Pink Floyd DSOTM & WYWH 5.1 Surround SACD Reissues

[bmoura]

I wonder what the difference will be from the previous SACD version of this to this version up for pre-order?

It's a repressing of the Surround SACD edition of Dark Side of the Moon that was previously released.
No differences.

 

[EricKalet]

It's a repressing of the Surround SACD edition of Dark Side of the Moon that was previously released.
No differences.

Ahhhhh as I suspected. No reason to pre-order then. But great for those looking for that do not have.

 

[~dave~~wave~]

It bears repeating that the evil Walton empire has the Immersion box with both mixes on blu ray in stock.
Hell may freeze over before the AP versions ships.
I started this thread two years ago.
Tired of waiting, I took the plunge, for $74.
Delightful.

https://www.walmart.com/ip/Dark-Sid...-Set-3-CDs-2-DVDs-and-1-Blu-ray-Disc/17350810

 

[sbrom]

It bears repeating that the evil Walton empire has the Immersion box with both mixes on blu ray in stock.
Hell may freeze over before the AP versions ships.
I started this thread two years ago.
Tired of waiting, I took the plunge, for $74.
Delightful.

https://www.walmart.com/ip/Dark-Sid...-Set-3-CDs-2-DVDs-and-1-Blu-ray-Disc/17350810

Good choice. I have the immersion set and the SACD. At the Walmart Immersion price you get a LOT more value for your money over the SACD. As you said both mixes, and let’s not forget the black marbles...

 

[ssully]

Doubtful. Too bad they also didn't includquote]e the original Alan Parson's 4.0 remix ... but that's NOT going to happen. I'm sure it will be an 'enhancement' over the Capitol SACD since AP wil be employing the latest technology but how much of an improvement remains to be seen [heard].

The only way to make it sound different is to change the EQ or channel levels. There is no 'latest technology' to do otherwise.

 

[4-earredwonder]

The only way to make it sound different is to change the EQ or channel levels. There is no 'latest technology' to do otherwise.

There is DSD 256 [QUAD] remastering from the original analogue masters. That's a relatively new and effective technology, ssully!

 

[ssully]

There is DSD 256 [QUAD] remastering from the original analogue masters. That's a relatively new and effective technology, ssully!

Huh?

Brian says up there
"It's a repressing of the Surround SACD edition of Dark Side of the Moon that was previously released. "

So, not a QUAD remix (which would obviously be a difference, though it's hardly new technology) , nor is it another transfer of the original master tapes (which could result in EQ /noise level differences that could be audible).

But no, simply remastering something in DSD 256 , that in itself would not make an audible difference. And added EQ/level changes along the way, would.

 

[bmoura]

Brian says up there
"It's a repressing of the Surround SACD edition of Dark Side of the Moon that was previously released. "

So, not a QUAD remix (which would obviously be a difference, though it's hardly new technology) , nor is it another transfer of the original master tapes (which could result in EQ /noise level differences that could be audible).

But no, simply remastering something in DSD 256 , that in itself would not make an audible difference. And added EQ/level changes along the way, would.

A couple of things to comment on here:

1. The Surround SACD edition of Dark Side of the Moon from Analogue Productions will be a repressing of the previously released edition.
There are several reasons for this. Including requests for a chance to buy the original SACD edition from listeners who missed the Surround SACD the first time around.
And the need to get artist approval if a new edition with remastering was created. (Remember Chad Kassem's comments about getting major artist reissue approvals "there are years - then there are Hendrix Years and Pink Floyd years...." )

2. DSD 256 releases do make an audible difference for a couple of reasons.
One is that the DSD format has been around for 20+ years now and the modulators used to create and remaster recordings in DSD are much better today than they were 2 decades ago.
The second reason is that by releasing an album in a higher DSD bit rate results in several benefits including the use of gentler filters in the listener's DAC, better phase and time response.
This explains why there is more and more demand from listeners for higher DSD bit rate releases and remasters than the DSD 64fs bit rate found on SACDs.

 

[ssully]

A couple of things to comment on here:

1. The Surround SACD edition of Dark Side of the Moon from Analogue Productions will be a repressing of the previously released edition.
There are several reasons for this. Including requests for a chance to buy the original SACD edition from listeners who missed the Surround SACD the first time around.
And the need to get artist approval if a new edition with remastering was created. (Remember Chad Kassem's comments about getting major artist reissue approvals "there are years - then there are Hendrix Years and Pink Floyd years...." )

Indeed.

