[Freeze]

Paid 140 for it and it was so worth it. Perfect condition. I did my research this original 1st pressing was done in 1983 in Japan they had the only cd manufacturing plant of that time cd's were brand new. They did a totally flat transfer from the original reel to reel tapes 0 post processing or production exactly how it was meant to be heard, no artificial loudening or compressors and the original master tapes were only 10 years old at that time much less degraded then they are now. This version even sounds better then the MFSL 200 gram vinyl pressing. It's the holy grail of DSOTM versions. I have the CD ripped in FLAC if any 1 would like to hear a sample wont transfer the whole thing though thats copyright infringement. PM me if interested.

 

[kool bubba ice]

Truly remarkable, & very well worth it.. Imagine if all studio's took such care in handling recording.. Dark Side of the Moon is a classic. Us & them is unbelievable. 140 well spent. I have some original first pressing from Japan & west Germany, but not as elaborate as yours. Original reel to reel tapes etc, sounds like a foreign language today. The CD is so heavy & actually feels that such care was taken into consideration. I would pay you 20.00 for just one song, Us & them, copied to a CD. One lossy &  the other flac.. two tracks of the same song. PM me if interested. I'd cover the shipping too.
 
Quote:

Paid 140 for it and it was so worth it. Perfect condition. I did my research this original 1st pressing was done in 1983 in Japan they had the only CD manufacturing plant of that time cd's were brand new. They did a totally flat transfer from the original reel to reel tapes 0 post processing or production exactly how it was meant to be heard, no artificial loudening or compressors and the original master tapes were only 10 years old at that time much less degraded then they are now. This version even sounds better then the MFSL 200 gram vinyl pressing. It's the holy grail of DSOTM versions. I have the CD ripped in FLAC if any 1 would like to hear a sample wont transfer the whole thing though thats copyright infringement. PM me if interested.

 

[Freeze]

ive been comparing the MFSL ultradisc with this pressing and the mfsl version sounds like theres extra reverb added its more  echoey i cant even stand the mfsl version anymore. The bass is louder in the mfsl version too i can tell its been artificially enhanced.

 

[Freeze]

I dont think this 1983 pressing will ever be beat. The original reel to reels degrade more and more every day that goes by its just what happens to magnetic analog it was done in 1973 its now 2010 thats 37 years of degrading. I know people like thier vinyl  and i guess its poossible an original 1973 pressing made directly from fresh masters would sound better with the proper equipment but and i mean huge but thats all depending on the quality of the record and how many times its been played. Each time you play the record you wear down the fidelity in microscopic amounts this cd I have will never wear down I have 100% crc verified flac files ripped from the cd not a single scratch on the cd and the cd is put away in its case never to be touched again. When I get old and pass this cd on to my grandkids it will still be the amazing amazing quality it was and most likely worth 5x as much by then.
 
I've just never heard such clarity. Here's what I can say about the different verdsions I have.
 
20th anniversary edition: Muddy sound everything sound squished together i guess you'd say the soundstage
 
MFSL Ultradisc: Bass frequencies are noticeably much louder in this version then any other version. If Pink Floyd wanted the bass to sound like that they would of made it like that. I think the higher bass also adds an annoying reverbish quality to it. The audio is clear and sounds alright and was my favorite till I heard the first ever 1983 cd pressing of it.
 
SACD 30th anniversary edition: Now I've never heard the actual SACD DSD layer of this cd, the stereo or 5.1 layer, as I don't have a SACD player. But I have heard the standard cd layer of this mastering and yea its less resolution compared to the SACD layer but the mastering is still the same and I highly doubt a lil more bandwidth over 16 bit 44.1khz is gonna make a night and day difference its still the same master. Regardless this version is almost as bad as the 20th anniversary. It's like their is some filter veil over it taking away all the crispness of the highs. My assumption is the original masters are just not what they used to be.
 
1983 UK Harvest Records 1st edition: Well I didn't think any version could top the MFSL version but once I heard this just incredible detail clarity seperation while still retaining warmth. I'm very pleased to have an untouched copy of the original reel to reel masters in the digital domain.
 
These damn producers need to lay off the compressors and lay off jacking up the loudness at the expense of dynamic range. Of course now they have to work against a degraded master copy so not much they can do now.

 

[Ham Sandwich]

 
Quote:

SACD 30th anniversary edition: Now I've never heard the actual SACD DSD layer of this cd, the stereo or 5.1 layer, as I don't have a SACD player. But I have heard the standard cd layer of this mastering and yea its less resolution compared to the SACD layer but the mastering is still the same and I highly doubt a lil more bandwidth over 16 bit 44.1khz is gonna make a night and day difference its still the same master. Regardless this version is almost as bad as the 20th anniversary. It's like their is some filter veil over it taking away all the crispness of the highs. My assumption is the original masters are just not what they used to be.
 

The SACD stereo and the redbook stereo are not the same.  The redbook version got some loudness treatment.  The SACD version was done the way audiophiles would want it.  You need to get a listen to the SACD stereo version.  Stereophile did an analysis of the SACD vs. CD layers.  The CD got some clipping that is not in the SACD.
 
