HiRez Poll Pink Floyd - Dark Side of the Moon [SACD]

[Quad Linda]

As I mentioned earlier in this thread, the MFSL LP is the way to listen to DSOTM in 2ch. I would disagree with saying that ANY LP pressing has better fidelity than the SACD.

Regarding Lennon's comments on the mono Pepper, ALL the Beatles albums, singles and EP's up to Get Back were mixed with mono vinyl as the primary medium. The band and Martin directed Norman Smith, et al, as to what they wanted. The band admits that once the mono mixes were done, they left the stereo mixes to Martin and the engineers. They had little or no involvement in the stereo mixes!! Stereo was like an afterthought, both in the mixes, and in the marketplace.

I had owned a maroon UK Beatles mono LP box, which I regret selling. I do own the Mono CD box. Guitar solos and other sounds are sometimes different from the stereo mix. Things also may be louder in the mix. A few are even different edits or takes. Besides that, mono does have a more solid, not necessarily more compressed, sound than stereo does. Likewise, stereo through 4 or 5 speakers usually has a more solid sound than synthesized surround. Still, I prefer more discrete channels, which is why I'm here.

...But I had always listened to DSOTM in a lovely MFSL LP plenty of times (decades!) BEFORE I listened to the AP mix, which I first listened to only a few years ago, and of course , was blown away by it!

It's like when Lennon stated that Sgt. Pepper's had to be listened to in mono to appreciate it, because the main intention of the artist is expressed in that particular mix.

And regarding the stereo thru the DPL, you'd be amazed(it depends on the DPL settings too) ...just try it...and besides , you'll get better fidelity than the SACD if you play the LP....

 

[leevitalone1]

As I mentioned earlier in this thread, the MFSL LP is the way to listen to DSOTM in 2ch. I would disagree with saying that ANY LP pressing has better fidelity than the SACD.

Regarding Lennon's comments on the mono Pepper, ALL the Beatles albums, singles and EP's up to Get Back were mixed with mono vinyl as the primary medium. The band and Martin directed Norman Smith, et al, as to what they wanted. The band admits that once the mono mixes were done, they left the stereo mixes to Martin and the engineers. They had little or no involvement in the stereo mixes!! Stereo was like an afterthought, both in the mixes, and in the marketplace.

I had owned a maroon UK Beatles mono LP box, which I regret selling. I do own the Mono CD box. Guitar solos and other sounds are sometimes different from the stereo mix. Things also may be louder in the mix. A few are even different edits or takes. Besides that, mono does have a more solid, not necessarily more compressed, sound than stereo does. Likewise, stereo through 4 or 5 speakers usually has a more solid sound than synthesized surround. Still, I prefer more discrete channels, which is why I'm here.

Beatle stuff was at a time when no one had stereo. FM was in it's infancy and all the music was primarily AM radio. My old GE was mono. Never even thought of stereo until FM radio became popular

 

[Quad Linda]

Correctamente! Like the lone nut that I am, I've had stereo LP & FM since '62, Quad since '71, and 5.1 since '99. Not many adults had stereo when the Beatles hit, and even fewer teens did. Oddly, I bought Something New (mostly Hard Day's Night tracks) in mono, but bought my first copy of all the others in estereo. Since then, I've bought them all a couple times in mono, and many times in stereo. Yes, stereo LP sales, especially of rock, were miniscule back then.

And now, we return you to the DSOTM poll thread.

Beatle stuff was at a time when no one had stereo. FM was in it's infancy and all the music was primarily AM radio. My old GE was mono. Never even thought of stereo until FM radio became popular

 

[ProgRules]

If you choose to keep it "in the family", I'll buy it from you...mine was sadly fatally injured!
Cheers....

That sucks! You do know I'm in the states, right? Do you know what shipping would be like to madrid? Send me a PM w/ what you know about shipping details and what you think is a reasonable price for the LP.

 

[leevitalone1]

That sucks! You do know I'm in the states, right? Do you know what shipping would be like to madrid? Send me a PM w/ what you know about shipping details and what you think is a reasonable price for the LP.

I send him cd's all the time. It's only a few bucks It was like 5 to send to the UK, 2 to CA and I think 3.50 for Espana.

