Bleat, Bark, Oink, what a fantastic piece of ear candy. A very active mix and the guitar sounds incredible. As does everything else. Great!
10. Hall of Fame disc
10. Hall of Fame disc
HiRez Poll Pink Floyd - ANIMALS [Blu-Ray Audio/SACD]
- Thread starter rtbluray
- Start date
Help Support QuadraphonicQuad:
hat20271
New member
I'm going to be very unpopular here (as this is also my first post) but I gave this a 6. And I'll explain why.
This entire mix struck me as a stereo mix with some enhancement. there's not nearly as much use of 5.1 as a surround mix should. I was halfway through the album when i realised that it felt like the mix was primarily for the left and right speakers, especially since the complete avoidance of using the centre channel throughout. Every vocal track is mixed to the left and right, so the centre channel really is nothing more than filler of the band mix.
The there's the LFE channel, which is the lowest in signal I have ever seen in any surround mix. I'm baffled as to why it only has a minimum if kick drum and bass guitar, only starting to show a presence during some of the lower keyboard synth parts. I ended up ripping the album as multichannel wav files just to boost the LFE channel, and I had to do that 22db. So the level the LFE would need to be for this to sound more balanced would absolutely destroy the sub if any other album was played.
And finally, this is a surround mix, so why is Pigs On The Wing (both parts) only in stereo? No slight presence in any other speakers, not even a slight reverb to give the sound a bit of body for surround. Nope, stereo only. Even if it was only recorded through 2 mics and all done live, that doesn't mean they couldn't sum a centre channel and room reverb for the rear speakers.
I'm going to add pics of each track as it comes off the disc (unaltered). I'm hoping that this could be a bad disc issue (someone else mentioned similar though) but I'm curious to see any other transfers to see if the levels are similar.
This entire mix struck me as a stereo mix with some enhancement. there's not nearly as much use of 5.1 as a surround mix should. I was halfway through the album when i realised that it felt like the mix was primarily for the left and right speakers, especially since the complete avoidance of using the centre channel throughout. Every vocal track is mixed to the left and right, so the centre channel really is nothing more than filler of the band mix.
The there's the LFE channel, which is the lowest in signal I have ever seen in any surround mix. I'm baffled as to why it only has a minimum if kick drum and bass guitar, only starting to show a presence during some of the lower keyboard synth parts. I ended up ripping the album as multichannel wav files just to boost the LFE channel, and I had to do that 22db. So the level the LFE would need to be for this to sound more balanced would absolutely destroy the sub if any other album was played.
And finally, this is a surround mix, so why is Pigs On The Wing (both parts) only in stereo? No slight presence in any other speakers, not even a slight reverb to give the sound a bit of body for surround. Nope, stereo only. Even if it was only recorded through 2 mics and all done live, that doesn't mean they couldn't sum a centre channel and room reverb for the rear speakers.
I'm going to add pics of each track as it comes off the disc (unaltered). I'm hoping that this could be a bad disc issue (someone else mentioned similar though) but I'm curious to see any other transfers to see if the levels are similar.
Attachments
I think that those who are shy about using the center channel realize that it is the weak link in a music 5.1 system. And I suspect that Guthrie is one of those people. Why? Because it is usually smaller than the mains and located above or below a TV screen. For optimal 5.1, the center speaker should be the same size as the mains with midrange and tweeters located in the same plane. My first two center channel speakers were just two damn small. I'm on my third one which is a 3-way beast with a 12" woofer and the same midrange and tweeter as the mains. It weighs 58 lbs. I wrenched my back maneuvering it into the rear seat of my car. Even though it is way better than the previous two speakers, it's position below the TV screen is not ideal for 5.1 music. There is a whole thread in the forum devoted to the topic of the center channel speaker.
Other than the problem that I've described above, I agree with your statement that, "One of the beautiful things about immersive sound is the air each musical element gets from having 1-3 more speakers to bring it to life." It's arguably one of the most convincing arguments I've ever heard as to why one should delve into surround sound.
