Pink Floyd Animals CD: 1986 AAD vs 2022 ADD

How does the 2018 digital remix compare to the original 1977 analog mix on compact disc? Discover the sound of these two amazing productions from 2022 and 1986.
Tracks & specs:
u.pcloud.link/publink/show?co...
Extra track (Dogs): u.pcloud.link/publink/show?co...
SPARS code video: • SPARS code AAD: When C...
Video index:
0:00 - Intro
0:50 - Video structure
1:23 - 2022 CD edition (remix concept & spars code)
4:28 - 1986 CD edition
5:05 - Test intro
6:06 - Track 1 (Sheep)
10:08 - Track 2 (Sheep)
14:13 - Tracks revelation
15:18 - Spectrum analysis
16:35 - Loudness analysis
17:15 - Dynamic range analysis
18:08 - Sound comparison
19:11 - Quick second test (Pigs on the wing, pt.1)
20:10 - Conclusions & AAD volume tip
More Ana[dia]log groove:
INSTAGRAM: / ana.dia.log
FACEBOOK: / anadialog1
TWITTER: / anadialog
#pinkfloyd #pinkfloydanimals #cds

[@anadialog]

I was listening again the two CDs on my system and it is amazing how much things change when listening to this album on a good system. Trough KZbin and in general on the computer just doesn't shine! For example "Dogs", which I did not include in the test (stupid me) si much much more lifelike in the AAD version. If this comments gets 50likes I will add also that track for download in the video description. OK! I heard ya...link is in video description. P.S. Video Monetization is entirely on Pink Floyd. It all goes to them.

[@a_karamys208]

You have my like. Great job!

[@mjallenuk]

Got a like from me... YT compression is a little bit savage but I guess it's all about money saving on server time

[@MARTIN201199]

Mine was the 31st like

[@andydogdixon1]

Me, 46th like. Getting close now!

[@tee-jaythestereo-bargainph2120]

#58/758😆

[@goldteethkeith]

My favorite part of Sheep is how Waters's voice blends into the synth during the verses, in the old mix his voice is completely gone by the end of the note, in the new mix you can hear when he ends the note, he actually adds a little inflection that you pretty much cant hear in the original, listen closely to "Only dimly aware of a certain unease in the air"

[@sigmundfreud8976]

I thought I’d be the only one to figure that out. In fact, you can hear how the synth note kicks off and starts to blend with the voice, it sounds interesting but, like you said, it loses the charm from the 1977 version which is so subtle. However, I love how Gilmour’s guitar glissandos (the ones right before the bridges) sound better in the new mix, they’re more powerful and edgy, maybe more aggresive.

[@GoodDayGoodDayGoodDay]

that's always been my favorite part too!

[@goldteethkeith]

@@GoodDayGoodDayGoodDay Its a cool trick, they do the same thing but with a saxophone about 2 minutes into The Gunners Dream. I think it was a really good idea, the sax matches his voice really well, but Waters didnt hold the note as long or they faded out too early so you can more clearly hear the distinction between the two. Still one of my favorite moments on a PF track though

[@lastcamie2]

This is the best song with him singing ...

[@bcpme8637]

Agree 100%. My favorite part of the album too.......and I thought the same upon the first listen.

[@rob5631]

This is not only my absolute favorite Pink Floyd album, but probably favorite album of all time. The first time I heard the 2018 remix, I noticed a significant difference compared to the original (and I did not particularly care for it). I grew up and have listened to the original for 45 years and have grown very accustomed to how it sounds. The best way that I can describe it is deeper, darker and more powerful than the new 2018 remix. My initial impression was that the 2018 remix was much cleaner and somewhat sterile, yet overblown and overproduced. The more I listened to it though, the more I grew to appreciate the enhancements in clarity and wider soundstage. Bottom line is now I can listen to both versions depending on my mood and listening environment. I will always go back to the original when I want to recreate the darker, more cynical vibe that has resonated in my teen and adult life for past 45 years. I will switch to the new 2018 remix when I want to geek out and be more of an audiophile. I love choice. I now have this album on vinyl, cassette, CD and now the new vinyl, SACD and Blu-ray versions. Life is good...

[@pauldavies6037]

which one sounds the best?

[@anadialog]

Thanks for your input. I like the "dark" definition, it fits perfectly.

[@rob5631]

@@pauldavies6037 after continued listening, the 2018 remix sounds the best to me. It is definitely worth picking up. I do however like having the option of being able to listen to the original as well.

