HiRez Poll Pink Floyd - DARK SIDE OF THE MOON [Blu-Ray Audio]

[sjcorne]

My memory is a bit hazy on Parsons involvement with the original quad mix, although I would not be surprised if it is truly his work in that regard. Thanks for any response on this one.

I don't know about the original stereo, but Parsons definitely did the quad mix - he wrote an in-depth article about how it was done in 1975, entitled "Four Sides Of The Moon". He also did a comparison between the quad mix and James Guthrie's 5.1 mix back when the 5.1 SACD first came out.

 

[THX1136]

Thanks for the memory jog!! I actually may have that article tucked away in some vast stack of audio magazines.

 

[ubertrout]

Fun interview with Alan Parsons about DSOTM including some discussion of quad. Nothing new I think, but fun.

 

[Sashaaa]

To be completely honest, I know this is a unpopular opinion but im not sure which mix I prefer. I'll do some a/b this weekend and put my thoughts down here. Historically, I prefered the 5.1 but recently I've found the quad is good too.

 

[newslane]

Coincidentally, yesterday I did an A/B test comparing the SACD with the stereo on the Blu-Ray 5.1 release. Rarely have I seen such a difference in these kinds of tests...SACD sounded much better.

 

[northernsoul]

SACD 5.1 has superb sounding bass guitar.

 

[Surroundaholic]

I recently did a blind A/B comparison between the 5.1 from the immersion Blu-ray and the SACD for a couple of buddies. The SACD won hands down with better soundstage, fidelity, and presence. Even though my experience was not blind, as I was running the demo, I wholeheartedly agree. I was not expecting to hear such a difference and was a bit shocked.

In case anyone is interested, here is a breakdown of the system:

Yamaha RX-A3050
Bryston 4B-ST (Powering the fronts)
Oppo UDP-203
Dunlavy SC-IV fronts
Dunlavy SC-I center
Sony SS-B1000 rears (saving up and searching for Dunlavy SC-I’s)
Hsu Research ULS-15 MK2 sub

Part of the system, but not used for the test:
Mirage front presence/Atmos
Klipsch rear presence/Atmos

 

[LuvMyQuad]

I recently did a blind A/B comparison between the 5.1 from the immersion Blu-ray and the SACD for a couple of buddies. The SACD won hands down with better soundstage, fidelity, and presence. Even though my experience was not blind, as I was running the demo, I wholeheartedly agree. I was not expecting to hear such a difference and was a bit shocked.

In case anyone is interested, here is a breakdown of the system:

Yamaha RX-A3050
Bryston 4B-ST (Powering the fronts)
Oppo UDP-203
Dunlavy SC-IV fronts
Dunlavy SC-I center
Sony SS-B1000 rears (saving up and searching for Dunlavy SC-I’s)
Hsu Research ULS-15 MK2 sub

Part of the system, but not used for the test:
Mirage front presence/Atmos
Klipsch rear presence/Atmos

So you compared the 5.1 Guthrie mixes from the 5.1 DTS-MA blueray to the 5.1 SACD, correct? What did the decoding, the Yamaha or the Oppo, and did you have either set to convert DSD to PCM? And how did you actually A-B anything using a single disc player?

 

[Surroundaholic]

So you compared the 5.1 Guthrie mixes from the 5.1 DTS-MA blueray to the 5.1 SACD, correct? What did the decoding, the Yamaha or the Oppo, and did you have either set to convert DSD to PCM? And how did you actually A-B anything using a single disc player?

Hi. Yes, we compared the 5.1 Guthrie mixes from the SACD and Blu-ray. Both albums are housed on a network server, the SACD as .dsf and the Blu-ray as flac. The Oppo is the device accessing the server and sending the undecoded signal via HDMI to the Yamaha for decoding. The Yamaha decodes the .dsf to DSD and the FLAC as 24/96 PCM. All mixes are in the same folder, so I was able to switch between file type easily and quickly.

 

[JediJoker]

Hi. Yes, we compared the 5.1 Guthrie mixes from the SACD and Blu-ray. Both albums are housed on a network server, the SACD as .dsf and the Blu-ray as flac. The Oppo is the device accessing the server and sending the undecoded signal via HDMI to the Yamaha for decoding. The Yamaha decodes the .dsf to DSD and the FLAC as 24/96 PCM. All mixes are in the same folder, so I was able to switch between file type easily and quickly.

And you level-matched the files beforehand? Even a slight increase in level can be perceived as a favorable difference.

 

[edisonbaggins]

How many regions was this box made for? EU and US is what I recall being reported here. Somebody on Facebook is saying they bought a sealed box, Stateside, which has a China encoded blu-ray. Bootleg? Would be odd for a bootlegger to manufacture all the marbles, scarves, etc. Thanks for any clarification!

 

[DuncanS]

How many regions was this box made for? EU and US is what I recall being reported here. Somebody on Facebook is saying they bought a sealed box, Stateside, which has a China encoded blu-ray. Bootleg? Would be odd for a bootlegger to manufacture all the marbles, scarves, etc. Thanks for any clarification!

As far as I know only US & EU pressings, and its our EU pressings which are failing.

 

[edisonbaggins]

As far as I know only US & EU pressings, and its our EU pressings which are failing.

Thanks! That's the best of my knowledge too. I assume, at this point, that the Facebook poster is the victim of some kind of bootleg or switch-aroo scenario or is mistaken somehow. What is China's region, anyway? Region C? Are the US and EU immersion blu-rays region free (I can check mine when I get home)? Thanks again.

 

[DuncanS]

Thanks! That's the best of my knowledge too. I assume, at this point, that the Facebook poster is the victim of some kind of bootleg or switch-aroo scenario or is mistaken somehow. What is China's region, anyway? Region C? Are the US and EU immersion blu-rays region free (I can check mine when I get home)? Thanks again.

There is no code on the disc, box, or various bits of paper or books, mine are EU but I think they're region free, if they are still functioning!

 

[Strilo]

My marbles and scarves are all region free!

 

[Scottie-boy]

This is quite simply a reference disk. I've long been a huge PF fan, and had the SACD since release. The quad mix is better. 10 all the way.

 

[wrat]

decided to revisit the quad on the blu from immersion the quad mix is outstanding great separation and placement BUT its missing the bottom octave so Im dinging the quad for that with an 8
the 5.1 is a 9

 

[Beefalo]

decided to revisit the quad on the blu from immersion the quad mix is outstanding great separation and placement BUT its missing the bottom octave so Im dinging the quad for that with an 8
the 5.1 is a 9

Use bass management and the subwoofers will get an excellent workout.
The lows are there. A LFE channel is unnecessary.
The 5.1 mix is OK if you like "big stereo"

 

[edisonbaggins]

decided to revisit the quad on the blu from immersion the quad mix is outstanding great separation and placement BUT its missing the bottom octave so Im dinging the quad for that with an 8
the 5.1 is a 9

Check your settings, my man!

 

[himey]

decided to revisit the quad on the blu from immersion the quad mix is outstanding great separation and placement BUT its missing the bottom octave so Im dinging the quad for that with an 8
the 5.1 is a 9

I agree that the mastering could be better on the blu-ray but the mix makes up for it compared to the 5.1 so I rate the quad at least 2 points higher, even acknowledging the sq of the 5.1 is better.