HiRez Poll Pink Floyd - WISH YOU WERE HERE [Blu-Ray Audio]

[stormchaser]

I need to spend more time with these mixes on Blu-Ray before I vote, but for some reason the 5.1 mix leaves me a bit cold compared to the quad mix. The 5.1 mix seems oddly detached and conservative to me. I can't quite put my finger on the reason why.

But to be clear....this is well worth the money even with the extraneous nonsense that clutters the box.

 

[JonUrban]

I listened to the 5.1 mix all the way through today on the way to a job, and the 4.0 mix on the way back. Both uninterrupted and with an ear for detail.

First off, I somehow expected that I would not like the 5.1 mix, and for the first 5 or 6 minutes, I did not. It sounded like I was listening to a stereo CD and the DPL circuits in my Acura were "doing their thing". However, when "Welcome to the Machine" started, my smile appearred. It was the first point in the 5.1 mix where I could pinpoint instruments, acoustic guitars to be precise. Very nice. Of course, the sound effects were in the back, front, in a good surround mix, but it was in this tune that the music filled the car in a non-ambient way. As I listened all the way through, the pattern of a) Sound Effects = good discrete surround, b) Music = more of an ambient surround appeared. I suppose this is the old "retain the feel for the original stereo mix" stuff, but my POV is this is NOT the stereo mix, it's the surround mix. Aside from "Welcome", the pinpoint surround of the audio was hit or miss. There were a few guitar parts that I could hear in a specific spot, but nothing that went "Wow, check this out".

Then, on the way home, I did the 4.0. Of course, this is quad, and there is a lot of seperation. The opening guitar solo "da-da-da-dum" (or however you want to describe it) was purely in the rears (in the 5.1, it's everywhere). This mix is well known, so describing it is moot, but let me say that in the 4.0, I could pinpoint the vocal of Roger and the vocal of David when they were singing, where in the 5.1 they sounded mixed together. I know that some don't like it this way, but then some do. I enjoy being able to listen to a specific vocal or solo when it's "pulled out" of a mix, giving it more detail.

So, the 5.1, I'd say, is a modern, very fine, surround mix. The 4.0 is more of a "wow" deal. If you want to impress someone with surround, you'll probably play "Welcome to the Machine" from the 5.1, or any tune from the 4.0. The audio quality is "pretty good for a 30+ year old recording. It does sound great, both versions, but it doesn't compare to something new like "Morph the Cat" in detail, then again, it's not the same type of music.

Is it worth $100? Well, I can answer that with this. I paid more than $100 for my Q8 of WYWH, so I guess, to me, it is.

Now, what do all of you guys think?

 

[oxenholme]

Breathtakingly good.

Is it my imagination, or is the quadraphonic mix on this ever so slightly different to the mix on the DVD-Audio mastered from the mint quad LP?

I have room for both the 5.1 and 4.0 mixes. Each has their merits, and I think the 5.1 mix of Shine on (track 5) might even be a little more powerful than the quad.

 

[DKA]

Just got done listening to both mixes.

Extremely underwhelmed by the 5.1. There are pretty flourishes here and there, but this is yet another example of someone having multitracks in front of them and not using them to their fullest capacity. "Shine on You Crazy Diamond" never took off and, by the time I got to "Have a Cigar," there was clear audible vocal in the rears. The center was pretty weak and not pronounced throughout the entire mix. What did I like? Overall clarity for sure. I liked how powerful "Welcome to the Machine" comes off, even if Guthrie pulled too many punches there - that should be the ULTIMATE surround track, yet it somehow sounded almost ordinary here. I thought once "Wish You Were Here" built up completely, there was some really pretty guitar placement in the mix. In the end, though? Just not enough for an album that should knock you on your socks. 6 out of 10.

