Pink Floyd - The Early Years - 1965 > 1972

[Robert van Diggele]

It seems ridiculous to think that those responsible for writing the original release would randomly or inventively tack on a statement indicating OBC in 5.1 would be included. If it didn't exist or wasn't planned for, who would have planted the seed in the press writer's head in the first place.

Writer sitting at a desk: "Hmmmm, Pink Floyd Corporation is paying me to prep a release about a comprehensive early years release with no details..... I dont know for sure but I am going to guess that they will purpose make a 5.1 of an album known to not have have a surround mix." "I am so positive that I am not going to have to confirm any of this before hand."

If there were other things that were erroneously reported on the original release that were subsequently taken away, I may buy into it. However, it looks like only the items based in surround were redacted or clarified. To me that sounds like they exist but got cold feet.

Sounds reasonable, except for the cold feet. Pink Floyd know their surround releases are appreciated. Therefore including one extra in this box would have been a good thing.

 

[privateuniverse]

Sounds reasonable, except for the cold feet. Pink Floyd know their surround releases are appreciated. Therefore including one extra in this box would have been a good thing.

All true, however there are still multiple reasons why this could have been pulled at the last minute. (And let's remember that the original press release stated that 5.1 mixes of Obscured AND Meddle would be included.) Maybe they thought that the box was getting too big and decided to scale it back. Or perhaps (and this would be the best possible scenario) they decided that it might be a better idea to reissue the Discovery box sometime in the future as a blu-ray set a la Quadio. Even if the multis are unavailable for some of the earlier albums as some have suggested, they could still do a blu-ray box with all albums in high-res stereo plus 5.1 mixes on every album that they have the multitracks for. This is all specul/ation, of course, but that scenario would certainly have me happily handing over my money. And as a die-hard Floyd fan, I'd still be more than happy to own the Early Years box.

 

[Odys]

Apparently that was a leak of a mistake.

IE, someone in the PR company promoting the set prepared some incorrect information that was never supposed to get out anyway.

The dropped discs probably don't actually exist.

It's difficult to complain if one purchases on the basis of what was, in effect, a rumour.

It won't stand up in court!


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

It's been confirmed that Meddle was a mistake (only Echoes was done from that), but how do you explain the photos for the corresponding sets that show an additional disc that is no longer there?

 

[wheeler98]

Pink Floyd - The Inside Job 1965-1972

 

[himey]

It's been confirmed that Meddle was a mistake (only Echoes was done from that), but how do you explain the photos for the corresponding sets that show an additional disc that is no longer there?

Where have you seen this confirmation? Was it official or chatter...Are you confusing the quad Echoes that made it to this release and the remixed 5.1 Meddle, that only made it to the unintentional press release.

 

[regnidec]

All true, however there are still multiple reasons why this could have been pulled at the last minute. (And let's remember that the original press release stated that 5.1 mixes of Obscured AND Meddle would be included.) Maybe they thought that the box was getting too big and decided to scale it back. Or perhaps (and this would be the best possible scenario) they decided that it might be a better idea to reissue the Discovery box sometime in the future as a blu-ray set a la Quadio. Even if the multis are unavailable for some of the earlier albums as some have suggested, they could still do a blu-ray box with all albums in high-res stereo plus 5.1 mixes on every album that they have the multitracks for. This is all specul/ation, of course, but that scenario would certainly have me happily handing over my money. And as a die-hard Floyd fan, I'd still be more than happy to own the Early Years box.

As far as I understand, the original press release you refer to was a leak of an erroneous press release....so it was not the original press release.

Therein lies the confusion.

The original press release had the track listing as we know it now.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[Fourplay]

Where have you seen this confirmation (of no Meddle quad mix)? Was it official or chatter...Are you confusing the quad Echoes that made it to this release and the remixed 5.1 Meddle, that only made it to the unintentional press release.

Verification from Andy Jackson can be found here:

https://www.quadraphonicquad.com/fo...hnical-Details&p=305810&viewfull=1#post305810

 

[Fourplay]

Verification from Andy Jackson can be found here:

https://www.quadraphonicquad.com/fo...hnical-Details&p=305810&viewfull=1#post305810

Actually, I say that - the verification is that the complete Meddle does not and never did exist in Quad.

I have not seen any confirmation that it was not or is not being mixed into 5.1, which was the format falsely announced for this release. So maybe there is a 5.1 mix or a plan, but it is not being released right now for whatever their reasons may be. Andy might be able to shed light on the topic, but might also be prevented from doing so if there is some sort of plan.

So perhaps there is hope.

 

[Odys]

Where have you seen this confirmation? Was it official or chatter...Are you confusing the quad Echoes that made it to this release and the remixed 5.1 Meddle, that only made it to the unintentional press release.

There were pictures in the lengthy thread at SHF. I think Rontoon posted them.

 

[rikpepe]

Why no Ummagumma ? This is just the best stoner album of all rime!
off topic why do I have one yellow star? Am I some sort of pariah or is it because I use exclamation remarks?

 

[salsdali]

And did we tell you the name of the game, boy?
We call it Riding the Gravy Train.

 

[Franklin]

Why no Ummagumma ? This is just the best stoner album of all rime!
off topic why do I have one yellow star? Am I some sort of pariah or is it because I use exclamation remarks?

It's rating your grammar.

 

[Robert van Diggele]

Why no Ummagumma ? This is just the best stoner album of all rime!
off topic why do I have one yellow star? Am I some sort of pariah or is it because I use exclamation remarks?

the stars are based on your post count, with intervals of 200 it seems.

 

[rusinurbe]

It's rating your grammar.

surely that Ummagrammar ?

 

[Franklin]

Haha - plus the ironic incorrect spelling of grammar that came through on the original e-mail!

Still, good point: maybe that's why I've only got four stars.

 

[HOOKEVE]

The official Works has two tracks, One Of These Days and Fearless taken from the quad master, maybe.

I've a fantastic unofficial DVD-A sampler named Works containing a lot of songs of ASOS, Meddle and AHM remixed in 24/96 on 2.0 and 5.1 MLP.

 

[Ranasakawa]

The official Works has two tracks, One Of These Days and Fearless taken from the quad master, maybe.

I've a fantastic unofficial DVD-A sampler named Works containing a lot of songs of ASOS, Meddle and AHM remixed in 24/96 on 2.0 and 5.1 MLP.

It's an up mix

 

[HOOKEVE]

Ok. Thanks a lot.

 

[Deek57]

It's an up mix

Indeed it is, sounds pretty good too....

 

[Ranasakawa]

Had that one for years