Scottie-boy
Member
I actually love the way the vocals are treated on this disc. They are floating but forward strongly across the front (as opposed to too much i.e. Rumours)
hat20271
New member
I've revised my vote down to a 5 after a relisten. There's really no excuse for out of time delay effects, and Guthrie didn't even bother to vocode the sermon in "Sheep", choosing instead to keep the vocal dry and just have the keyboard chords straight. Also, as Roger's "Sheep" vocal is morphed into the synth sound on the original album, this time the vocal is left there to its finish rather than crossfaded into it.
I mean, has Guthrie even heard the source material?
I mean, has Guthrie even heard the source material?
The56Kid
2K Club - QQ Super Nova
A ‘5’? Really? Plenty more I could add here but I think this suffices.
Welcome to QQ and thank you for providing details for your vote. You are certainly entitled to the opinion you have and hopefully no one here will be too upset about it. But I will offer up a counter to a couple of points if I may.
First, on my setup this disc has some of the best low bass I’ve ever heard. Deep, powerful and tight. It gives this album a menacing sound I have not experienced before.
Second, I believe it was a deliberate artistic choice to bookend the album with stereo (really, mono) Pigs on the Wings, since it provides a great contrast as Dogs opens up and then Sheep closes down.
I do agree with you that, although tastefully done, there were times I wished for more adventurous surround channels.
I actually thought leaving the vocal there on “Sheep” was pretty cool - BECAUSE it is different from the original. I also heard keyboard parts that never caught my attention before.
I love nothing more than a mix that opens up a new listening experience on album I’ve heard countless times before…but to each his own…it’s all subjective…beauty is in the ear of the beholder
I had expectations for this release and they were exceeded. The surround mix opens up the organ/syn effect parts that were buried in the stereo mix. The fidelity is a great improvement over the vinyl. I always thought this was cool album, Now 45 years later I am thinking it might be coolest. Easy 10 for me
Hard to rate this one. On one hand, it's Pink Floyd, on the other hand it's a remix. I don't mind remasters, or a remix when there is a strong need for it (e.g. beatles original stereo vs any of the later stereo mixes.) For the most part it sound true to the original, but some instrument and vocal parts sound different. Not necessary better or worse, just different.
The first and last track are pure stereo. There isn't much that you can do with just one guitar and one vocal track, but it still feels like lackluster bookends to an otherwise very nicely mixed album.
Center channel is mostly unutilized, just quiet reflections of the fronts, as per usual from Guthrie. Otherwise far more aggressive than his previous mixes. The keyboard at the start of sheep is just magical, it sounds like it' coming from everywhere, but with very defined direction and presence. It's just a shame that it's only 5.1 (or really 4.1) when atmos is all the craze. This easily could have made for a great atmos mix. The cardboard sleeve is a let down. I was thinking an 8, but the fact that it wasn't confined to a $200 box set will up it to a 9.
The first and last track are pure stereo. There isn't much that you can do with just one guitar and one vocal track, but it still feels like lackluster bookends to an otherwise very nicely mixed album.
Center channel is mostly unutilized, just quiet reflections of the fronts, as per usual from Guthrie. Otherwise far more aggressive than his previous mixes. The keyboard at the start of sheep is just magical, it sounds like it' coming from everywhere, but with very defined direction and presence. It's just a shame that it's only 5.1 (or really 4.1) when atmos is all the craze. This easily could have made for a great atmos mix. The cardboard sleeve is a let down. I was thinking an 8, but the fact that it wasn't confined to a $200 box set will up it to a 9.
The only way everyone is going to be happy is by making one's own 5.1 from the multi-tracks. It would seem that the appearance of the multis for general sale is not going to happen. That's too bad, because some people would pay beaucoup bucks for the opportunity to have a shot at their own mix.
