Pink Floyd in High Resolution
- Thread starter Randy Myers
- Start date
Mike Lavigne
Member
when i have visitors, and they want to hear how great tape can be for rock, played at warp 9, there are two tapes i play. side 1 of LZ 1, and 'Wish You Were Here' on the Studer A-820. the combination of ultra, ultra iconic cuts which we all have such a locked in reference from our daily lives, and the quality of the transfers, is magical. it's how God intended for us to hear it.
the vinyl transfers of 'Wish You Were Here' are not great, just good. and the tape is in another world. with LZ1, i do have my Classic 45rpm box set so the difference is not as dramatic a step up.
So are you saying Tidal does not cut it :happy:
Mike Lavigne
Member
not at all; i love streaming, do it at least 50% of the time. i do prefer Quboz to Tidal, and i do use TAS (Taiko Audio System) to listen to Quboz, not Roon most of the time. when i'm using Roon, then i do listen to Tidal which is very good. it's just that i like hirez, and Tidal does not do it except for 'hirez lite' = MQA. another 20% of my listening is to digital files. do i prefer analog? sure, but the digital is so good and easy to access (millions of titles, new music) it's the majority of my listening.
if you click on my system link you will see i have a considerable commitment to digital, as much as anyone. and as much as my vinyl or tape commitments.
i listen to tape about 2-4% of the time. but with visitors, they want the really, really good stuff, and that is vinyl and tape. with visitors typically there is also a streaming session where they choose the digital cuts they want to hear.
it's about the music, while certainly enjoying the best possible way to enjoy each recording.
Some of these are really good and notable improvements over previous digital versions. Pulse, The Wall, and Animals all stand out. Ummagumma is a notable improvement but the source recordings are a bit hissy. I haven't listened to every one of the albums, and I would bet that Momentary Lapse of Reason and Delicate Sound of Thunder have the same compressed masterings as the 2019 ones (they are listed as that), but I suspect all that most of the earlier albums are improvements except perhaps DSOTM and WYWH (each of which has had several previous hi-res releases)
I also have a 15ips 2-track of WYWH which sounds great, but I don't know how far it is removed from the master tape.
I also have a 15ips 2-track of WYWH which sounds great, but I don't know how far it is removed from the master tape.
Audiophilehi
Member
I just finished listening to The Wall and while it does sound good it doesn’t beat my 1st issue Japan or Canada CD. Next up is Animals.
Randy Myers
Well-known member
- Thread Author
- #27
I also have been impressed with Meddle and Obscured By Clouds. Animals is good, in my view better than the CD, but not as impressive as some of the others. I also like The Final Cut!
??
Are you playing your Canada CD on a player that will de-emphasize? Only a few players made in the last 20 years do, and no “universal” players do.
Some fans still like the 1994 Doug Sax version best, and some prefer the 1987 UK Harvest. I have to say I don’t know what audio qualities of any of these older versions listeners are preferring, but of course everyone is entitled to their preferences and opinions.
Animals could benefit from remixing (rather than just remastering); that is supposedly coming next year, along with a 5.1 version.
Audiophilehi
Member
It was de-emphasized using xACT. I listen to it on my N100H and also made a CD-R copy. I also forgot to mention the 1987 UK CD I have a prefer as well. The 2011 CD sounds very similar to the current Hi-Res.
Mr Peabody
Well-known member
The 1st Dire Straits album sounds good, I like Making Movies but production not as good, never got into Brothers In Arms.
The high res version Take 5 by Dave brubeck is excellent and probably one of the more dramatic differences in recordings I've experienced, 44.1 vs HR.
Personally I like about 4 PF albums and never really use them as a reference unless someone wants to hear something.
The high res version Take 5 by Dave brubeck is excellent and probably one of the more dramatic differences in recordings I've experienced, 44.1 vs HR.
Personally I like about 4 PF albums and never really use them as a reference unless someone wants to hear something.
mep
Well-known member
- Joined
- Dec 4, 2013
- Messages
- 5,086
MQA Take 5 or Quobuz Take 5?