[@georgebarrett2132]

@@rob5631 the biggest advantage of the '18 remix is, as Guido described when pointing it out, the clarity of the vocal by it's being brought to a more forward positioning. but i do not mind the original '86's somewhat more distant lyrical source and, especially for roger's less fluctuating delivery and it's lesser rich(sweet) tone than are those of david, i actually prefer it. (it's the same with fagen's voice, even though the others had to persuade him to take lead....both floyd and dan are first and foremost a man's band) i would not agree that there is any breadth extension in sound stage, the opposite in fact. the instumental are mostly the coming from near same directions as do on the original yet there is an added and noticable, shall we say, compartmentalization of each which overly isolate's their trajectories as remaining perceivably singular and, thus, resulting in them less fully and naturally blending as parts into the whole of the audible stereo effect. it's not unbearable but, i'd still have to attach it adjectives like a bit more sterile, a few degrees colder, and just a tad descernibly manufuctured. there is also some missing acoustic information from within this new mix....i purchased this release along with the "foreigner" debut a couple of months later and "talking heads: '77" right after it and, as wrote in my org post, know it all by heart. but the differences are on the whole are trivial and, rather, even likely inaudible to all casual listeners, with the vocals benifit of the new mix can be very servicable if analyzing them with newer listeners or just for fun, partying.

[@Bosworth123]

@@anadialog When you like it, it's dark. When you don't, it's muddy.

[@TheAgeOfAnalog]

Animals was the very first CD I ever bought, along with my first CD player, back in 1987. I still have it.

[@birgerolovsson5203]

I bought my first CD-player in June 1987 also but I bought the CD Jennifer Rush - Heart Over Mind instead.

[@RUfromthe40s]

@@birgerolovsson5203 also bought my first cd component for the system in 87 a pd-7300 from pioneer but before i had the sony first cd player semi-portable ,the same system when they released the first minidisc deck, but jennifer didn´t gave me no rush ,i bought the woodentops album "giant" also the first solo album from julian cope after the teardrop explodes and the psychedelic furs album "talk talk talk" that i had in vinil ,a great album

[@birgerolovsson5203]

@@RUfromthe40s I bought the CD "Jennifer Rush - Heart Over Mind" when I bought my Yamaha CDX700 in June 1987 just because the shop only had 3 CDs and the other 2 CDs was nothing for me. 3 CDs, talk about many. 😅

[@RUfromthe40s]

@@birgerolovsson5203 sorry , i think everyone as the right to it´s own taste, i only said that like a joke ,i have a lot of friends that we met when we were only 4 years old ,one of them says that the best artist in the world is George Michael ,in my opinion is trash but i make jokes with it but it´s is taste and he also owns a lot of good music , what to do? When the release of it´s second solo Lp it was ofered with two more Lp´s ,this to say that everyone that bought in late 80´s or early 90´s cd players from sony received a copy of "listen without prejudice, vol.I or II" almost no one that i know including girls didn´t play that cd since they ofered them, or maybe in the secret of their rooms at night they listen to it like a guilty pleasure, i remenber when in highschool having what everybody calls a punk rock band but not like those epitaph bands in the 90´s more like dead kennedy´s mixed with the Misfits but was just an excuse for our poor knowledge of playing instruments when we were 14 not our only taste in music but the best we could do at the time to have a lot of fun, tastes are what each one enjoys the most not what is supposed to be listened because it´s fashion, regards

[@commonman317]

Same here.

[@dutterman812]

The newer mix sounded to me like there was more separation between instruments, more "compartmentalization" perhaps narrower placement in stereo, and it actually made this sound like "old" Pink Floyd. Their sound and production changed with each album, but I fell like this remix helped reveal some elements of vintage Pink Floyd sound. I was skeptical at first, but will now probably give this a good sit-down listen on the stereo at home.

[@Pete-eb3vo]

I don't know it automatically makes it sound more like old Pink Floyd. All the 2018 remix does is take a album that was supposed to wound weird and dark and sacrifices it all to make it sound more generic and sacrifices some of the mid and low range in favour of the vocals being pushed to the frontline. Honestly, that's not what i would call a great service to a iconic album, but at least it's not acting like a replacement to the original version.

[@rm-mastering]

I have to agree with you AAD without doubt, the second song in AAD, vocal reverbs beautifully presented and preserved. The ADD lost. Thank you for a great video.

[@PhilipvanderMatten]

I agree

[@DaveMenkehorst]

I think it is a new reverb right?

[@rm-mastering]

@@DaveMenkehorst I'm referring to the original mastered version AAD, I'm assuming the new remastered version ADD, doesn't have (in my opinion anyway) additional processing such as reverb etc, just a different remastering technique following todays trends of pushing the levels up, I've always advocated against hot mastering (pushing beyond it's limits) as this generally causes finite and subtle nuances to be pushed back and sometimes lost in the mix. Another thing I have noticed is the high mids and low treble tends to suffer and become hard and brittle when music is pushed to hard through AD/DA converters.

