PINK FLOYD: DSOTM Immersion Box - Post your price

QuadraphonicQuad

Help Support QuadraphonicQuad:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Is this for sure the Parsons mix? Maybe it's the simulated quad mix that came out on the USA Q8.
 
I paid Eur 99,95...

I was interested in the DVD with the surround mixes. These are at the bottom of the box below all the gadgets and booklets.
The 5.1. and the 4.0 mixes are available in 448 and 640 kbps... in Dolby Digital :-(
My system can play them all, except the one I wanted to hear: 4.0 at 640kbps - I think it is the fault of the Denon Link I use. The mode seems to be undefined while 5.1 at 640kbps works. But for HiRez 5.1. I can use the SACD.
So first I listened to the 4.0 at 448 kbps Dolby Digital. Not a real pleasure :-(

Good luck there is also a BluRay with the same content as the DVD (actually it also contains the extras from a second DVD).

For me a BluRay would be enough.

Markus
 
On the BluRay you can switch back and forth between the Parsons and Guthrie mixes!! On the Oppo just hit the Audio button and the menu comes up : 5.1, 2.0, 4.0! You can switch back and forth instantly. It's very cool to hear the sound field shift and the changes in the placement. This is even more than I had hoped for. Very cool!!
 
Nice thread and info, glad some of you guys got this already. But can anybody answer the following yet:

1. How does the quad mix quality compare to the bootleg that's out there?
2. In how far does the 448 kbps DD mix sound bad? I mean, apart from it being DD. Is it muddy? Overly compressed? ...
3. Anybody A-B'd the 2003 SACD and 2011 BluRay yet?

In short... Should I really pay 100 dollars to get material I already have? Thanks guys! :)
 
7 Times? You really are nuts, Chuck! This pot shouldn't cast aspersions toward your kettle. I've owned a 2ch LP, SQ LP, SQ CD, SACD 5.1, MoFi Gold CD, a surface noisy Mofi UHQR 1/2 speed LP which I got new, MoFi 1/2 speed LP, Shine On Box (nice cover!), and Toshiba Japan CD. The Immersion box purchase (tomorrow?) will make my 10th copy. The redundant versions on it and the SACD will bring the total to 16 versions that I've owned! The MoFi CD & LP's are the only ones I no longer own. I really am nuts!!!

So far, the SACD 5.1 is my favorite combining great fidelity with a great mix. I do still prefer the Parsons mix, though. I'll post my Immersion comments when I get it.

Toggling between Immersion versions is way cool. These days, even the software has some cool toys built in!

Linda
In the High-Fidelity, First-Class Travelling Section...Keep Your Hands Off My Stack!

Got one today. Out the door for $105.00. It is very nice and very,very silly. I still feel stupid for buying it. Main reason was to see if they did anything to the Parsons mix. Will hopefully get to listen to it tomorrow. Currently I'm just trying to justify this purchase of an album I have bought no less than 7 times. From MoFi to Shine On, I bought'em all. A set of marbles? A scarf you will never use? Coasters you won't open? Really??
 
Bright Side, I'll try to address the SQ CD boot/Immersion/SQ UK LP comparisons when I get my box. Then, I'll have all three.

I'll try to provide honest comparisons, without any Goody-Good BS.

Linda

Nice thread and info, glad some of you guys got this already. But can anybody answer the following yet:

1. How does the quad mix quality compare to the bootleg that's out there?
2. In how far does the 448 kbps DD mix sound bad? I mean, apart from it being DD. Is it muddy? Overly compressed? ...
3. Anybody A-B'd the 2003 SACD and 2011 BluRay yet?

In short... Should I really pay 100 dollars to get material I already have? Thanks guys! :)
 
So far, the SACD 5.1 is my favorite combining great fidelity with a great mix. I do still prefer the Parsons mix, though. I'll post my Immersion comments when I get it.

Linda
In the High-Fidelity, First-Class Travelling Section...Keep Your Hands Off My Stack!

I find that really interesting because the SACD's sound quality can't overcome the awful surround mix, which, in terms of surround sound, is no better than a synthesized stereo-to-surround mix, such as PL-II Music mode or the Fosgate Tate's Surround mode can do. To me, the SACD surround mix sounds like they made a stereo mix, then stuck a few things in the back so it could be called "surround" - plus, everything is so 'blended' together that it has the localization of a non-logic matrix - it doesn't make the room sound bigger or let me hear more into the mix, as good quad mixes, and the Parsons mix, do.