Mike Lavigne
Member
in this particular case, on my system the MQA Take Five (176/24) does better the Quobuz 44/16. slightly more dynamics and more textural information.....more analog. not huge.
the 176/24 version on my internal hard drive (played through Roon) is another issue; it betters the MQA. more dynamics, life and tonal richness and complexity, a sparkle if you like. even more analog.
all three are great listens. if Quobuz had a 176/24 or other higher rez that would be a question. but i did not see one.
i had not fired up Roon for a month or so and had to do a software update for my 'versions' tab to appear. the best digital version would be using the Taiko (TAS) software and not Roon with my file. but Roon is pretty good.
JohnJ
Member
Pink Floyd "Hi-Rez" now on Qobuz.
Mr Peabody
Well-known member
Yes, the Tidal version, 176.4. I only get the first unfold, even with that the 176 was much better than the 44.1. Usually the differences are more subtle.
However,I listened to a Cowboy Junkies album last night on Tidal, both 44.1 but one was MQA, the MQA version was definitely better. In comparing on Tidal I find no definite, not sure if remastering is involved when the MQA versions are made or what makes some mor evident than others.
However,I listened to a Cowboy Junkies album last night on Tidal, both 44.1 but one was MQA, the MQA version was definitely better. In comparing on Tidal I find no definite, not sure if remastering is involved when the MQA versions are made or what makes some mor evident than others.
crwilli
Active member
Listened to the new 24/96 DSOTM this afternoon via Qobuz. It is good but not better than my SACD rip. Not sure I would miss the RIP if I didn’t have it.
The quality of streaming has come a long way.
The quality of streaming has come a long way.
Randy Myers
Well-known member
- Thread Author
- #37
Yea, I did not get the DSOTH or the WYWH because I have my SACD of each (ripped to server of course), but I have been happy with the SQ of the five I did purchase.
listened to the 24/96 DSOTM on qobuz ...can't say it wowed me. the mids seemed pretty lifeless.
but then i had just been listening to the OJC masterings of sunday at the village vanguard and waltz for derby immediately prior which are absolute reference material, imo ...so, the new hi-rez DSOTM could have suffered by comparison.
i will give it another listen -- maybe i will put on some mp3s before
but then i had just been listening to the OJC masterings of sunday at the village vanguard and waltz for derby immediately prior which are absolute reference material, imo ...so, the new hi-rez DSOTM could have suffered by comparison.
i will give it another listen -- maybe i will put on some mp3s before
DTOSM is the 2011 version (better than the stereo tracks of the 2003 SACD.) WYWH is a new transfer and mastering (clearly different from the 2011 BD and the SACD), though I'm not sure it is better.
Mike Lavigne
Member
i might have 15+ versions of DSOTM. i'm sure i'm not alone.
at least -3- CD's, -2- SACD's, at least -8- vinyl pressings, and -2- 15ips, 1/4" tape master dubs (one is really good, one is just ok). the best sounding of all these versions to my ears is my MFSL UHQR pressing, even better than the 2 master dubs for whatever reason. i have a couple of early pressings, but not an original pressing. i'm told the UHQR surpasses the OP but i can't verify that.
this afternoon i played side one of the UHQR pressing at warp 9, to calibrate my ears on how DSOTM can sound. have not played that in maybe 5-6 years, and my system has taken some steps forward since then. like a new fresh experience.
is DSOTM a tired war horse? not a chance.
i love the digital of Pink Floyd, and from time to time end my evening listening with a few PF cuts. seems to hit the spot for me. but good to get in touch with the vinyl again.
at least -3- CD's, -2- SACD's, at least -8- vinyl pressings, and -2- 15ips, 1/4" tape master dubs (one is really good, one is just ok). the best sounding of all these versions to my ears is my MFSL UHQR pressing, even better than the 2 master dubs for whatever reason. i have a couple of early pressings, but not an original pressing. i'm told the UHQR surpasses the OP but i can't verify that.
this afternoon i played side one of the UHQR pressing at warp 9, to calibrate my ears on how DSOTM can sound. have not played that in maybe 5-6 years, and my system has taken some steps forward since then. like a new fresh experience.
is DSOTM a tired war horse? not a chance.
i love the digital of Pink Floyd, and from time to time end my evening listening with a few PF cuts. seems to hit the spot for me. but good to get in touch with the vinyl again.