Have you heard the 2011 Floyd remasters? Are they worth the investment?

[gater]

I ask this having already purchased the set, so I guess that is my answer.
[ATTACH=CONFIG]1164[/ATTACH][ATTACH=CONFIG]1165[/ATTACH][ATTACH=CONFIG]1166[/ATTACH]

[CRAZY-HORSE]

i have an old cd of The Wall...Dani bought the new remastered one but i cant tell the difference???

also have Animals,Wish You Were Here as part of the new remastered series but as i do not have earlier cd editions of these albums so i cant say!....

guess that doesnt really help you much does it?!

[gryphon]

I guess there is a limit to how much you can get out of the Orange book standards for CD..................With many CD's done in the early days the standard was poor they rushed and they were naive ( or looking for money later ??) THe big factor at the moment is CD players with upsampling , that stretches the sound production ability and can break the laws of wysiwyg up to a point BUT I think EMI have reached the point where you work hard for an ever smaller improvement.

[CRAZY-HORSE]

just been checking out info/reviews of the new remastered "animals" and "wish you were here" cd,s and appearently the 'proffessional critics' are praising the new superior sound over the original versions....what they all seem to agree on is bolder/deeper bass sounds and better clarity between the drums/percussion parts!, just not sure if they are comparing to older cd versions or to the original vinyls???

personally, i think all these so-called superior masters are a selling gimmick....i have a decent Pioneer cd player, a NAD intergrated amplifier,Yamaha tape deck, and pretty expensive B&W speakers, and just bought a Numark vinyl player...which gives me very good sound for what i want...so the sound is perfect for my ears!

[Music Head]

just because something sounds different does not mean it sounds better.

[gryphon]

Another point:

I find that the CDs that really need remastering often are not.

Those that care and are technically good .feel the need to remaster and do so.

However I have quite a few things that are poorly presented they need a remaster and often they are passed over.

[CRAZY-HORSE]

exactly MH!...i'll listen to vinyl of 1960s bands over cds anyday of the week....they were designed to be listened like that!

also, good points Gryphon!

[Music Head]

Beatles remasters are a good example for me
Have all the vinyl, have all the cd's
Yes they sound different
I love them both
I do not favor one over the other
Could it be the quality of the music over the quality of the recording
I would probably say the same on the Floyd remasters

[JeromeD]

The whole 'remasters' thing is just a money-making exercise. The original albums are fine as they are. And the new 'immersive' mixes using Sony's 360 audio mixing software are complete rubbish. Especially the drums. They just sound completely flat. They do bring out some elements (keyboards, synths, sound effects etc.) but the mix as a whole does not sound cohesive at all. I have listened to a couple of them but the original vinyl stereo mixes are way better. Just my opinion.