at stake here is the song, not the recording or the production. which is why the passing (but striking) similarity between "Taurus" and "Stairway To Heaven" was not enough to establish copyright infringement. The songs here use different chord progressions, have different main melodies, and share only a background melody fragment (with implied chords).

You may have taken my flip comment more seriously than it was intended, JJ; I really only meant to remark on the passing similarity of that opening phrase--and, backhandedly, on the frivolity of certain lawsuits we could both name.... But like @Lord British, I appreciate your erudition, and I welcome any opportunity to see the word solfège in print!