[@rm-mastering]

In addition, with modern produced electronic music, these differences are not as noticeable compared to old (analogue produced 70's, 80's and some 90's) music. With modern music, the engineers generally account for this in the mix but with old tracks being remastered, most music companies pass songs through auto remastering software (or online mastering services), these on occasions can be great but generally I find songs can suffer greatly due to who ever designed the software preset algorithms they rely on to give you the final mastered song may not always work well with the song. I think you'll agree (and if you have the money) It's always better to buy a suit from a tailor rather than off the peg suits, music suffers the same. It's a good topic for discussion. For connivence, I do prefer CD's to vinyl but I always go back to vinyl for shire musical enjoyment. When buying CD's I always try to find the original un remixed and non remastered versions, you can generally pick them up in thrift/charity shops in good condition and at a nocked down price! The joys of HiFi.....

[@mjallenuk]

I could listen to both with ease... I think that's a job well done

[@YouKnowWhereYouWentWrong]

I've purchased "Animals" as an LP, an 8 Track (with the Snowy White guitar solo connecting both parts of 'Pigs on the Wing') a cassette, a CD, a second "remastered" CD and finally last year as a Blu Ray with a 5.1 mix. I'm gonna plant my flag on that 5.1 hill. It's the best mix of this album I've ever heard. With the right set up it's insanely good. Sure, the "warmth" of an analogue LP is an incredibly specific sound, but let's remember (for those of us old enough to) how much trouble it was to keep that vinyl clean & clear of pops & scratches.

[@CuriousEnthusiast956]

All i hear on the remix is a less dynamic version with unnecessary hiss reduction, loss of the reverb and surreal atmosphere particularly on Sheep and is overall just a more sterile version of Animals. I don't understand why anybody who likes audio prefers the remix. The warmth IS the sound of the album. That's how it's meant to be heard. Not cold!

[@Mark-ro5zg]

Thank you for the comparison between these cd's. I had this on 8 track not long after it first came out [Junior in HS] and played it all the time in my car. I've listened to this album hundreds of times over the years. I picked up the remix version recently and agree that the midrange is boosted a little and the vocals are much clearer. I have the 1992 Shine On Box Set version. I compared the 2 and noticed right away the difference vs the 1992 version. I'm hearing things I hadn't noticed before in the older version. I'll be listening to the remix version from now on. I also have the 2016 vinyl version.

[@Lasse3]

Great video, great channel, kudos! Wish you good luck growing the channel.

[@stephanem.2268]

Really great job on this video 👍 I've always been in love with this album and the "new" remix brings more informations and clarity but it's true that 1986 CD has something more emotional and darker after all more in line with the concept behind the album

[@De_La_Soto]

I like the “fullness” of the instruments on the original, but that “pop” on the remix (especially the vocals) is also great. They are both fantastic, it’s hard for me personally to REALLY prefer one over the other.

[@RUfromthe40s]

i heard only one version or two if the pre-recorded cassette counts and how amazing those pink floyd albums sounded but new remix it will sound like a pink floyd cover band

[@De_La_Soto]

@@RUfromthe40s it makes sense considering it’s a Remix as opposed to a Remaster, but it’s a really great listen!

[@RUfromthe40s]

@@De_La_Soto i don´t understand the diference between a remix and a remaster because both will change the perfect sound of pink floyd´s albums ,i own a first copy and someone during the 80´s left a new copy in my house and both sounded good but mine allthough it sounds perfect ,the cover it´s in bad shape but i only had to trade one cover by the other and have two animals lp´s but keeping the original they say it as some value ,i only refered to that because ,how can one improve perfection, the cd that came out in the 80´s i heard it and it sounded like the guitars were mufled so i don´t agree with the digital conversion because it destroys the work of a band and with remixes and remasters the sound is changed for the worse , i could talk about this for hours but it´s easier tosay that one can´t change for better what is already perfect, the cds might have written and would sell a lot by saying "this is a copy of the analog version of this album ,hear it but remnber you´re only listening to 50% of the original quality ,they could had improved the tape recording so one today could record into tape a analog copy that would sound much better but because of money reasons no one would spend money in improving new protected cassettes to substitute old cassettes that can be destroyd by several reasons, i today still record a lot of cassettes with my favorite songs and sounds even better than a cd, but i when cassettes were sold like 10 sealed cassettes 1€ ,i bought several boxes of 10 normally good ferric tapes and the best chrome tapes including the casing that if not well built will put out of tune any deck, i still use a cassette deck that it was bought in 1976 and records perfect ,even sounding better than a cd ,this i also learn with the years ,i started to listen to music more often when i was 12 ,and only learned about good cassettes and bad when i was 25 and had 3 decks destroyd by using after 1986 basf cassettes that were my favorite but the tape was still good but it´s casing made decks being destroyd because the tape to ritate inside the casing would make the deck work at the triple of the strenght he used in regular well built cassettes, that´s when i learned by seeing a good deck work bad with only 5 years of use ,that´s when i only started to buy the best cassettes assembled that at the time were only the TDK´s ,the MAXELL´s and the SONY´s for my surprise,but in the 90´s maxell started to built bad cassettes so i only used at the time sony and tdk cassettes and bought several boxes of them and maxell older models too, till 93, to end people think that the nakamichi dragon was the best deck ever ,i had two because they were cheaper ,they worked perfect but at the end of two summers it get destroyd ,every high-end deck from brands like pioneer and AKAI or Technics or Teac or ES from sony are several times better sounding than the dragon wich i had two the second time because i was told they had improved it,but not ,only the 680zx , the zx-9, the cr-3 , the CR-7 and cassette deck 1 are great decks from nakamichi . I only have the 680ZX ,the ZX-9 and the CR-7, but i collect hi-fi components, regards

