Pink Floyd The Wall in 5.1

[KG10]

Silly question but when the 5.1 mix eventually gets released will it come on 2 SACDs like the original CD version did?

(For the Blu Ray audio version I'd be shocked if it came on more than one disc)

 

[madscot]

It will most likely come in a big box set with 4 lp’s, 6 cd’s, posters, programmes and a blu ray, and will cost about £350!

 

[Zepfan]

It will most likely come in a big box set with 4 lp’s, 6 cd’s, posters, programmes and a blu ray, and will cost about £350!

Don’t forget the marbles!

 

[KG10]

Don’t forget the marbles!

And a brick from the wall itself.

 

[JediJoker]

Silly question but when the 5.1 mix eventually gets released will it come on 2 SACDs like the original CD version did?

(For the Blu Ray audio version I'd be shocked if it came on more than one disc)

For the inevitable Analogue Productions hybrid SACD version, I think it will have to be. According to Wikipedia, the album is 80 minutes and 42 seconds long. That's just outside the maximum allowable length in the Redbook, and although it can definitely fit on a modern CD, I'm not sure about the CD layer of a hybrid SACD nor the willingness of Pink Floyd Records to release an out-of-spec disc (unless it's a DVD with higher-than-officially-supported Dolby Digital bitrate; thanks, James Guthrie ). Then, there's the SACD layer, which includes a mandatory stereo program. As such, the maximum length of a multichannel SACD is about 74 minutes with the multichannel program using DST compression.

 

[KG10]

For the inevitable Analogue Productions hybrid SACD version, I think it will have to be. According to Wikipedia, the album is 80 minutes and 42 seconds long. That's just outside the maximum allowable length in the Redbook, and although it can definitely fit on a modern CD, I'm not sure about the CD layer of a hybrid SACD nor the willingness of Pink Floyd Records to release an out-of-spec disc (unless it's a DVD with higher-than-officially-supported Dolby Digital bitrate; thanks, James Guthrie ). Then, there's the SACD layer, which includes a mandatory stereo program. As such, the maximum length of a multichannel SACD is about 74 minutes with the multichannel program using DST compression.

Out of interest have there been recorded anomalies that have occurred from playing those out of spec dvds on players?

 

[JediJoker]

Out of interest have there been recorded anomalies that have occurred from playing those out of spec dvds on players?

Maybe on an early DVD player, if anyone's still using one of those? I'm sure any Blu-ray player (and most DVD players) will handle them just fine.

 

[KG10]

Also what is James Guthrie's workflow when doing 5.1 mixes?

I heard something about him mixing directly from the multi track tapes as opposed to transferring them to digital first (which is one of the reasons the wall 5.1 has taken so long given the condition of the tapes themselves) which you can correct me on if im wrong about that.

 

[Owen Smith]

Then, there's the SACD layer, which includes a mandatory stereo program. As such, the maximum length of a multichannel SACD is about 74 minutes with the multichannel program using DST compression.

Wouldn't the stereo program use DST compression as well? To quote the wikipedia page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Super_Audio_CD:

DST compression is compulsory for multi-channel regions and optional for stereo regions. It typically compresses by a factor of between two and three, allowing a disc to contain 80 minutes of both 2-channel and 5.1-channel sound.[19]

So at 80 minutes 42 seconds length it might just fit on SACD with DST on stereo and multi channel. But I agree a double SACD is more likely.

 

[Owen Smith]

Also what is James Guthrie's workflow when doing 5.1 mixes?

I heard something about him mixing directly from the multi track tapes a opposed to transferring them to digital first (which is one of the reasons the wall 5.1 has taken so long given the condition of the tapes themselves) which you can correct me on if im wrong about that.

More weirdness from Guthrie, if it's true. Who on earth would subject the old multi track tapes to that kind of wear? Digitise them once very carefully at 24/96 and be done with it!

