advertisement


Animals 2018 remix

I have it coming on LP and CD, due to arrive Thursday. This is an album I've listened to maybe four times in my life, so I'm not burned out on it.
 
Having just played the 5.1 mix, it's not as massive a jump from Stereo to Surround as DSOTM and WYWH are, due to the original not intended for multichannel release.
However, as I find with all multi-channels - 5.1 or quad mixes - the ability to send individually recorded instrument tracks to multiple speakers rather than compressed down to two for stereo - is revelatory in itself.
If you like the album and have a surround system, it's well worth it.

I'm listening to it in a 4.1 system - I no longer feel the need for the centre channel and rely on a phantom.
It makes purchasing speakers easier.
 
I just had a quick listen on Spotify to compare this version against the 2011 remaster.

I agree this new one sounds more dynamic, e.g. drums have more impact, and it seems to bring out things that aren't so obvious in the old mix. So it's not a "loudness war turn it up to 11" effort, but an actual improvement on the original in my view.
 
When? It's happening now. All the rage in Dalston craft beer shops I'm sure.

I’m so out of touch even my snarky suggestions have already happened.

More in the spirit of this thread, I bought (but haven’t yet played) the 24/192 download. It’s the first cash I’ve spent on “Animals” since the CD cost me £11.25 in 1986, so I don’t feel too fleeced.
 
It's a shame that they couldn't have added the conjoined version of PotW

Never heard that before. Is it availabe anywhere in decent quality?

Quite enjoying the remix (CD), for many of the reasons already noted.
 
I'd love to know the rationale for the huge price difference between the BluRay and SACD. As DSD cannot be edited I'm assuming the remix was performed in PCM, so you could argue that the BluRay gets you closer to the source as it skips a conversion step to DSD. On the other hand, if the editing was done at 768kHz or 352.8kHz PCM, I guess you could argue that downsampling it to 192kHz for the BluRay release is equally or more destructive than converting it to DSD64 for the SACD release. Thoughts? :)
 
I'd love to know the rationale for the huge price difference between the BluRay and SACD. As DSD cannot be edited I'm assuming the remix was performed in PCM, so you could argue that the BluRay gets you closer to the source as it skips a conversion step to DSD. On the other hand, if the editing was done at 768kHz or 352.8kHz PCM, I guess you could argue that downsampling it to 192kHz for the BluRay release is equally or more destructive than converting it to DSD64 for the SACD release. Thoughts? :)
Manufacturing costs?
 
OK found it, very odd, you have to put the specific title in and it does not show initially as an album but as individual tracks. But anyhow gonna give it a whirl!

Went to see Think Floyd in Andover last week, they were bloody marvellous, probably better than waters in Philly to be honest.
 
Just a few minutes in, but a better attempt than the recent 'later years' momentary lapse mess up, which is massively overdriven and splashy. This is a bit more thoughtful. They seem to have removed a lot of reverb/echo from the voices which was nice.
 


advertisement


Back
Top