I think the SACD surround mix is so bad that the SQ LP, played through the Sony SQD-2020, has better surround sound.

As a side-note, you own so many different copies of Dark Side, that you really need to buy a Sony PCM adapter and find the MoFi Dark Side PCM VHS or Beta tape version.

Too bad Nautilus never did a dbx II encoded version of the SQ mix - I prefer it, in stereo, to the standard stereo mix.
 
As a side-note, you own so many different copies of Dark Side, that you really need to buy a Sony PCM adapter and find the MoFi Dark Side PCM VHS or Beta tape version.

????????????
 
Most people don't know those PCM versions exist. As a MoFi dealer at that point, they DO exist. There was a MoFi PCM of Fagen's Nightfly, too. It predated the US CD release by only a few months. These are GREAT fidelity, but I didn't think all that was worth the expense or bother. Disclord, I think you're crazier than I am, which didn't think possible!

Looney Linda

????????????
 
Most people don't know those PCM versions exist. As a MoFi dealer at that point, they DO exist. There was a MoFi PCM of Fagen's Nightfly, too. It predated the US CD release by only a few months. These are GREAT fidelity, but I didn't think all that was worth the expense or bother. Disclord, I think you're crazier than I am, which didn't think possible!

Looney Linda

In the early 90's there was a company called Isosonics that was going to produce a 16-bit/48kHz sampling PCM adapter for VHS or Beta units and that would work reliably in the slowest modes. It was in response to the whole SCMS requirement that was holding DAT recorders back from the market - it was a group of students from MIT that was heading up the project and Philips was helping out and was going to supply their 4x oversampling 16-bit "Royal Crown" DA converter to the group. The signal was to be DAT standard in all respects and even have a 4 channel mode at 32kHz sampling, although not for 'quad' recording but to double the playing/recording time by having an extra pair of stereo channels. Nothing ever came of any of it because Sony soon introduced 'real' DAT recorders at prices that were surprisingly low... I bought my Sony DTC-700 DAT recorder within the first month of its release for only $500 - and could buy the 120 Minute DAT tapes for less than $7 each. MiniDisc didn't reach those prices until a year or so after its release. I just wish pre-recorded DAT tapes had been released - except for the demo tapes (I have one from Sony that pretty much matches the first Sony/CBS CD sampler) or special items such as Steal-Dis-DAT, nothing was ever done with pre-recorded DAT. I've always wondered what the situation was in Japan? Did they get any substantial pre-recorded DAT releases?
 
My system can play them all, except the one I wanted to hear: 4.0 at 640kbps - I think it is the fault of the Denon Link I use.

Just a quick note about Dolby at 640kbps. I believe Neil told us it's actually "out of spec" to be on a disc. So depending on your DVD player it may or may not play. Pink Floyd did this same sort of thing on the Live DVD "Pulse," 2 Dolby streams. One of my year 2000 regular DVD players "Apex" would not play the 640kbps stream. But another newer DVD-A player would (If I recall correctly my Pioneer 578A played it) with no problems. So that may be the issue. Since it's Dolby, personally I didn't notice too much difference in streams on the PF Live DVD.
 
OQG, will the 640kbps DVD be "in spec" on my Sony BDP-350 Blu-Ray, along with the Blu-Ray itself?

In '73, I heard US "SQ decoded" DSOTM Q8, w/black lights & KILLER QUAD in a guy's bedroom... can't remember what I was doing in there...

IMHO, I once preferred Q8's, standardized & truly discrete. More titles other Q formats combined! Didn't buy US Q8 of DSOTM. SQ LP is better fidelity. If I knew UK Q8 was discrete, I'd own it, too. Acquired all equivalent SQ's of Q8 titles I own.

Quad was dead in late '70's. Owning esoteric hifi raised my consciousness. I shifted priorities from discrete mixes to dynamic range, s/n ratio, frequency response, imaging and tonal accuracy. 5.1 Advanced Res delivers it all! In a tradeoff world, I prefer SQ to Q8. CD-4 & Q4 beat the rest and proved Quad could have it all!

I PREFER the Parsons mix, but prefer listening to Guthrie mix, because it's 5.1 SACD. I'm ALONE in liking 5.1 SACD ABORTION of Bartok's Concerto by Boulez! I prefer the Quad mix! I own SQ, Q8 & 5.1. I gulp when writing controversial comments. Go ahead and bust my chops.