[@whataboutrob442]

​@RUfromthe40s Mastering comes after the mix is complete. So a remaster doesn't really change the overall sound, just the levels. A remix is great because it is all rethought.

[@AndreaPaolini]

Thanks ! excellent and interesting analysis

[@tonymenzies4462]

Pigs on the remix is fantastic. Thanks for getting me back into this great album 😎

[@jacoblandjensen6230]

Dear ANA[DIA]LOG I know this record very well, don't tell the others, they might say that I am old 😉 I love streaming / media servers, because its gives easy access to music, but to me the AAD is a clear winner, yes the voice sounds better on the ADD but the better dynamics on the AAD, lets the music lives more, and who don't like lively music 🙂 Thanks for showing us the difference ❤

[@Silent-Lucidity]

I recently listened to a few Audible books and I think your voice would be perfect in this field!! Just thought I'd throw that out there. :)

[@anonamouse5917]

What makes a remix especially challenging is that the original (barring some massive eff ups) is considered sacred. It looks like the engineer was wearing his shock collar so we get to enjoy some dynamic range. I would have preferred the peaks not hitting the top but I wasn't there to adjust the trigger sensitivity on the shock collar. I will be seeking this disc out to add to the collection. The original will always be my favorite (sacred) but this will make an nice alternative for when I'm in the mood.

[@patbarr1351]

That somewhat depends upon the era you grew up in, I think. In the late '70's - early '80's we loved remixes (the British mix might differ from the American) & sometimes different versions appeared at the same time, even on flipsides of the same single!

[@RUfromthe40s]

@@patbarr1351 i remenber having to look for the maxi-singles ,because normally they had a new mix and songs not available in the album or live versions of other songs

[@DerekPower]

As I’ve said elsewhere, the 2018 mix was an effort to bring clarity and definition and thus satisfy the ears of the surviving members of the band. But personally, I like what was done back in 1977 (and thus what was issued from 1986 to 2011 or so).

[@earthoid]

I first noticed the clear sheep noises which immediately gave away the remixed version. After that I have to say that I liked both versions at different times. For me though, I'm happy enough with the Discovery box set that I bought back in 2011.

[@vangmx]

For me, it’s not about which sounds better in terms of either analog or digital on the mixing end (AAD vs. ADD) but more about which mix you like. The analog mixed version sounds more 3D but all the sound elements (vocals, instruments, bass etc.) can sound kinda lost and muffled together during the heavy and complicated sections of the music while the digital mixed version sounds cleaner, sharper, less reverb so it lost a bit of that 3D-ness from the analog mix. Either way, both still sound good in my ears.

[@anadialog]

That is only a part of the equation. We are comparing versions

[@RUfromthe40s]

i when starting to buy my favorite albums in cd version was just a desilusion no cd sounded better than the original version and your description of the sound is acurate ,i even have two vinil versions because pink floyd wasn´t cool anymore and when asking to several friends ,who had left the animals record in my house no one said it was his ,and both sound great the 80´s version and the original from the 70´s

[@RUfromthe40s]

the guitars sound like guitars not mufled, another example is the only record i bought from supertramp ,the crime of the century ,the guitar on "bloody well right " in the vinil one can hear the guitar ,in the cd there´s a guitar but mufled not like the original version which one can tell what is the efect and guitar played at the least sounding the same. In the pink floyd album there are parts of guitar being played at a very interesting way of changing the tempo in the solo

[@daviddrake6875]

Don’t forget analog is infinite sampling.

