HiRez Poll Pink Floyd - WISH YOU WERE HERE [SACD]

[arnold_layne]

Has the quad mix being on the Blu-ray knocked down the value of the Q8? I can't imagine anyone buying the Q8 now.

Well technically the Q8 is the complete quad mix, since the BD version is missing a section during SOYCD part 8. A Q8 recently sold on Ebay for $73 and it's in poor shape.

A_L

 

[Sthunderrocker]

Also, the UK quad mix used for the Blu is gently different (BGV levels, etc) from the US quad mix.
S

 

[wanners]

Also, the UK quad mix used for the Blu is gently different (BGV levels, etc) from the US quad mix.
S

Didn't we conclude there was no different UK quad mix. the mix used on the US Q8 is the only one.

 

[britre]

Incorrect. There is the Q8-US Vinyl Quad mix (vinyl run through SQ encoder, Q8 straight to tape) and an EMI UK master which was used to make the UK vinyl which is the one on the BDA and DVD. It will not decrease the value as the DVD and BDA do not replicate the vinyl or Q8. They have a different sound that is very valuable and can not be had any other way.

 

[wanners]

Incorrect. There is the Q8-US Vinyl Quad mix (vinyl run through SQ encoder, Q8 straight to tape) and an EMI UK master which was used to make the UK vinyl which is the one on the BDA and DVD. It will not decrease the value as the DVD and BDA do not replicate the vinyl or Q8. They have a different sound that is very valuable and can not be had any other way.

I know what you mean now; I thought you meant a US q8 vs. UK q8.

How do you know the BD is based off of the UK master used to make the UK vinyl? Why do think they did that--was the uk master better?

 

[britre]

No, it was the one in the EMI vault availiable. I and others believe the Columbia tape no longer exists. It most likely was a 4 or 8 track master as what was mentioned earilier is true, the US is 8 seconds longer, runs slower in speed and has the extra shine on sniglet to make it fit the tape format

 

[Sthunderrocker]

I know what you mean now; I thought you meant a US q8 vs. UK q8.

How do you know the BD is based off of the UK master used to make the UK vinyl? Why do think they did that--was the uk master better?

The engineer of the bluray specified in an interview that the Quad came from a master held at Abbey Road. I'm guessing it was assumed the quality was better, or the Columbia master was in worse shape. However it should be noted that, aside from being the less aggressive mix (compare the backing vocals for an example), the rears on WTTM are very noticible sub par to the rest of the recording... sounding flat and dull. I wonder if its all they had or if they messed up on their final EQ pass...
S

 

[Sthunderrocker]

BTW... the "Hub Remaster" comes from the US Q8 with corrected channel locations.
S

 

[britre]

You can also get the BDA with all the homebrewed copies on it and there you will find the original USA SQ un-corrected with channels in the wrong place.

 

[britre]

The engineer of the bluray specified in an interview that the Quad came from a master held at Abbey Road. I'm guessing it was assumed the quality was better, or the Columbia master was in worse shape. However it should be noted that, aside from being the less aggressive mix (compare the backing vocals for an example), the rears on WTTM are very noticible sub par to the rest of the recording... sounding flat and dull. I wonder if its all they had or if they messed up on their final EQ pass...
S

I do not believe it was an EQ issue, I think there was an issue with the tape and the rears were deteriorated on that track. The SQ copies and the Hub Remaster does not have that anomolie. A tape that is close to 40 years old that transfers that well is a blessing however. I did do a side by side with the UK SQ and the clarity is very close with the vinyl being warmer but can not compete with no surface noise and purer separation. The tape hiss was reduced on the BDA and DVD 2011 and on the SQ it is present and you can hear splices and such. Also true of the HUB remaster. Those gentlemen did the most awesome job I ever heard working with a 3 3/4 ips tape with limited frequency response. It was quite the miracle.

 

[neil wilkes]

I think a whole lot of things about this..

- I do not consider the presence of overlapping information in other channels to be a weakness in a mix. I think holding back from providing complete discreteness can fulfill many functions, the most important being creating a more "full" mix or allowing for holes in the soundfield to be better filled. I think there are better ways to do this, though, than what Guthrie did. Guthrie was too conservative with this mix, though, with the presence of as much lead vocal audible behind the listener on "Have a Cigar" than there is in the center an example of that.

- The idea of "presenting the stereo's mix in a 5.1 format" is one I don't understand when coming from professional mixers and producers. This is not what I want when I'm buying something put out from a record company. Very few mixers understand this. Steve Wilson does. That's for sure. To use this as an excuse as to why this, or the "Moving Pictures" mix, pulls too many punches, is not something I can be easily sold on.