The quad mix definitely offered more in the sense of separation, but sometimes presented the mix in almost too dry a manner. I liked the fact that I could tell that I was listening to a very different mix than the stereo but, for every new sound brought out in the mix, there was a guitar line that should have been more prominent buried in the mix. Many times, songs were just robbed of their power. I also thought the vocal was just buried in fronts with some unbalanced rears dominating the mix. Again, "Welcome to the Machine" was a highlight, but I'm still waiting to experience that song the way I want to hear it in surround. 7 out of 10.

An interesting set but, oh, this could have been so much more. Because of that, 6 out of 10 as a whole.

 

[Robert van Diggele]

You wait months for a release, wade through all the junk in the box to find the Blu-ray which, in effect, you've paid £84 for, play a really nice 5.1 mix and then everything falls apart because the transfer suffers from some quite to very loud clicks towards the end of the album (at 41:48, 43:54 and 54:10). The last two are very noticeable as they are very loud pops from the front, left speaker, particularly the one at 44:10 as the music has just about faded at that point on the 5.1 mix.

From some of the posts on the Steve Hoffman site this seems to be a problem only on the European editions which feature the other discs still in the holders at the bottom of the box rather than having them in separate sleeves so it looks like we Europeans are losing out all around.

The best we can hope for is that EMI do the honest thing and agree to replace the European Blu-rays with corrected versions.

Hi Matt, I also have an EU version from Amazon UK. Yesterday evening I wrote them an email about the pops. They answered very quickly saying that they are aware of the problem (mstly by the customer reviews) but that they do not know if EMI is going to replace the discs. Amazon will refund me 10% of the box price. Other option was returning the whole set, but as long as EMI does not replace the discs, the replacement will probably have the same problem.

Only question left, will those pops damages our speakers in the end?

 

[mattB2]

Hi Matt, I also have an EU version from Amazon UK. Yesterday evening I wrote them an email about the pops. They answered very quickly saying that they are aware of the problem (mstly by the customer reviews) but that they do not know if EMI is going to replace the discs. Amazon will refund me 10% of the box price. Other option was returning the whole set, but as long as EMI does not replace the discs, the replacement will probably have the same problem.

Only question left, will those pops damages our speakers in the end?

Hi Robert, I wrote to the Braindamage site and they said that they had raised the issue with the head of Digital at EMI for investigation. I can but hope that they decide to issue replacements as the last two "pops" are particularly nasty ones. It seems as though the European market is really being side-lined with this release as the only way we can get a clean version version of the 5.1 mix and the other mixes in hi-res is to buy both the box set and the SACD which is only available as an expensive import. Everyone seems to be winning on this except the European consumer.

 

[arnold_layne]

I received my Immersion set today. Question, is it just me or are the left and right channels reversed on the quad mix on the Blu Ray, or was the Quad 8 wrong all this time?

On the Quad 8, WYWH starts with the radio effects in the front left channel. On the Blu ray quad mix, it's in the right channel. Rear channels are also switched.

A_L

 

[arnold_layne]

Appears to be the same as the quad mix. SOYCD 6-9 is the only song that diverges in time and the 4.0 is 33 seconds longer than the 5.1. Here's the table of times extracted by AudioMuxer:

Shine On You Crazy Diamond VI-IX 2.0:[12:39.754] 4.0:[12:58.024] 5.1:[12:25.769]

- Ben

SOYCD 6-9 seems to be missing a few bars compared to the Q8. Also the left and right channels are reversed compared to the Q8. This is just compared the Blu Ray quad mix to the Q8.

A_L

 

[GabeL]

I've now had an opportunity to hear the Quad and newer 5.1 mixes on the U.S.A. Blu-Ray release and I gotta say I'm very very very impressed! I'm giving this one a ten...easily.

 

[cupboy]

Hi Matt, I also have an EU version from Amazon UK. Yesterday evening I wrote them an email about the pops. They answered very quickly saying that they are aware of the problem (mstly by the customer reviews) but that they do not know if EMI is going to replace the discs. Amazon will refund me 10% of the box price. Other option was returning the whole set...