I like this kind of new revelation also...as long as it doesn't get out of hand like on the 5.1 SACD of Layla. A case in point is Steven Wilson's remix of Lucky Man with the background chorus so delightfully rendered in the rears. I prefer the original 5.1 version somewhat because it has more impact, but I also like Wilson's take on it.I actually thought leaving the vocal there on “Sheep” was pretty cool - BECAUSE it is different from the original. I also heard keyboard parts that never caught my attention before.
I love nothing more than a mix that opens up a new listening experience on album I’ve heard countless times before…but to each his own…it’s all subjective…beauty is in the ear of the beholder
Nova
Well-known Member
I remember the Wall Concert , when the band started playing the beginning the sound was a very deadpan center stage low effect until
another brick in the wall started , Dave’s guitar
Spinning around the room …. Awesome
Surround system
Gilmour played the bass on Pigs and Sheep.
People bitching about Pigs On the Wing being stereo makes me chuckle, because whoever did the very fine upmix of Animals that's been in circulation for some years now (the best we had until now), made the same artistic choice. PoTW in stereo...then Dogs blooms into surround.
As for complaining about the low level LFE being only a minimum of bass and kick drum and then some synth...that's what LFE , if used at all for music (it often shouldn't be) , is supposed to be. It's really just support. And I perceived no deficit in my listening (2 subs) compared to other 5.1 mixes. The bass is nicely balanced.
As for complaining about the low level LFE being only a minimum of bass and kick drum and then some synth...that's what LFE , if used at all for music (it often shouldn't be) , is supposed to be. It's really just support. And I perceived no deficit in my listening (2 subs) compared to other 5.1 mixes. The bass is nicely balanced.
I've listened to this a couple of times now, at first I was underwhelmed with the mix but I'm now going with a 9, it's my fav Floyd album and the fact it's available as a stand alone blu-ray at a good price is a major plus, but I would have liked a slightly more adventurous 5.1 mix
Last edited:
Welcome to the forum.
You are most welcome to your opinions and most appreciated for your articulate and thoughtful explanations supporting them.
We need a few dogs barking here among the herd of sheep, and it seems Wollongong has provided one.
Your rhetorical question at the last indicates why you may not be resonating with the prevailing opinions here.
A re-mix is an opportunity to re-imagine the material and present it in a fresh way.
It in no way cancels or negates the original.
You may continue to delight in it forever.
The more one is familiar with and enamored of a stereo album he's listened to for 45 years, the more jarring fresh mixes seem.
As you visit here and compare your observations across a spectrum of material with those of others you may notice that.
Or not. March to your own drummer. We don't need everyone following the flock.
Ouch, is something nipping at my heels?
kap'n krunch
2K Club - QQ Super Nova
well, I am going to suggest you check your system (it has happened to all of us too) cause I don't think you are hearing this right...
The morphing of the vocals into the synth sounds perfect to me and the vocoder is basically there, don't know how your system is set up bu give it several tests..
The56Kid
2K Club - QQ Super Nova
Was thinking the same thing about his/her system.
My disc arrived today. I already had opportunity to hear the mix, so I've listened through about 3 times now.
My absolute bottom line is a 9. I think that's fair, and a lot is because Rick's playing has more focus than in the stereo, and I thought very nicely done. More sonic detail is apparent to me, a little crisper (Sorry I don't know them there big audofile werds) perhaps.
If further listens reveal more to me, I may revise upward. The last thing I voted a 10 for, I just knew right off. Strangely, I guess, because I've been such a PF fan, when I stopped to consider, 9 was what I came up with. Guthrie did better than with the SACD of DSOTM, thankfully.
NOT disappointed I bought the BD, that's fo sho, and it will get much listening in the weeks and months ahead.
My absolute bottom line is a 9. I think that's fair, and a lot is because Rick's playing has more focus than in the stereo, and I thought very nicely done. More sonic detail is apparent to me, a little crisper (Sorry I don't know them there big audofile werds) perhaps.