[@carmelofiorilla868]

@@daviddrake6875 actually it’s “very very long sampling”, not just infinite…

[@danb.9891]

Interesting video, thanks for posting. For me, I noticed the sound if sheep was much more forward on the AAD track and the voice, bass, drums felt "small & squashed down". On the ADD the sheep sound was way back in the mix , but the voice and instruments was more forward and felt "taller" (if that makes any sense?). I also agree, that both discs are of much higher quality than 95% of most rock recordings. Again, great job on this video. 👍

[@Darrin.Crawford]

You know what you just described??? A remix. The AAD vs ADD is irrelevant here.

[@muinarc0]

Vocals are brought forward in almost all modern "remixes". Because of this I tend to universally prefer 80s-90s CDS to any modern "remaster". The science then for digital audio on Redbook CD is the same as now. New doesnt have to mean better but everyone just seems to assume new must be better with digital audio.

[@Bring_MeSunshine]

I guessed correctly, after hearing Sheeps 1 & 2. The analogue version has an unmistakable thicker sound in the lower mids, that seem to permeate across everything, as tape saturation. Considering they are normalised, the older version sounds louder, probably perceived, more Lufs. But what I also heard, right from the off, was the clarity in the remix, which started with the sheep sounds. While I've not listened to Animals for years (I actually say the Floyd in '77 on the Animals tour, too) listening again to the original mix, you fall straight back in to 'knowing' the arrangement inside, and the remix had odd 'new' things that weren't in that audio memory, as well as having more detail in the upper areas

[@Markus_Christians]

i am sure everyone has already said all this, but as soon as i heard the drums kick in on the second version, i knew that was the remix. you can actually hear the cymbals and even the hi-hats, ever so slightly now. in the original mix the high end of the drums is completely lost. :D :D

[@FinnleysAudioAdventures]

I’m old enough to be there at the dawn of CDs showing up for purchase in Music+ and The Warehouse in those long flat boxes. Anyways, one thing that I didn’t like about CDs were ones which had pure digital DDD process. It always had a lot of sibilance and harshness in the high end. I started to avoid those CDs and get ones which had analog mixing, AAD or DAD. I can’t remember which Peter Gabriel album it was, but it sounded like a cabasa after every S or C sound. Now the re-releases sound much better since they have been remastered with newer mixing techniques. I still love SACD for Pink Floyd. When listening on a system which fully supports multi channels it sounds amazing.

[@LordOfTheThreeWorlds]

Fascinating to hear this - I would have done the same thing with this 2" tape 10 years ago if I coulda laid my grubby hands on it! Of course nothing can compare to the original masterpiece but no doubt a fresh perspective on these sessions and the experiment to run it through modern equipment is worth a shell or two. Looking for hard copy of this spinner now :)

[@heimirarnarbirgisson1443]

On Sheep the snare drum was a clear give away. Knowing the song and having listened to PF for way to long i immediately knew this wasn't the original recording as no PF song had ever had that bright snare sound. Maybe i'm just to used to the old mix, but i have to say that even though Rogers voice on Pigs in the new mix was a lot more clear and of more quality, i found the old mix much more pleasing to the ear, as it has more reverb and sounds more distant. Makes it sound dreamy.

[@renegonzalez6755]

Beyond the concept of either liking or not liking modern day treatments of classic albums can we please acknowledge the fact that Pink Floyd is still being discussed in the here and now. In my opinion all their albums were good for different reasons. They truly inspired the concept of reinventing and treading into new "waters." Just compare Piper to Division Bell and be amazed.

[@zundap100]

Thanks man for doing this and givin us the info. 👍In mine ears the edition from 1986 sounds more natural. Maybe there is more info on 2018 mix, but the 1986 edition sounds more real and natural to me. It is the same on vinyl, I have all of them too, original from 1977 Made in Sweden, Bernie Gundman remaster and 2018 mix, there is the same. Original from 1977 sounds definitely for me the best.

[@anadialog]

Thank YOU Dan!

[@ec8107]

Generally, as a guitar player, my ear is drawn to the guitar first. I immediately noticed the clarity and string separation of the guitar on the second one. I loved it. ADD for the win.

[@stevendphoto]

I have a $12k plus car stereo, with a CD player. I also have the remastered version CD of Animals version released some years ago and it sounds alright. I purchased the new 2022 released CD (w/2018 remix) and comparing them song-by-song, the new remix has much more low-end bass and sounds clear and crisp on my $3800, Tweeters & Mids. The new remix just sound more modern and lively...!

