DSOTM 50th Remasters and Atmos Mix Reviews

[toxie]

Yeah not really much of a change on both the new 50th and the live both seem same as last 2011 version that was released in immersion set. I had a listen to the apple versions but couldnt really tell much difference in what i heard compared to 2011 but then again maybe i am wrong?.

[lennyif]

Spinning the Wembley vinyl right now, and I have to give it a hearty thumbs up. I actually prefer it with the edits, I think. The pacing of the performance is better with those little nips and tucks. The sound quality is fantastic to my ear. I don't think I have ever enjoyed this show as much as I am enjoying it right now, and I didn't really expect more than to tick a box.

This Wembley gig sure has had an odd relationship with me over the years. First time I heard the old Brain Damage boot as a kid, I got rid of it shortly after because I hated the performance and the wonky mixing. Andy Jackson turned it completely around for me. The value of a good producer and careful editing and restoration cannot be overstated.

[voices2010]

Great sound and great panorama in the mix! there are many details about the position of the sounds that make the experience more alive. I didn't like DTS Estereo very much.. I prefer the new 2023 remix. The only pain is the cost of the packaging, but I definitely find it relaxing and enriching.

[daemonspudguy]

There is no DTS mix of Dark Side, is there? I thought the only digital surround sound mix you can get now is the Dolby Atmos.

[ILuvHoney]

Isn't a remaster normally little more than an EQ change though? It's not like they are doing the mixing anew or something. And of course, they can apply compression, like they have unfortunately done on remasters in the past 25-30 years, although fortunately less on Pink Floyd releases than on the releases of many other bands, but as far as I can see, that is not a good thing, and if they did not do that this time I am glad they didn't.

I actually don't see that any remastering would be necessary for this album at all, as it sounded pretty much perfect to begin with. They could just have transferred the master tapes used for the original 1973 pressings and transferred it to digital domain and done nothing more as far as I am concerned. I am pretty sure that my 70s German vinyl pressing will blow away any "remaster". It blows away the 2011 CD, at least.

[voices2010]

Isn't a remaster normally little more than an EQ change though? It's not like they are doing the mixing anew or something. And of course, they can apply compression, like they have unfortunately done on remasters in the past 25-30 years, although fortunately less on Pink Floyd releases than on the releases of many other bands, but as far as I can see, that is not a good thing, and if they did not do that this time I am glad they didn't.

I actually don't see that any remastering would be necessary for this album at all, as it sounded pretty much perfect to begin with. They could just have transferred the master tapes used for the original 1973 pressings and transferred it to digital domain and done nothing more as far as I am concerned. I am pretty sure that my 70s German vinyl pressing will blow away any "remaster". It blows away the 2011 CD, at least.

Although the remastering is not a general mix, it can include the modification of some elements in a not so aggressive way (position, volume, equalization, compression, etc). Let's say that in the remastering it is not only limited to a "whole", but by decision of the person who performs it, it can affect separate elements.

[Glco8284]

Can anyone verify that both stereo mixes from Blu-ray 1 and to are the same ???

if yes why !!!!!???? Why not made a version from the atmos ??? At the beginning of speak to me you hear a complete silence but with the stereo you hear the noise and also the end of on the run is different with atmos then stereo ?

[voices2010]

One of the things I hate about this box is that it doesn't contain a technical sheet of contents or credits. on the BD Atmos it is only mentioned that James Guthrie did the mixing. For example the Two stereo mixes in both BDs

[Triply]

I just found out that my receiver does indeed support Dolby Atmos, so I'll probably buy the additional speakers next month and set it up. I'm still awaiting my set and am looking forward to it.

[MrFender]

Just an FYI if you're on the fence about buying, Amazon (at least in the US) just dropped the price to $255. It was up to $488 briefly last week.

[voices2010]

Can anyone verify that both stereo mixes from Blu-ray 1 and to are the same ???

if yes why !!!!!???? Why not made a version from the atmos ??? At the beginning of speak to me you hear a complete silence but with the stereo you hear the noise and also the end of on the run is different with atmos then stereo ?

según yo... el BD atmos contiene Stereo remix 2023 mientras que el BD ordinario contiene el Stereo normal pero con resolución 192/24

[Nodak]

Isn't a remaster normally little more than an EQ change though? It's not like they are doing the mixing anew or something. And of course, they can apply compression, like they have unfortunately done on remasters in the past 25-30 years, although fortunately less on Pink Floyd releases than on the releases of many other bands, but as far as I can see, that is not a good thing, and if they did not do that this time I am glad they didn't.

I actually don't see that any remastering would be necessary for this album at all, as it sounded pretty much perfect to begin with. They could just have transferred the master tapes used for the original 1973 pressings and transferred it to digital domain and done nothing more as far as I am concerned. I am pretty sure that my 70s German vinyl pressing will blow away any "remaster". It blows away the 2011 CD, at least.

I am going to agree with this with some caveats. One thing about the Dark Side of the Moon is that when mastering it, due to limitations of the equipment of the time, that when they turned the tracks on and off there is an audible thump or click. The Dark Side is littered with these and once you hear them you cant unhear them. It was in the early 80s was when they were finally able to remove them. These artifacts dont bother most people and otherwise the mastering on the early vinyl is exceptional.

The 1983 Japanese EMI CD release has always been my go to for when I want to listen to Darkside, though I'd love a chance to listen to this over my stereo.

https://www.discogs.com/release/5605...de-Of-The-Moon

[svaerige]

just compared vinyl and CD versions

On The Run has slightly different mixes

1. Wembley-1974-OTR-Vinyl



2. Wembley-1974-OTR-CD

[ILuvHoney]

Does not this indicate just that the CD is louder?

[svaerige]

https://ravinganddrooling.com/forum/...071#post309071

[OrlandoSimmo]

No, the cd just has an increased dynamic range in comparison to the vinyl LP

[svaerige]

No, the cd just has an increased dynamic range in comparison to the vinyl LP

It seems to me that this segment differs not only in loudness



isn't it ?

the rest of the tracks don't have such obvious differences