If further listens reveal more to me, I may revise upward. The last thing I voted a 10 for, I just knew right off. Strangely, I guess, because I've been such a PF fan, when I stopped to consider, 9 was what I came up with. Guthrie did better than with the SACD of DSOTM, thankfully.
NOT disappointed I bought the BD, that's fo sho, and it will get much listening in the weeks and months ahead.
I think it's important to remember that remixes are just that. And surround remixes are even moreso because of the track separation. You are supposed to hear things you haven't heard before. Whether you like them or not is a matter of taste. When you do a classic artist remix, you cannot please everybody. Either you stick too close to the source material and disappoint a few, or clean everything up, think outside the box, and disappoint a few.
I love almost every 5.1 mix I've heard. There are some I've heard that I've thought were lackluster, but probably due to the tracks they had to work with (Appetite for Destruction is a good example, where it seems like most everything was stereo except for some added guitar leads and a few backing vocals). A lot are just kind of static mixes (Reckless by Bryan Adams being an example), but again I have no problem because it fits the music. But I tend to like them all because in hearing the separation, you can hear more of the songwriting process.
Floyd is its own thing, and Animals is a weird album because it has a mix of straightforward rock (which calls for something more static) followed by sections of psychedelic awesomeness (panning). I think Guthrie has done a great job on this mix. Not just in cleaning it up, but in recognizing the different sections with his mix. Oh, I suppose he could've thrown the very light verb from the vocals (which it seems like he removed completely) on Pigs On A Wing to the rears on a surround mix, but maybe the song doesn't call for it. Or maybe he did on his first mix and Roger told him to stuff it. We don't know. Ultimately, it's unimportant because those songs are just bookend filler. It's the middle three where this album has always shined.
If this were the original mix and the new mix was the 1977 mix, people would be wondering why in the hell they made a new mix that sounded so much worse and muddier than the original. I get that there's a desire to remain true to the original mix. Steven Wilson does a great job of this, and some folks still don't like it because just mixing it with modern equipment makes everything cleaner and with more sheen.
In the end, I think this was worth the wait. We get to hear what it could've sounded like with the new stereo mix, plus we get a thoughtful 5.1 mix that pays sufficient tribute to the original.
A 10.
I love almost every 5.1 mix I've heard. There are some I've heard that I've thought were lackluster, but probably due to the tracks they had to work with (Appetite for Destruction is a good example, where it seems like most everything was stereo except for some added guitar leads and a few backing vocals). A lot are just kind of static mixes (Reckless by Bryan Adams being an example), but again I have no problem because it fits the music. But I tend to like them all because in hearing the separation, you can hear more of the songwriting process.
Floyd is its own thing, and Animals is a weird album because it has a mix of straightforward rock (which calls for something more static) followed by sections of psychedelic awesomeness (panning). I think Guthrie has done a great job on this mix. Not just in cleaning it up, but in recognizing the different sections with his mix. Oh, I suppose he could've thrown the very light verb from the vocals (which it seems like he removed completely) on Pigs On A Wing to the rears on a surround mix, but maybe the song doesn't call for it. Or maybe he did on his first mix and Roger told him to stuff it. We don't know. Ultimately, it's unimportant because those songs are just bookend filler. It's the middle three where this album has always shined.
If this were the original mix and the new mix was the 1977 mix, people would be wondering why in the hell they made a new mix that sounded so much worse and muddier than the original. I get that there's a desire to remain true to the original mix. Steven Wilson does a great job of this, and some folks still don't like it because just mixing it with modern equipment makes everything cleaner and with more sheen.
In the end, I think this was worth the wait. We get to hear what it could've sounded like with the new stereo mix, plus we get a thoughtful 5.1 mix that pays sufficient tribute to the original.
A 10.
Similar threads
- Poll
- Sticky
- Poll
- Sticky
- Poll
- Sticky
- Poll