Maybe a return was the better option if the USA sets aren't affected. Just buy a USA set.

 

[Guy Robinson]

The 5.1 is much better than the 4.0. I love it! Didn't like Guthrie's DSOTM mix.

 

[mattB2]

Maybe a return was the better option if the USA sets aren't affected. Just buy a USA set.

I can't really speak for Robert but at least in the UK importing the set from the US isn't really an option. With postage, the set from the US Amazon store works out at about £84 which is about the same price as the UK set (with free postage) but there is no way that a box this big could get through UK customs without incurring import duty, sales tax and additional postal charges which would probably add another £30 to £40. I also feel that in this case importing kinda deflects from the main problem in that EMI should be responsible for producing discs that are fit for purpose but who knows what EMI's new owners will do?

 

[grill]

FYI
Here are some screenshots of the wavs, the spectrograms and the DR statistics: http://www.sendspace.com/file/5ghckb

 

[Mandrake2011]

Here are some screenshots of the wavs, the spectrograms and the DR statistics: http://hotfile.com/bla_bla.html

Beware:
"As determined by Cisco Ironport's Senderbase security database (http://www.senderbase.org), the webserver or webpage you are trying to reach has previously been detected as spreading malicious software such as viruses and worms. The risk of allowing this page to load in your browser is HIGH and could result in an attack against your system or personal information."

A better place for uploading images is http://imgur.com

 

[grill]

Beware:
"As determined by Cisco Ironport's Senderbase security database (http://www.senderbase.org), the webserver or webpage you are trying to reach has previously been detected as spreading malicious software such as viruses and worms. The risk of allowing this page to load in your browser is HIGH and could result in an attack against your system or personal information."

A better place for uploading images is http://imgur.com

Is it better? http://www.sendspace.com/file/5ghckb

 

[Mandrake2011]

Is it better? http://www.sendspace.com/file/5ghckb

Yes, thanks.

 

[Ge Someone]

I managed to get hold of the BD version and I think it is great.
The Quad version sounds good and has better separation than the best sounding conversion I possess. The 5.1 is sounding even better and the mix has enough great surround moments to like. As the center and the LFE channels are underused it is almost a new quad mix with those 2 channels added as an afterthought.

Voting is a bit @: with two mixes made more than 30 years apart.

some funny detail: in the LFE channel (I took Shine On parts 3-5 as example) there is high frequency content up to 45000Hz. Completely unnecessary on a BluRay if you ask me. OK, it is very low and your sub probably doesn't know what to do with it anyway. Also the settings I choose, make you see less of the low freqs.

 

[Disclord]

I managed to get hold of the BD version and I think it is great.
The Quad version sounds good and has better separation than the best sounding conversion I possess. The 5.1 is sounding even better and the mix has enough great surround moments to like. As the center and the LFE channels are underused it is almost a new quad mix with those 2 channels added as an afterthought.

Voting is a bit @: with two mixes made more than 30 years apart.

some funny detail: in the LFE channel (I took Shine On parts 3-5 as example) there is high frequency content up to 45000Hz. Completely unnecessary on a BluRay if you ask me. OK, it is very low and your sub probably doesn't know what to do with it anyway. Also the settings I choose, make you see less of the low freqs.

It's crazy they left the LFE like that but perhaps they did it to avoid the phase shift issues that come with filtering the LFE? Or maybe their 5.1 set up wasn't all that it should be and they never noticed the LFE channel's high frequencies. I would think it would add odd sounding artifacts to the mix - but a properly set up receiver should filter it to 80 Hz or whatever it's set at.

 

[grill]

I think it is the remnant of the high frequency noise of the original DSD master.

 

[Disclord]

I think it is the remnant of the high frequency noise of the original DSD master.

It very well could be, DSD being as noisy as it is, but it still should have been filtered out. The LFE is not supposed to have much of anything beyond about 200 Hz if done correctly. It's a sloppy job by someone who doesn't understand the technology.