prodj101 Posted June 15, 2003 Share Posted June 15, 2003 well, I'm not big into rock, so will I enjoy this disc? I got it on SACD, and I've heard nothing but good things about how well it was mastered, and I'm looking forward to it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TBrennan Posted June 15, 2003 Share Posted June 15, 2003 You can expect some really boring music, lots of aimless noodling that only sounds interesting if you're smoking pot. But if you are smoking pot it's OK. Some delusional druggies have even convinced themselves that Pink Floyd is important and profound. Yeah, right. My opinion ya understand. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Audible Nectar Posted June 15, 2003 Share Posted June 15, 2003 Pay no attention to the Tom behind the curtain Yes, you should get this. There's a reason this work has spent more weeks on "Billboard's Hot 100" than any other - and the SACD has gotten nothing but rave reviews. If you don't have a copy, this is a good time to get one - with all of the trimmings! I would like to see this done with "Animals" too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fish Posted June 15, 2003 Share Posted June 15, 2003 You should be very happy with it.It is a must have,it is over the head of some though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whell Posted June 15, 2003 Share Posted June 15, 2003 My intrests range from classic rock to jazz. Still, in all the 25 years that I have been seriously buying music, be it vinyl or CD, I've never bought DSOTM....until about a month ago when I picked up the 180 gram vinyl re-issue. Its superb music from start to finish. I hope you enjoy it as much as I have. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Griffinator Posted June 15, 2003 Share Posted June 15, 2003 The sound quality of the SACD version of Dark Side is everything you would expect of an SACD version - spectacular. That said, I was totally disgusted with the surround mixing. We ran a standard 5.1 channel analog out (3 pairs Monster Interlink 400) from my friends Sony DVP-NS725 DVD/SACD unit into his Yammy HTR-5590. Perhaps it was the decoders on the Sony (granted, it's an entry level SACD player) but to me it still seemed like everything was coming from the front and nothing from the rears. Am I the only one who's had this experience? I'm all ears - tell me what you're using and how it's performed with some of these SACD 5.1 masters... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
marksdad Posted June 15, 2003 Share Posted June 15, 2003 dark side of the moon is interesting t brenan is right it sounded a whole lot better when i used to imbibe, as far as the disk is concerned it is done well, it has cool sound effects Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
reel 2 reel Posted June 15, 2003 Share Posted June 15, 2003 check out the June 2003 SOUND AND VISION mag..there's an interview with the producer of the SACD..and then there is an interview with Alan Parsons, the producer of the orginal release...very interesting Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jt1stcav Posted June 15, 2003 Share Posted June 15, 2003 I don't know whether you'd want to see the "dark" side of m00n...he's one crazy mofo who just bought and then sold a pair of Belle Klipsch...what? You're not talking about our dear m00n, but the classic Pink Floyd album that got me through my burnout high school years? Oh... Just kiddin' m00n ol' buddy, ol' friend of mine... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fish Posted June 15, 2003 Share Posted June 15, 2003 Griff,just wanted to reply to your surround question.The surround mix I hear is very well done,maybe the best possible with current tech.It is very well defined in each of my speakers,the surround mix is pretty clear and actually is pretty loud on rears.Lots better than that kinda fake echo sound of some dolby,dts.I only have a modest system but it sounds pretty good to me,better than I expected given its age.If the first track does not blow you away,somethin's up.And if track 3 does not make your head spin,there's something you're missing,the surround is fantastic. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rowooo Posted June 16, 2003 Share Posted June 16, 2003 With some good weed and a dvd of the Wizard of Oz you can expect some tingling excitement, mind blowing/altering effects, and some serious musical enjoyment. The SACD stereo version is much better in my opinion than the original cd. You won't be disappointed even under sober conditions. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
prodj101 Posted June 16, 2003 Author Share Posted June 16, 2003 I'll be playing it on my 2.1 system, which I have set to play multichannel SACD's in stereo form. I never really got convinced by the multichannel music. I've always prefered the simplicity of 2.1, not to mention I think it's just easier to listen to. I ordered it so it should be coming this week some time. I don't think it will be too weird for me, I listen to some weird stuff, i.e. the older herbie hancock stuff when he was using all the techno (things like rain dance). I have RF-5's, an RSW-15, and Mcintosh amplification. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ray Garrison Posted June 17, 2003 Share Posted June 17, 2003 ProDJ, Check out this review and I think you'll find quite a bit to ponder over. I'd be reallyl, really interested in your reaction to the difference between the CD layer and the SACD two channel layer after you've had the chance to compare them. If you don't like "rock", what kind of music do you listen to? And, what is "rock"? Ray Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Strabo Posted June 17, 2003 Share Posted June 17, 2003 You should expect it to crack. Just kidding. I feel that this should be in everyones music collection in some form. Although I'm fairly burned out on it (no pun intended) I still find this album as one of my most listened to. And IMHO the 30th anniversary is the best version available. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
artto Posted June 17, 2003 Share Posted June 17, 2003 stick it up your *** Brennan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
prodj101 Posted June 17, 2003 Author Share Posted June 17, 2003 ---------------- On 6/17/2003 10:21:34 AM Ray Garrison wrote: ProDJ, Check out this review and I think you'll find quite a bit to ponder over. I'd be reallyl, really interested in your reaction to the difference between the CD layer and the SACD two channel layer after you've had the chance to compare them. If you don't like "rock", what kind of music do you listen to? And, what is "rock"? Ray ---------------- that is an interesting review. It really does make me suspicious as to whether or not the CD layer was intentionaly marred in order to make the SACD layer sound special. while I haven't actually heard the sacd yet (I am still waiting for it, should get here thursday) from that review I would imagine that it probably was. the CD shouldn't sound THAT much worse than the SACD or vinyl counter part, though I have known stereophile to exagerate alot with their choice of adjectives. They describe the difference as night and day, where as with SACD's I own myself, the difference is there, but is not the type where you would drop what you're doing and run into the room to see make sure your speakers somehow got transformed into avant garde trio classics. I suppose I can only compare the stereo sacd layer because I don't have a multichanel system set up where my sacd player is, and moving it to the synergy system wouldn't sound half as good in multichannel as the reference 2.1 system does in stereo anyway, so it would defeat the purpose. I suppose I'll have to add 3 more RF-5's . As for your question about what kind of music I listen to? I listen to jazz alot, the older rap (back when it used to be a good genre), and some rock and metal, though those are deffinatly the least played of all music listening I do. what is rock? I'm not sure, lol. electric guitars with the distortion maxed out? heavy drum beats? after reading some more about this album I am thinking it is not your traditional rock it all, not by my deffinition anyway. I just had to get it to see what everyone was talking about. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AnalOg Posted June 17, 2003 Share Posted June 17, 2003 stick it up your *** Brennan Hey artto don't you ever have anything nice to say! Tom Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TBrennan Posted June 17, 2003 Share Posted June 17, 2003 nt Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
prodj101 Posted June 17, 2003 Author Share Posted June 17, 2003 ok thats just disgusting brennan. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Invidiosulus Posted June 17, 2003 Share Posted June 17, 2003 Tbrennan, It is those kinds of remarks that makes me sick of these boards. Maybe you hadn't noticed but Tom(rf3iicrazy) was quoting artto when he said that. He was trying to point out that someone was being a little rude to you but instead you were Very rude right back Peace, Josh Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.