 

[ssully]

And regarding the stereo thru the DPL, you'd be amazed(it depends on the DPL settings too) ...just try it...and besides , you'll get better fidelity than the SACD if you play the LP....

Fidelity to what?

 

[leevitalone1]

Over at the HD site they have a guy beating a dead horse icon. we need that here.

 

[strat54]

Dark Side Of The Moon sounds really good. Mostly I prefer the AP mix, but much of this is more balanced, glad to have both.

 

[Bill Houston]

Must have!

Mix/Sonics: 10
Music: 10

 

[Blrac]

The better of the 2 releases. Starts off strong and never stops. I gave it a 9. Every Floyd fan needs to own this.

 

[edisonbaggins]

I do like the SACD mix quite a lot. I like the Parson's Quad mix a bit more.
Could be nostalgia/bias for the original engineer messin with my brain...
But, some things about the SACD mix feel out of balance. Like, some spoken voices are too loud.
It's not bad and I'm glad it's affordable!

 

[svengaleekie]

I've just re-listened to this through my new speakers and it was just STUNNING, loved it to bits, can I please change my vote to a solid 10?
There's a reason this album has been used as a demo for HiFi since it came out, it's got everything, high end, bass and bits in the middle too and this SACD surround mix is superb putting all those loverly sounds all around you. RECOMMENDED!

 

[CPR]

As I've stated before, the Alan Parsons Quad mix, bootleg, is the go to demo disc, for Goldmund Audio
Enough said!
Even in an Elliot Scheiner/ELS, Acura system, people marvel, at the dynamic range, & sonics
Can't top PERFECTION, IMHO

 

[Quadzilla]

As I've stated before, the Alan Parsons Quad mix, bootleg, is the go to demo disc, for Goldmund Audio
Enough said!
Even in an Elliot Scheiner/ELS, Acura system, people marvel, at the dynamic range, & sonics
Can't top PERFECTION, IMHO

The Parsons bootleg has blown-away a few of my friends in my TL. It is especially fun if they don't know the car has a surround sound system. For 2-channel though, the SACD is the best sound quality to my ears in a dedicated (versus video-based) Stereo SACD player ... even though I have the MoFi CD and LP.

 

[Simon A]

The Parsons bootleg has blown-away a few of my friends in my TL. It is especially fun if they don't know the car has a surround sound system. For 2-channel though, the SACD is the best sound quality to my ears in a dedicated (versus video-based) Stereo SACD player ... even though I have the MoFi CD and LP.

Let me get this straight. You are talking about a bootleg version of the Quad mix that differs from the version found on the Blu-Ray, correct?

 

[Quadzilla]

Let me get this straight. You are talking about a bootleg version of the Quad mix that differs from the version found on the Blu-Ray, correct?

Yes ... allegedly ... and it is great!

If you ever get to London, I will take you for a ride.

 

[himey]

Let me get this straight. You are talking about a bootleg version of the Quad mix that differs from the version found on the Blu-Ray, correct?

The bluray has both versions, 5.1 (Guthrie) and 4.0 (Parsons). The DVD Audio 4.1 (Parsons with upmixed lfe channel) has different mastering that some prefer. Yes it is different in that respect.

 

[Audiowannabee]

I really liked the 5.1 sacd. But i like the 4.0 a lil more...9 for sacd....10 for AP quad

 

[ar surround]

I see I voted a 9 on this one way back when. Some people don't care for the Guthrie big-stereo mix. It's true that his mix could be a bit more adventurous, but I find it nicely immersive when I crank up the surrounds about 3dB. Oh, and I have that Logic7 overlay capability that really opens things up. (There goes AR using that annoying "L-word" again.)

But the DSOTM fidelity is excellent which for me trumps mix every time. I absolutely cannot put up with any stridency in a hi-res recording. The Beatles TWA has that problem. I was able to eventually fix it to my tastes, but it took so many listens to get it right that I am temporarily sick of hearing it.

 

[fetchmybeer]

I have not heard the quad mix and, at this point, I won't be spending the $ necessary to acquire it. This was my first surround disk and it is the benchmark to me (since surpassed by some SW mixes). It's also better than the WYWH surround mix. DSOTM has a lot going on so there is a lot to work with. I think it's pretty successful in that regard. If the quad is better, then great, it'll get an 11 from me if I ever hear it. This one is still a 10.