Most of all, I want two things from Immersion:
1-Parsons mix in ALL it's glory, finally! BLU-RAY!!!!!!!!
2-Unreleased & live stuff.
The rest I already have and/or could live without.
I'LL INSPECT CD's FOR SCRATCHES BEFORE LEAVING THE CHECKOUT! Try doing that online!
EMI eventually got it right, albeit at $100+. Now, about perfecting the packaging...

Linda
Softer Side of the Moon
 
In the early 90's there was a company called Isosonics that was going to produce a 16-bit/48kHz sampling PCM adapter for VHS or Beta units and that would work reliably in the slowest modes. It was in response to the whole SCMS requirement that was holding DAT recorders back from the market - it was a group of students from MIT that was heading up the project and Philips was helping out and was going to supply their 4x oversampling 16-bit "Royal Crown" DA converter to the group. The signal was to be DAT standard in all respects and even have a 4 channel mode at 32kHz sampling, although not for 'quad' recording but to double the playing/recording time by having an extra pair of stereo channels. Nothing ever came of any of it because Sony soon introduced 'real' DAT recorders at prices that were surprisingly low... I bought my Sony DTC-700 DAT recorder within the first month of its release for only $500 - and could buy the 120 Minute DAT tapes for less than $7 each. MiniDisc didn't reach those prices until a year or so after its release. I just wish pre-recorded DAT tapes had been released - except for the demo tapes (I have one from Sony that pretty much matches the first Sony/CBS CD sampler) or special items such as Steal-Dis-DAT, nothing was ever done with pre-recorded DAT. I've always wondered what the situation was in Japan? Did they get any substantial pre-recorded DAT releases?

Not to bury your question, re-posted here. I've wondered the same the same thing about more prerecorded DAT. I thought the format would last. I paid $1200 around 1994 for a professional DAT machine that didn't get too much use. I still have it. Computer recording seemed to take over as computer/sound cards became cheaper and sound easier to edit as I recall it. In retrospect, I've regretted buying the DAT and have thought that I might have been better off buying a computer with sound card at that time instead. Although the DAC's might have been better on the DAT than what computer cards were offering at the time. At least on the affordable end. Not sure.
 
OQG, will the 640kbps DVD be "in spec" on my Sony BDP-350 Blu-Ray, along with the Blu-Ray itself?

In '73, I heard US "SQ decoded" DSOTM Q8, w/black lights & KILLER QUAD in a guy's bedroom... can't remember what I was doing in there...

IMHO, I once preferred Q8's, standardized & truly discrete. More titles other Q formats combined! Didn't buy US Q8 of DSOTM. SQ LP is better fidelity. If I knew UK Q8 was discrete, I'd own it, too. Acquired all equivalent SQ's of Q8 titles I own.

Quad was dead in late '70's. Owning esoteric hifi raised my consciousness. I shifted priorities from discrete mixes to dynamic range, s/n ratio, frequency response, imaging and tonal accuracy. 5.1 Advanced Res delivers it all! In a tradeoff world, I prefer SQ to Q8. CD-4 & Q4 beat the rest and proved Quad could have it all!

I PREFER the Parsons mix, but prefer listening to Guthrie mix, because it's 5.1 SACD. I'm ALONE in liking 5.1 SACD ABORTION of Bartok's Concerto by Boulez! I prefer the Quad mix! I own SQ, Q8 & 5.1. I gulp when writing controversial comments. Go ahead and bust my chops.

Most of all, I want two things from Immersion:
1-Parsons mix in ALL it's glory, finally! BLU-RAY!!!!!!!!
2-Unreleased & live stuff.
The rest I already have and/or could live without.
I'LL INSPECT CD's FOR SCRATCHES BEFORE LEAVING THE CHECKOUT! Try doing that online!
EMI eventually got it right, albeit at $100+. Now, about perfecting the packaging...

Linda
Softer Side of the Moon

The BR should be fine and you might even be able to play the 640kbps Dolby, depending.

I found a UK SQ pressing of DSOTM around 75-76 and it was my best Quad disc. I still believe the Quad mix of DSOTM the best mix of any recording Mono, Stereo, Quad or 5.1 (also because of what the material is). So that's why it was so very important that they got this right. Very happy to hear all the mixes are all on one disc.

Would also like to hear opinions of sound differences if any, from the SACD and DVD-A 2nd generation master tape boot and the new BR. I would imagine the best sound on the BR. Either way, I plan to own this.
 