[@leroyrs]

That's a great comparison. I always wondered why new records sounds very often very loud and sometimes with signs of distortion. Especially voices sound different to former productions. One of my favorite records Dire Straits - Love over gold still sounds technically better than a lot of newer productions by different artists. I think compression can be a bad thing when it's not done carefully. Most people think when it sounds louder it sounds better. Thx for your review.

[@RUfromthe40s]

agreed , the original sound shows how high the volume as to be because if not at a high level the lower volume part of the songs wouldn´t be heard ,it shows how listen to the album , i had a pioneer system in mono from the 60´s but the turntable was from 69 already in stereo with a diamod tip ,that´s why they sound perfect today, no ceramic type

[@MARTIN201199]

Wow. This is what I was expecting long ago

[@MARTIN201199]

There's s noticeable difference in loudness when listening through AT-M40X. Definitely I liked more the AAD

[@IIIElijah]

Good analysis

[@Nostromo1966]

Hello, as a studio technician I can tell you that in this album, what has been done is to start over from scratch from the base of the original magnetic, it has been digitized with good converters and a mix has been made with new compressions and effects. , then a final mastering has been applied. You only hear the final mastering and that is not conclusive, behind it, there is not only dynamics, eq or compression, there is a new mix possibly on a digital console. You're right that today everything tends to be more compressed and with more punch for streaming and some works sound better than the old ones, but here there is no mastering, but rather a remix. Thanks.

[@anadialog]

Thanks for your input

[@testerpot]

This is the correct reply and I was so hoping someone would articulate this better than I can.All new compression and eq has been added to the avail stems or tracks. Its like comparing apples and oranges. Its a whole new interpretation with all new filters etc.. if the tracks were recorded dry...there are so many ways this album could be re done by new engineers.. Not just a loudness and waveform comparison.

[@georgebarrett2132]

(pause at fourteen-eighteen)...: track1='86...(addit..play again at fourteen-nineteen+(1/2?)...."i'm going...OK, the 1st track was the analogue version, the AAD...the original 1986 version, okay?". i love these little comparison test you do..ha haa, you're the greatest Guido! it was evident from dynamics positioning of the immediate rest following that opening 1st sparrow chirp....i know this whole album note for note by heart since it's initial release. there more obvious, greater give aways...like the suffocated ignition notes of the lead guitar right before "you'd better watch out! there may.." i also, on that lonely island would bring the '86 original.....thanks once again for another fun vid my friend🤟

[@andreabosio8480]

credevo di conoscere sheep come nessun’altra canzone dei floyd, e invece ho scoperto grazie a questa comparazione suoni che non pensavo neanche ci fossero. Personalmente questo remix mi piace di più dell’originale, per quanto magari sia più compresso e senza quei db di dinamica, suona cristallino, a differenza del master originale e anche del remaster 2011 se vogliamo, che suonavano decisamente più “muffled”. Peccato che manchi quel palco scenico, quel suono 3d che aveva il master originale, ma non mi posso lamentare direi. Comprerò sicuramente il blu-ray. Grazie come sempre per i tuoi video così interessanti :)

[@anadialog]

Grazie a TE Andrea!

[@vbathory3757]

1977/1986 mix for me. Mix on the 2018 is inconsistent, but I can hear what Guthrie was trying to do. Perhaps Steven Wilson should try his hand at remixing Animals, as he has fond x wonderful job on the Jethro Tull and King Crimson albums.

[@ourworld215]

Thank you, my favorite album of all time. !st video I've seen of yours and will go watch the aad you suggested. As far as Animals goes, I think it was originally in quadraphonic. At least the 8 track with the bonus loop was for sure. I'll have to look at album to see. I no longer have a quadraphonic system to listen to either off of but when I did it was a dramatic difference. OF course the hiss and crackle take away from the amazing pre thx / q- sound to 7,1 times we are in now. I thought for the cd they just took finished product and transferred it to Cd perhaps with some added compression or minor remastering to avoid clipping.... I believe that the analog waves when heard in good conditions has a more harmonious effect on the listener. Actually physiological and psychological. Where purely digital can be perfect everything and amazes me with dynamics. It can still create euphoria and motivate or even repel but that warm analog tones just go deeper into my body . 1 love

[@anadialog]

Welcome! I completely agree on the psychological aspect...I would love to experiment a true high quality quad system...

[@AvithOrtega]

A channel that talks about remaster versions , dynamic range and loudness war? This is home :D Remastering versions are worse versions unless proven otherwise, and this is one of those few cases where it actually preserves most of the original dynamics and loudness, what a nice surprise! There is still some differences as you mentioned, personally I still prefer the original for the depth, for the energy, for the sonic impact (and therefor the emotional impact is stronger). If we had the best of both versions then it would be indeed perfect.

