Pink Floyd - Wish You Were Here Surround Sound SACD

[etzeppy]

My CTA DTS is from the quad reels and was released in August of 2005. Haven't seen a copy from an LP. Was that a CD-4?

To stay on topic, I'll add that my DVDA of WYWH is from a Q8 (no mention of UK) and was done by Gerardo and Bob. It sounds very good.

Is your CTA conversion available somewhere? I have yet to find a CTA conversion myself. As for the quad LP, I'm pretty sure it was only released in SQ.

 

[Quadwreck]

I don't know him but I thought his name was Tad, not Tab.

Chris

Tad's another guy here.

 

[Chris Gerhard]

Tad's another guy here.

OK, a Tab and a Tad are involved in the Quad hobby.

Chris

 

[Kazaam]

Here's me showing my ignorance, but... What is CTA? [Edit: Are you talking about Chicago?]

 

[georgeshannon]

Off Topic:

Yes, Chicago Transit Authority. The band's original name before the city made them change it.
Yes, it is available somewhere. What did Arn call it? The "evil" site.

 

[Steve Schoultz]

Thanks George!

 

[MyCuff]

All,
To get back on topic (once again) if anyone uploads the kap'n krunch version of "Wish you were here" (2.97 DVD Audio) to the noid I will happily assist in seeding.

 

[kap'n krunch]

Try jdownloader, you just set it up and it'll d/l it for you without asking about every step...you don't have to have an account in RS and it's freee!!

 

[winopener]

CTA from a quad reel? Is this another one of the "supposed" private quad reel releases as Hard'nHeavy etc?

 

[georgeshannon]

CTA from a quad reel? Is this another one of the "supposed" private quad reel releases as Hard'nHeavy etc?

No, nothing as juicy as that. Just something I picked up from the binaries newsgroup years ago. The music files were created in August 2005, but the artwork showing the reference to quad reels and the text file referring to quad reels were created in 2008. Who knows, maybe the original uploader did get these files from a private collection. Probably got them from the same private collection as the quad reels used for the ELO Eldorado DTS disc that was uploaded near the same time.

 

[wanners]

No, nothing as juicy as that. Just something I picked up from the binaries newsgroup years ago. The music files were created in August 2005, but the artwork showing the reference to quad reels and the text file referring to quad reels were created in 2008. Who knows, maybe the original uploader did get these files from a private collection. Probably got them from the same private collection as the quad reels used for the ELO Eldorado DTS disc that was uploaded near the same time.

Wasn't the El Dorado disc determined after much debate to have been an upmix?

 

[georgeshannon]

Wasn't the El Dorado disc determined after much debate to have been an upmix?

Not that I'm aware of or remember. The original uploader is a regular member of this forum. Maybe he'll chime in and tell us his source. He identified quad reels as the source on both discs' artwork and text files. Can't imagine why someone would go to the trouble to do that if it wasn't true.

After seeing some of the items released recently, I know there are quad reels out there (and in private collections) that are unknown to many experts. Just because an item was not commercially released or doesn't appear on some list somewhere doesn't mean it doesn't exist.

 

[Steve Schoultz]

I'm no expert for sure, but it sounds like the real thing to me. Hopefully this will be confirmed. I did notice with the recent Animals upmix, there was some bleeding between the channels. It does sounds great though. I don't hear any bleeding on the CTA.

 

[wanners]

Not that I'm aware of or remember. The original uploader is a regular member of this forum. Maybe he'll chime in and tell us his source. He identified quad reels as the source on both discs' artwork and text files. Can't imagine why someone would go to the trouble to do that if it wasn't true.

After seeing some of the items released recently, I know there are quad reels out there (and in private collections) that are unknown to many experts. Just because an item was not commercially released or doesn't appear on some list somewhere doesn't mean it doesn't exist.

Here's the link to the thread discussing EL Dorado etitled "is this the real mccoy? https://www.quadraphonicquad.com/forums/showthread.php?4667

If it's the one by gerardo, I think it is an upmix--it sounds like an upmix to me, not that it's bad. It's very good, just doesn't sound as good a quad reel.

 

[HOOKEVE]

I have two different MCH WYWH mixes:

1º.- A DVD-A 96/24 DD/DTS 4.1 which contains the original quad mix with the extra music containing in the Q-8 tracks. The songs versions are different that the original stereo mix.

2º.- A DVD-A 96/24 5.0 which contains a new perfect surround mix. The quality sound is superb, and the songs versions are the same that the original stereo mix. May be the new SACD remix ?

Well I did a master on WYWH, in Spanish, sorry. If you wish read it (post 19), click here.

 

[wanners]

I have two different MCH WYWH mixes:

2º.- A DVD-A 96/24 5.0 which contains a new perfect surround mix. The quality sound is superb, and the songs versions are the same that the original stereo mix. May be the new SACD remix ?