2. DSD 256 releases do make an audible difference for a couple of reasons.
One is that the DSD format has been around for 20+ years now and the modulators used to create and remaster recordings in DSD are much better today than they were 2 decades ago.
The second reason is that by releasing an album in a higher DSD bit rate results in several benefits including the use of gentler filters in the listener's DAC, better phase and time response.
This explains why there is more and more demand from listeners for high DSD bit rate releases and remasters.

Neat! All that needed then is solid DBT evidence that DSD 256 'does makes an audible difference' (particularly when we are talking about analog sources). Alas, that has never been forthcoming. Given the claims made about the distinct improvements from using DSD, it should be , should always have been, easy to prove. Alas, it has very much not been, ever. Might I suggest that if you must have peace of mind about filters etc... good old PCM can do that, too? With far smaller file sizes?

The real reason why there is 'more and more demand' for such things, if that's true, is that, it's a form of faith in high numbers.

 

[bmoura]

Indeed.

Neat! All that needed then is solid DBT evidence that DSD 256 'does makes an audible difference' (particularly when we are talking about analog sources). Alas, that has never been forthcoming. Given the claims made about the distinct improvements from using DSD, it should be , should always have been, easy to prove. Alas, it has very much not been, ever. Might I suggest that if you must have peace of mind about filters etc... good old PCM can do that, too? With far smaller file sizes?

The real reason why there is 'more and more demand' for such things, if that's true, is that, it's a form of faith in high numbers.

Have a listen to some of the Analog to DSD 256 releases. Many listeners hear the difference and are requesting more.
Along with the original recording artists, producers, engineers and record labels.

It explains the ever increasing number of releases in this DSD bit rate.

 

[ssully]

Have a listen to some of the Analog to DSD 256 releases. Many listeners hear the difference and are requesting more.
Along with the original recording artists, producers, engineers and record labels.

Well, again, and this is pretty much always the case with 'hi rez', how are you to know that the 'sound' is due to DSD 256 specifically, versus typical mastering choices that do affect sound e.g., choice of source tape, application of EQ..?

It explains the ever increasing number of releases in this DSD bit rate.

It's just one possible explanation. Many listeners have reported hearing differences between many things. But sometimes those things don't really sound different. And sometimes they do, but the cause of the difference isn't what the listener thinks it is.

 

[BeoProf]

Ahhhhh as I suspected. No reason to pre-order then. But great for those looking for that do not have.

I am actually looking forward to getting this one.
First, I did not get the previous version. Since there is many counterfeited copies floating online I did not want to risk it and I never really encountered it in a b&m store to be able to make sure it is legit.
Second, it looks like it might get the same type and size of cover as Wish You Were Here, so they would fit together nicely on the shelf

 

[All Ears]

Well....it looks like it's finally going to come out January 24 2020

https://store.acousticsounds.com/d/...ail&utm_term=0_d7d119d847-eeb45c5316-11983157

 

[bmoura]

Yes indeed, Wish You Were Here by Pink Floyd is In Stock at Acoustic Sounds

https://store.acousticsounds.com/d/133316/Pink_Floyd-Wish_You_Were_Here-Hybrid_Multichannel_SACD

 

[soundboy]

 

[sbrom]

Yes indeed, Wish You Were Here by Pink Floyd is In Stock at Acoustic Sounds

Wow, that video on remixing WYWH and the missing piano part is amazing. It makes me feel good about the attention to detail throughout the process.

 

[GOS]

This is all just essentially a repress, right? Nothing new here for those that have both?

 

[JediJoker]

This is all just essentially a repress, right? Nothing new here for those that have both?

Correct, aside from new packaging for Dark Side.

 

[sperezmore]

Well....it looks like it's finally going to come out January 24 2020

https://store.acousticsounds.com/d/...ail&utm_term=0_d7d119d847-eeb45c5316-11983157

Thank you

kind regards,

 

[marpow]

I might get it for the new packaging which matches the packaging of Wish You Where Here.
I own the previous SACD MCH, and always thought the artwork and jewel case packaging didn't do justice.