[wab]

I want some Pink Floyd in my CD collection. This new 2CD compilation looks pretty good since I don't want to buy all their CD's.
I know best-off's sometimes "work" and sometimes they don't. Anyone have this compilation? Any thoughts?

 

[DarkAngel]

Its about as good as you can hope for best of collection. The problem with best of Cds for groups that have many albums spanning many different styles is that inevitably to have some tracks from each album there will be some weak tracks, and this is no exception. But no one expects best of CD to have only tracks from DSOM/Wish/Wall only, although if you own those three
CDs I don't really think you need this collection.

The sound is of audiophile quality and with 26 tracks pretty generous. The market for this CD is people who don't already
own the "big three" and want a sampler of Pink Floyd work. This does have many great tracks.

 

[pigmode]

wab, I don't consider this a traditional "best of..." kind of release. It's a concept title. The songs have been tweaked: the soundstage has been enhanced, and I believe at least a few have been remixed. I recieved mine as a gift and I kind of like it. It's interesting but not a neccesity.

Here's my recommendation: Start with DSOTM, then get Wish You Were Here, Animals, and The Wall. Those albums need to be heard in their entirety, in their original form. Remember, each Pink Floyd title is a concept onto itself. I'm looking at the song list for Echos, and I feel that it would hurt more than help to hear that first, although it is a good window to their earlier work (pre-DSOTM).

 

[coolvij]

I need to get the Wall and "Animals" - then my PF colllection can sit for a while.....besides, WYWH really sorta makes me care less about getting more albums - I'd rather listen to it more.

 

[pigmode]

I know what you mean. Everyone always raves about the sound quality of DSOTM, but WYWH is awesome in that respect.

 

[morphsci]

I do not think this is a very good Pink Floyd compilation, either in terms of musical selection or mastering quality. It pails in comparison to the mastering on the MFSL copies of DSOTM or The Wall. IMO.

 

[Dusty Chalk]

I just wanted to say that I think Animals is a completely underrated album, IMHO. It ties for first (with Wish You Were Here) as my favorite album of all time. Anyone who likes the "big three", as DarkAngle put it, should definitely check this album out if they haven't.

 

[pigmode]

Quote:

Originally posted by morphsci I do not think this is a very good Pink Floyd compilation, either in terms of musical selection or mastering quality. It pails in comparison to the mastering on the MFSL copies of DSOTM or The Wall. IMO.

Do you have the UD1 or the UD2 version? The word is the UD1 blows the 2 into the weeds. At their asking price, I doubt I'll be getting those at all. I'm just happy to have a 1/2 speed mastered Mo-Fi DSOTM.

 

[johnnylexus]

what is MFSL?

i'm in dire need of an education on well-mastered/recorded CD's ..

 

[morphsci]

Quote:

Originally posted by pigmode Do you have the UD1 or the UD2 version? The word is the UD1 blows the 2 into the weeds. At their asking price, I doubt I'll be getting those at all. I'm just happy to have a 1/2 speed mastered Mo-Fi DSOTM.

I can't really say what version I had since I no longer have it. I am willing to accept that there may be better versions out there. Whatever version I had I did not care for and thus no longer own it.

Quote:

what is MFSL? i'm in dire need of an education on well-mastered/recorded CD's ..

MFSL is mobile fidelity sound labs. They were an audiophile label that did direct to disc LP and remastered Cd recordings of mostly jazz and rock albums. They went out of business but have been resurrected by music direct. The complete old MFSL discographery can be seen HERE.


And I also agree with Dusty that Animals is way underrated in the schema of Pink Floydism.

 

[pigmode]

Quote:

Originally posted by johnnylexus i'm in dire need of an education on well-mastered/recorded CD's ..

Johnny, its a never ending process of discovery and dissappointment. A few of the MFSL discs I have, have been dissappointments, but most of the rest are from good to fantastic. In DCC on the other hand, I have found greater consistency in the sound I am looking for.

Even when buying standard shelf items, the latest remasters are not neccesarily the best. I have a stack of CDs that will eventually get taken to the used CD place. Finding good music is harder than finding a good amp. And I'm talking about music I already like!

 

[johnnylexus]

pigmode: which specific MFSL discs did you find disappointing?

What is DCC?

I recently spent a little over $100 on CD's from CD Universe. They had a ton of old titles that brought me back to my early rocker days. I ordered a few of them for nostalgias sake, and .... voila ... they sound like CRAP. Can't even listen to them. Other, newer titles, such as "a Decade of Steely Dan," "The Rippingtons Black Diamond" and "Storyville / A piece of your Soul" sound pretty danged good.

I am very interested in earnestly seeking out TOP QUALITY recordings. I even bought the 333ES SACD player on yer all's recommendations in hope that more titles will come to that format.

 

[DarkAngel]

Critics please put the long knives away!

Remember this is a compromise "best of " CD, it will have some weak tracks because it tries to sample from all periods, and some of your favorite tracks might be missing, but it seems to have all the popular must have tracks and does draw heavily from their best work DSOTM/Wish/Wall..........all "best of" CDs have this problem, I see little to criticize here.

I found nothing lacking in sound quality, now remember some of these tracks are from 1960s pyschedelic period and do not have same sound quality as DSOTM/Wish, but the core material sounds about as good as it ever has on standard CD.........there may be better MFSL CDs but they cost much more! Again I find nothing to criticize here, relax enjoy the music. It has amazing sound quality for rock music from the 1970's, compared to other stuff done then.

Johnny Lexus
MFSL, DCC, and other labels are premium "gold" CDs with special remasters that often are better than standard CD recording,
you pay much more however. I have found however many of the newer standard remasters surpass the more expensive gold Cds,
so I do not buy them and sold the few I have. Sound engineers now have the tools to effectively improve sound of original CD recordings.......some are better than others at doing this! Bob Ludwig is good example, check his Tom Petty remasters or Rolling Stones virgin label remasters, dramatic improvements.

 

[DarkAngel]

Just to put my comments in context, I currently own the "big three" DSOTM/Wish/Wall all new 1990's remasters and purchased Echoes compilation to pick up some other tracks I didn't own, as I didn't want to purchase full albums like "animals" "meddle" etc.

I wound up selling Echoes because there really aren't many tracks
outside of the "big three" that I thought were important to own,
sold very quickly at half.com for little cost to me overall.

 

[morphsci]

Let me explain a little more my disappointment with Echoes. Anyone familiar with Pink Floyd realizes that their albums were constructed as a cohesive entity so that not only the songs themselves but the overall feel of the album was part of the experience. If Echoes had been constucted as a compilation from the original masters it would have been much better as it would have been done with the same cohesiveness as most of Pink Floyds albums. It would have also have been possible to upgrade the sound. For me there was too much dissonance between tracks to convince me that this was a Pink Floyd album. IMO.

As far as remasters go I also agree that some current remasters are very good. However, I find a lot more variance among the mass market remasters than I do among DCC and MFSL remasters.