- The quad, as presented in this package, has its share of flaws itself, and almost goes too far in the other direction, plus sounded rather unbalanced to me.

- That being said, I do firmly believe the mix is derived from multitracks, and that this simply was an artistic choice done by Mr. Guthrie. For what it is, I enjoyed the clean sound of it and feel it more than has its moments. In the end, though, he didn't do what I wish he would have. That's fine. Others are going to feel differently, and more power to them. I don't think anything is being misrepresented.

- I'll never understand why people choose to isolate channels on a mix when listening. The idea of a surround mix is for the channels to psychoacoustically interact with each other and produce a "surround" experience when sitting in the sweet spot. Isolating channels and looking for imperfections is just looking for something not to like in a mix. I'm more of a "glass half full" kind of guy than that.

- I have never believed this to be a "quad" forum. The name on the marquee says "Multichannel music past, present, and future." I've said this before and I'll say it again: I personally do not care about older quad recordings for the most part. I was in diapers when most of them came out, and very rarely do I encounter a transfer that I honestly enjoy. This, however, is the largest surround community that I know of, and the overlap between "modern surround enthusiast" and "grew up on quad as a kid" is rather large. There's room for everyone here.

- People who are going to point fingers and say "fake" need to do a lot of listening as to what "fake" sounds like in 2011. It's not the crap you heard ten years ago, or what Silverline was putting out. People make baseless opinions all the time as to what "derived from stereo" sounds like, and a whole lot of them need to do their research before opening their mouths. From a crispness standpoint, though, hey, I wish some of what I do from stereo sounded as good as Guthrie's mix.

Very well put, DKA.

 

[QuadGar]

I have to agree with britre regarding the stereo version from the box set. The Columbia 24 bit SBM cd is much better. I even compared one song at a time and kept going back to Columbia 24 bit SBM cd. I bought the box set in anticipation of getting a blue ray player. Since I can play 5.1 SACD's i've been contemplating getting the SACD version since the dolby versions in the box set suck pond water! I've checked this thread and the blue ray thread for an SACD vs Blue Ray 5.1 comparison. Unless I missed it, would somebody please give their thoughts on these two versions head to head. If you had to choose which one is better? Thanks!

 

[OppoFood]

I see that Amazon UK and Amazon.com both appear to be out of stock and are quoting one to two months delivery time.

Is this disk going to be OOP shortly or are we just looking at the effects of Christmas shopping?

Can still obtain from Elusive and was wondering whether to get a copy before it is too late.

Amazon UK is tops for me as they offer free shipping to New Zealand and no VAT so the price is good.

 

[GabeL]

I'm not sure, but I'm also getting concerned that will not my copy from Amazon

I see that Amazon UK and Amazon.com both appear to be out of stock and are quoting one to two months delivery time.

Is this disk going to be OOP shortly or are we just looking at the effects of Christmas shopping?

Can still obtain from Elusive and was wondering whether to get a copy before it is too late.

Amazon UK is tops for me as they offer free shipping to New Zealand and no VAT so the price is good.

 

[cupboy]

wherehouse.com cancelled mine. So that means they should show up in stock in a few days. I see they've raised the price. Well, I've always got the Blu-ray, so no big deal deal I guess.

Can't find it on the HMV Japan site anymore. Doesn't come up with a search. All that appears are standard CDs.

 

[grill]

At jpc.de it is still in stock for €39.99.

 

[mch007]

I'm not sure, but I'm also getting concerned that will not my copy from Amazon

When did you order? I (pre-)ordered from amazon.com on 13th Dec and it was delivered yesterday. I also got a pre-order guarantee price of $32.52 (with free shipping), which is good. even if more are in stock in amazon, it may not be under $35...and with present price of $43.91, it is cheaper to buy from elusive, acoustic sounds, music direct etc.

 

[Guy Robinson]

Voted 10. Very detailed and everything is very clear. The mix fills the room and discrete elements are there when required. Bass is incredible. It's also highly crankable. In my opinion the Quad version on the BR is too discrete. I like the 5.1 Guthrie version better.

 

[ArnoldLayne]

Finally done with my speaker upgrade so now I will start votin in polls again

I like discrete mixes so this has been a slight disappointmente after so many years and such a high price (partly because ef Spanish custom, grrr...). So it's an 8 from me.

 

[filper]

Love it.

It is like hearing the album for the first time... all of these sounds brought to life.

It is one of those albums that is beyond stereo.

Beautiful packaging as well.