For grins, I'll also play 640kbps info on other drives and report back, if desired. Check my profile for DVD-A/V & PC gear.

DAT was oddly affected by computers, which were both boon and bust for DAT. The PC home studio soft/hardware you mentioned, OQG, hastened it's demise. Simultaneously, computers were backup with it, even in some large corporations. At that time, I was lured away from electronics for the computer business. Our clients were mostly Fortune 1000. DATa DAT's. Higher capacity tapes and better data compression cut into DAT market. Optical media and ten kajillion GB hard drives eliminated it. DAT's too bad.

To me, DAT, DCC, PCM VHS/Beta and Elcassette were terriffic formats that were doomed from the start. Like a downhill boulder, technology's acceleration crushed them soon after introduction. Hi 8, Beta and MiniDisc weren't surpassed quite as soon. I considered all of these, but never invested my $$$. Bad enough I invested in CED to get Live at Pompeii, Last Waltz, Let it Be, Gimme Shelter & Grateful Dead. That will only become a mistake if/when Let it Be hits on Blu-Ray. Bought Live at Pompeii on VCD before the DVD was out, too.

Linda
Returning You to the Softer Side of the Moon...
 
To the folks who have already landed a copy, what sound format did they use on the blu-ray? PCM? DTS MA? Dolby True HD?

Also, is everything 24/96? Does that include the live concert PCM tracks?

(Side note: Bummer that The Wherehouse ended up having such a killer price, while Amazon just sits at $109.99. I generally hate The Wherehouse, so I'm really hesitant to order from them. My friends and I have even taken to changing the first vowel to something more... entertaining.)
 
Might it be something that's legal in Nevada? I know, it's either gambing or Warhorse, right?

Linda
Lady of 5.1 Evenings
Now returning you to station WYWH.
Wait, that's a different thread.
To the folks who have already landed a copy, what sound format did they use on the blu-ray? PCM? DTS MA? Dolby True HD?

Also, is everything 24/96? Does that include the live concert PCM tracks?

(Side note: Bummer that The Wherehouse ended up having such a killer price, while Amazon just sits at $109.99. I generally hate The Wherehouse, so I'm really hesitant to order from them. My friends and I have even taken to changing the first vowel to something more... entertaining.)
 
I'm heading to Best Buy tomorrow to get mine. As much as I dislike the big box store, being able to select the "best looking box" without rattles is enough for me to justify paying the $109 over the lesser mail order prices.

As for those MFSL VHS tapes, I remember seeing them. In fact, I recall a Sansui $1000 box that you could attach to your VCR to play them back. Can't remember the model number and I only recall seeing it in a catalog, but it sure looked bad ass. Of course, I lusted for one, but back then I could barely afford a Hi-Fi VHS machine! Ah, those were the days! :)
 
I'm heading to Best Buy tomorrow to get mine. As much as I dislike the big box store, being able to select the "best looking box" without rattles is enough for me to justify paying the $109 over the lesser mail order prices.

Same here. I will check the price at FYE first, but Best Buy is probably going to be lower.

...Bummer that The Wherehouse ended up having such a killer price, while Amazon just sits at $109.99. I generally hate The Wherehouse, so I'm really hesitant to order from them....

Those bastards cancelled all my pre-orders for 3 Warners Japan SACDs. They did it today. And they had them in stock at the time. Probably didn't like the idea I ordered them when they had the 10% off and free shipping sale. I won't bother doing pre-orders with these losers in the future. And of course Amazon has raised the prices on them since by at least $5. So now I'll just wait for the next HMV Japan X15 points sale.
 
I've come to LOATHE Best Buy. In fact, I've been boycotting them for the last year, along with Target. So many people boycotted them both, that Target scaled back their openings in the Bay Area. Further comment borders on politics, so I won't go there. Yet, I may resort to using BB, so I don't have to return scratched up discs by mail.

I'll be hitting Rolling Stones and see if they'll match BB.

Linda

[/I]
I'm heading to Best Buy tomorrow to get mine. As much as I dislike the big box store, being able to select the "best looking box" without rattles is enough for me to justify paying the $109 over the lesser mail order prices.

As for those MFSL VHS tapes, I remember seeing them. In fact, I recall a Sansui $1000 box that you could attach to your VCR to play them back. Can't remember the model number and I only recall seeing it in a catalog, but it sure looked bad ass. Of course, I lusted for one, but back then I could barely afford a Hi-Fi VHS machine! Ah, those were the days! :)
 
Back
Top