[@Badassvidsz]

Hi dear Guido greetings 🙂 From the begging i've recognized which is wich and i was confirmed by you . by my opinion both sounds great 🙂 Great video as usual ...Nick .

[@terrylarson7596]

Great Video! Pigs on the wing Pt.1 listen for the lack of echo decay (ADD) in Roger's voice when he sings "If you didn't care" The ADD version is more in your head than in the room. I will buy the new, one just for interest sakes

[@daveelson213]

i like both. simple as. both different beasts.

[@babylemonade2868]

Great analysis,I’d like hear what you think of the new vinyl as well. I think Rick’s keyboards also shine on this new version and the old version sounds better than I remembered it to.

[@dougg1075]

Album is a masterpiece

[@tokelahti]

Amazing, I listened with MDR-7506 and the difference is huge! Even with this YT-compression. And I’m not a mucisian or have no golden ears. I just got the need to get the new versions…

[@guayaboxuruguay3287]

AAD it's very natural. I like it.

[@tee-jaythestereo-bargainph2120]

Thanks for the video ! AAD all day long Alice in Chains Cd MTV unplugged live 1996 by Sony/Columbia sounds amazing !

[@RUfromthe40s]

at the time most of the rock bands known were still recording AAD ,from the seatle movement all of them

[@jakehudson7118]

The drums just sound amazing on the remix

[@SpriteAndCoke]

The background art on iTunes for the new one is stunning!

[@DanClapp]

After so many years of listening to animals, this remix blew my mind when I first heard it. I thought it was all hype, but no. It sounds incredible!

[@peterregorsek1504]

I have tested song on yugoslavian vinyl release from eighties. I knew when I heart that the first song is from the old disc, because it sounds the same as on my vinyl. Yugoton was buying stampers from the west, usually used ones. But if you have a luck, you get a vinyl record which was pressed at a time, when stampers were not so much worn out. ;)

[@Madworld57]

Great video Guido. The only thing I disagree with is when you say you would have preferred the original cover. Well, in this sense, I find the considerations expressed by the "45 rpm audiophile" channel in the video dedicated to the comparison of vinyls "Pink Floyd Animals: Remix vs. British 1st Pressing vs ...." extremely appropriate and pertinent. Ciao!

[@markphilpot8734]

When it comes to CDs, AAD sounds the best. Opinions vary and I am not the last word on this. A revealing system proves this out. You will believe what you want, but your ears are the real judge and that is a fact. Judge for yourself. Cheers all.

[@vintageshed965]

I've had my bet on second one being the new mix. The instruments "pops out" more in my opinion, to the point that to my ears it seems like they are fighting between each other which one is in the foreground. The first track just seems more smooth to my ears. In the end it's just a personal preference, and both sounds good in the end.

[@zetapal]

On the first track I preferred the 2018 remix, The original sounded more compressed and almost a slight distortion on the organ. On the 2nd track quick test, I preferred the original as the 2018 remix vocal was totally dry. They took all the reverb out of the vocal. Listening on Ananda planar cans, Gravedigger pure copper balanced headphone cable, Jotunheim 2 amp (balanced), Bifrost 2/64 (balanced) over usb.

[@electrolytics]

Thanks for making this video. I like the original.

[@anadialog]

Thank YOU!

[@1607trojan]

I love this comparison as lately I’ve been trying to approach music in more of an audiophile prospect. Listening on AirPod Pros, ‘18 sounds clear and I can hear more of the instruments but for some reason ‘86 (77) sounds more enjoyable. Might be a different story if listening on a stereo with good DAC.

[@nancyblubberhead7256]

Was shocked by the difference at the start of "Sheep". The part where the keyboard comes in sounds very "muted" on the new version. On the strength of that alone I think I can safely say I'll stick with the old mix. Thanks for this comparison.

[@anadialog]

Thank YOU!

[@nickknight5543]

Even though Animals is my favorite Floyd album I'm sticking to my 2nd pressing of the CD of the original mix.

[@raymondmitchell7582]

Thank you a very interesting video, I have the original first UK, AAD, CD. I also have a mid eighties Japanese AAD, press on CBS/Sony, and the version that came in the ' Oh By The Way ' box set. This is a personal opinion but I like the Japanese CBS version, to me it seems to have a warm sound. I recently got the 2018 Remix CD and Vinyl versions, and I do feel they have done an excellent job, I have listened to them both a few times and they are very good. But this boils down to personal choice again, I always seem to go back to my copy of the original UK Harvest 1st pressing of the vinyl LP.