 

[KG10]

More weirdness from Guthrie, if it's true. Who on earth would subject the old multi track tapes to that kind of wear? Digitise them once very carefully at 24/96 and be done with it!

That's why I hope im wrong about it as those tapes have been through enough abuse as it is during the original stereo and quad mixing process.

 

[Owen Smith]

That's why I hope im wrong about it as those tapes have been through enough abuse as it is during the original stereo and quad mixing process.

I didn't think there ever was a quad mix of The Wall.

One reason Guthrie might mix direct from the analogue multi track tapes is he's a DSD nutter. He might be mixing in the analogue domain and then directly converting the mixed output channels to DSD in the mistaken belief there are audible benefits to doing that compared to using PCM. Even if there were circumstances where that produced better results (which don't exist in my opinion), surely in this case the degradation of the old tapes from using them direct would lose more?

 

[KG10]

I didn't think there ever was a quad mix of The Wall.

One reason Guthrie might mix direct from the analogue multi track tapes is he's a DSD nutter. He might be mixing in the analogue domain and then directly converting the mixed output channels to DSD in the mistaken belief there are audible benefits to doing that compared to using PCM. Even if there were circumstances where that produced better results (which don't exist in my opinion), surely in this case the degradation of the old tapes from using them direct would lose more?

I was refuring to the previous mixes he did for TDSOTM, WYWH and animals as I believe all of those had quad mixes?

 

[Owen Smith]

I was refuring to the previous mixes he did for TDSOTM, WYWH and animals as I believe all of those had quad mixes?

Yes those all had old school quad mixes back in the day. EDIT: apparently Animals did not, my mistake.

 

[rontoon]

I was refuring to the previous mixes he did for TDSOTM, WYWH and animals as I believe all of those had quad mixes?

Guthrie never did any quad mixes for any of those albums and Animals never had a quad mix at all.

And people are still posting marbles jokes? Sheesh! One campaign over a decade ago and folks still can't let it go.

 

[Bill B]

Guthrie never did any quad mixes for any of those albums and Animals never had a quad mix at all.

And people are still posting marbles jokes? Sheesh! One campaign over a decade ago and folks still can't let it go.

That was because it was such a random item to include in such a set that it is the poster child for ridiculousness and excess in box sets. Can anyone think of a better example?

 

[KG10]

Guthrie never did any quad mixes for any of those albums and Animals never had a quad mix at all.

And people are still posting marbles jokes? Sheesh! One campaign over a decade ago and folks still can't let it go.

I never said that Guthrie did the quad mixes.

I was talking about how much where the multitrack tapes have gone though to make make all those mixes.

 

[DrKlahn]

I would guess at this point if we see anything, it will resemble what was done for DSotM 50th. No real point in doing 5.1 when you can do Atmos.

I just have no idea if Roger is even interested in this at this point. Not my favorite album, but I'd definitely still buy it. I'm surprised we aren't seeing buzz for WWYWH 50th.

 

[ssully]

Also what is James Guthrie's workflow when doing 5.1 mixes?

I heard something about him mixing directly from the multi track tapes a opposed to transferring them to digital first (which is one of the reasons the wall 5.1 has taken so long given the condition of the tapes themselves) which you can correct me on if im wrong about that.

That would be insane to do. Of course the multis need to be archived digitally, and I would hope that they have been by now. There would be no reason to subject them to a mixing session -- possibly two, one for stereo another for multichannel -- after that.

Where did you read/hear this?

 

[KG10]

That would be insane to do. Of course the multis need to be archived digitally, and I would hope that they have been by now. There would be no reason to subject them to a mixing session -- possibly two, one for stereo another for multichannel -- after that.

Where did you read/hear this?

I recall someone on the steeve hoffman forums? Mentioning that James Guthrie's analogue workflow would be impossible given the condition of the wall tapes.

Also saw on a mini documentary 3 2 inch tape machines running in sync that seemed to support this (unless it was to transfer them all to digital at once?)



5:55