OK, I haven't heard this version myself yet, but based on the research i've done, I'm going to go out on a limb and say this is the new upmix. The giveaway is that it's from the stereo source. There's little if any possiblity of a leak of the real 5.1 mix, if there is one yet.

 

[DKA]

OK, I haven't heard this version myself yet, but based on the research i've done, I'm going to go out on a limb and say this is the new upmix. The giveaway is that it's from the stereo source. There's little if any possiblity of a leak of the real 5.1 mix, if there is one yet.

if you and I are thinking of the same upmix, the post you're referring to was written on 2/28, and that mix was not even in existence yet. I will say that the new mix is the best I've ever personally heard the album in surround (not my work, and I will say that I am referring to the combination of sound quality and separation, not just what's more "discreet," etc.), and is highly recommended.

you're the second person I've heard talk about differences between the quad and stereo versions. are we talking that the versions of the songs are actually different on both, or is this just a comment on separation, etc.? i've probably heard a quad version, but it's been a while, at this point.

 

[wanners]

if you and I are thinking of the same upmix, the post you're referring to was written on 2/28, and that mix was not even in existence yet. I will say that the new mix is the best I've ever personally heard the album in surround (not my work, and I will say that I am referring to the combination of sound quality and separation, not just what's more "discreet," etc.), and is highly recommended.

you're the second person I've heard talk about differences between the quad and stereo versions. are we talking that the versions of the songs are actually different on both, or is this just a comment on separation, etc.? i've probably heard a quad version, but it's been a while, at this point.

Well, Historically, the way I would have been able to tell the difference between an upmix (no matter how good the separation) and the true quad would have been that the quad multitracks were obviously different, with the female singers coming in sooner and extra gutarwork, etc. But now there's the new wrinkle of a possible true 5.1 mix that would likely try not to be too differrent from the stereo source, like they tried to to with eagles hotel california. You know, so as not to shock the sensibilities of everyone who is used to hearing the stereo mix. So maybe the new 5.1 mix if it ever comes would be less like the quad mix if you follow me.

With SBU and the incredible separation you get now, I think this is causing confustion and a jump to the conclusion that the new 5.1 might have been leaked, rather than just a really great upmix from a really great source.

To your point, I think the 5.0 mix (the "new" one i was referring to) came out in late 2009. I was not aware of a newer one.

 

[DKA]

Well, Historically, the way I would have been able to tell the difference between an upmix (no matter how good the separation) and the true quad would have been that the quad multitracks were obviously different, with the female singers coming in sooner and extra gutarwork, etc. But now there's the new wrinkle of a possible true 5.1 mix that would likely try not to be too differrent from the stereo source, like they tried to to with eagles hotel california. You know, so as not to shock the sensibilities of everyone who is used to hearing the stereo mix. So maybe the new 5.1 mix if it ever comes would be less like the quad mix if you follow me.

With SBU and the incredible separation you get now, I think this is causing confustion and a jump to the conclusion that the new 5.1 might have been leaked, rather than just a really great upmix from a really great source.

To your point, I think the 5.0 mix (the "new" one i was referring to) came out in late 2009. I was not aware of a newer one.

that's a really good explanation. thank you. it's something i never honestly knew as to actual differences in the mix itself rather than it just being a matter of taste.

there's certainly a lot going on with stereo-to-surround methods, and being able to do them yourself rather than wondering how a TOUP, or whoever else, did it. it's a good time to but pre-conceived notions aside for some and just sit back and listen.

 

[floydflush]

To slow down the confusion a bit here's a list of conversions (more info you can find on AVS for this):

Maybe this can be of any use:
Beside several DTS-CDs there are 5 (!!) good Wish You Were Here DVDAs out there.
You can tell them by the file size.
SQ-LP conversion (Quadumvirate) 3.59 GB
Conversion (???) (as A&V TS folder) 3.59 GB
Conversion by Area51 1.80 GB
SQ-LP conversion by Tom M. 2.63 GB
SQ-LP conversion by Kap'n Krunch 2.97 GB
You don't need all - the last two are by far the best.
Both make their points. Tom's DVDA has the better menu and a sound which seems more balanced. But the one of the Kap'n has better channel separation and a more "powerful" sound (more like from a Q8 tape).
For me and for now the Kap'n has won the run !!

B U T this was 1 month ago! Now - for the winners-list - you have to add ALs great upmix (SBU) of this album. So for now you really have to look out for three (!!!) conversions!
(The Q8 conversion >2,46GB< which appears these days is very very good too, but can't beat the three other ones.)
And since the original quad sources were partly different to the stereo version you'll get the latter one from AL now in quad too. Surprise, surprise...