I've not ever had an opportunity to listen to the original first edition version.  I'd be curious to hear for myself what it is like.  I bought the MFSL version way back when it was first released and that's been my headphone listening version since then.  It does have the typical MFSL smile curve.  Bass and toms are a bit loose and bloomy, as is typical for recordings of that era.  The SACD version fixes that up, the toms and bass are no longer bloomy and they are separated better from each other.  Amazing what modern compressors and tools can do when used for good rather than evil.

 

[Freeze]

I just don't think its worth it to buy an SACD player for 1 disc. Besides the first pressing is amazing. Here's some more info.
 
The very first mastering of Dark Side of the Moon for CD.

http://pinkfloydarchives.com/DJaCDPF.htm#DSOTM1

http://pinkfloydarchives.com/Discog/Japan/DSCD1/JADS1.htm

======================================

Pink Floyd - The Dark Side of the Moon
Sony Japan Black Triangle
Matrix Disc: CP35-3017-7-1A1
DIGITAL "ORIGINAL FLAT TRANSFER" MASTERING
(P) 1983 Made In Japan

Originaly Recorded at Abbey Road Studios, London
between June 1972 and January 1973

======================================

An AUDIOPHILES DELIGHT!

THIS IS THE RARE FIRST JAPANESE PRESSING OF THIS CLASSIC ALBUM ALSO KNOWN AS THE "BLACK TRIANGLE" PRESSING SOUGHT AFTER BY PINK FLOYD COLLECTORS AND AUDIOPHILES ALIKE (NON "TO")

THIS PRESSING IS CONSIDERED BY MANY TO BE THE 'HOLY GRAIL' OF THE DARK SIDE OF THE MOON RECORDINGS, BETTER THAN MFSL!

This is the Japanese issue made from the very first Sony CD mastering of Dark Side of the Moon. Often referred to as the Sony "non-TO" pressing.

======================================
 
If I had a time machine I'd totally be visiting abbey road studios during the DSotM recordings. Would be amazing to be there.

 

 

[Skylab]

I'd love to hear that.  I have about 6 different versions of DSOTM, and the one I like best is the ORIGINAL MFSL *LP* - from back in the day.  It sounds the best to me.  The SACD is also very good.  I also have the (much later) MFSL CD, and the 30th anniversary vinyl as well as the SACD...and the original vinyl LP...

 

[Davey]

Quote:

They did a totally flat transfer from the original reel to reel tapes 0 post processing or production exactly how it was meant to be heard, no artificial loudening or compressors ....

 

Nice score! You're probably aware, but I think they did use pre-emphasis on those Dark Side originals, so you need to either process it after ripping with good de-emphasis software, or play it on a CDP that does de-emphasis correctly or it will be kind of bright.

 

[wywern209]

does anyone know which edition is being sold on amazon right now? im talking about the CD of course. im only seventeen and nowhere near rich enough to have a really high end setup that can play vinyl.

 

[Skylab]

The one to buy on Amazon would be the hybrid CD/SACD: http://www.amazon.com/Dark-Side-Moon-30th-Anniversary/dp/B00008CLOA/ref=ntt_mus_ep_dpi_4
 
Anything else is either inferior, or in "collectors' item" territory

 

[wywern209]

Quote:

The one to buy on Amazon would be the hybrid CD/SACD: http://www.amazon.com/Dark-Side-Moon-30th-Anniversary/dp/B00008CLOA/ref=ntt_mus_ep_dpi_4
 
Anything else is either inferior, or in "collectors' item" territory

thx for the reply

 

[jilgiljongiljing]

I am quite happy with the SACD version, and if you can pay 140$ for a cd, I'm sure you can spend 100 odd for the Sony CE595 and 12 bucks for the SACD. Just sayin...
 
But congrats on acquiring a rare fine recording.

 

[Ham Sandwich]

 
Quote:

thx for the reply

I'll second the recommendation to get the hybrid CD/SACD version.  It's the best version that is currently in production.  The current CD version isn't so good, it's been loudnessed too much.  The only thing the current CD version is good for is for recreating the style of sound you'd get at a laser light show of the DSOTM.  Not what is good for critical listening enjoyment.  Even if you don't have an SACD player the hybrid version is the one to get to start with.  You'll still be able to play the CD layer.
 
If you get in the collecting or enthusiast mood the old versions are neat.  You'll get to hear for yourself what the old-school mastering brings out, what is different, what that style of sound actually sounds like.

 

[golgi]

 

I only have two versions of this album.  I have the MFSL Ultradisc II gold cd which I think sounds good.   And I also have the 30th anniversary vinyl LP which sounds very good.  These are the only two that I've heard so I'm not sure how they stack up against the others.  I've always wondered if I should look for a more definitive version.  From what I'm reading in this thread, I should seek out the original Japanese cd.  Has anyone compared that to the Ultradisc II or the 30th anniversary vinyl lp?  If so, is it a drastic difference?

 

[bridge8989]

the 1983 emi/toshiba CP35 japan black triangle is supposed to be the best mastering (which is the one I have :])