[@RUfromthe40s]

i once bought a japanese version of the american prayer from japan with extra tracks and had a very dynamic sound but i notice a bit of crackle in some part of the album ,it was a version of cd recorded from the vynil, and what a stylus and well kept record, normally i used to record parts to a cassette or reel with songs mixed with the "an american prayer" ,also the doors album recorded without jim morrison from the same company in japan in cd ,the album in vinil was destroyd because of being played in a dual turntable with those needles before the diamond tip ones ,i think they are called ceramic ,not sure

[@KopiOkaya]

I have both the 1985 CD (CBS/Sony 32DP 360, Japanese pressing) and the 2018 remix in 24/192 digital download. I must say both has their pros and cons. The 2018 remix is more "system-friendly". I don't have to turn up the volume to hear details. Vocals sounds cleaner and more legible. The 1985 CD however I have to crank up the volume dial by quite a bit for normal listening level. The 1985 version sounds warmer, fuller and more dynamics overall. The 2018 remix sounds more crisp, tighter and airier. I don't have an absolute favorite. Both are very good in their own ways.

[@wally6193]

digital downloads don't count, lol, they are trash usually.

[@floydzepplin2427]

I love the remix as it is clearer…that said, I will still listen to the original mix

[@Gary-uq2wi]

The first thing that I noticed was the drums, they sound totally different, they actually sound like a totally new take...

[@legionnairegonk4425]

Just bagged me a first UK issue CD, which has a mastering very similar to the holy grail vinyl version (according to vinyl heads). It sounds wonderful 👍. No need for a reinterpretation mix for me...

[@anadialog]

I agree, I also have an OG and it's quite similar...

[@johnvrabec9747]

I play bass and I could tell the difference in the intro. Roger's bass has a touch more clarity and presence in the remix of Sheep. And then, the snare is a giveaway, once the song kicks in. I'm going to check it out further.

[@PhilipvanderMatten]

I have them both. If I had to choose I also would prefer the original mix. In an effort to make the 2018 remix have a clean sound, he deleted a lot of the reverb on the vocals. I miss the reverb. It's so dull now. Also, the original mix is just a lot more full sounding, where the new one isn't. If I go back and forth between them in my rips (after normalizing) I prefer the old one. I do appreciate the cleanliness of the remix, don't get me wrong. I guess I could listen to them both.

[@JMG72ARG]

you read my mind with this one, was wondering what the new remix was like. Sounds like the drums were brought forward in the new mix. I have the momentary lapse of reason remix, that one is an improvement in my view.

[@markallan4849]

I like the older CD better, his voice sounds crisper to me and so does the music. But in your Beatles Revolver video, I liked the newer mix so much that I bought the CD the next day. I'm really enjoying your Videos. Thanks! I would like to understand the different mixing sources better though.

[@davidwhitehouse6562]

I personally believe the ADD version is what the band heard in the control room after the session. The album has the best representation of the true sound. If they had not "remixed" the album, (but just enhanced the guitars, bass, keys, and drums individually, and not changed any of the FX levels) that would be perfect. That would be how the genius and production value of their music should be heard. Back then 80hz and lower was hard to reproduce with the equipment available. Speakers weren't strong enough and amplifiers were not powerful enough. If someone could get the original 2" tapes and play them through the equipment of today it would sound amazing. Just my 2 cents. Cheers

[@JrGoonior]

Mr. Carlson : "Do hear dogs barking on there?' Fever: "I do"

[@jorgesantos8509]

The remastered catalog edition from the 90's is the best of all. It adds Transparency and detail retaining everything else.

[@marksaxon]

These remixes from the 70's are easy to tell apart from the original. I'm a drummer and one of the things remixes from this era always try to do is make the drums sound more modern. Back then, drums were usually dry (not a lot of reverb), not a lot of emphasis on the low end (bass drum and snare) and overall just dead sounding. I call them the cardboard boxes. They did this on the Genesis remixes as well. I can't listen to Wind & Wuthering and Lamb Lies Down because they compressed the heck out of Collins' kit. I like the clarity of the rest of the band on this new remix of Animals but then it takes away the mystique of the original mix. I have listened to Animals for over 32 years so I know it very well. The peak of -8 LUFS on the master is a no-no for me. I usually stick at the peak to around -12 and -11 when I master my songs. Granted I'm no mastering engineer by any stretch but I also know enough to be dangerous and when a song is too hot. Great analysis though and it's fun to chat about it.

[@progressive7682]

Il punto debole del mix originale secondo me è proprio la batteria di Mason, per me questo nuovo remix gli rende giustizia, la traccia Sheep ora è più godibile.

[@ilfordino-fordfiestatutori8725]

I was undecided until I got to 11:45 when the drums joined. As soon Ias I heard the drums I was 100% sure it was the 2018 version. The synth later confirmed even more. Tha main difference between the two tracks of Pigs on the wing is that in 2018 version he guitar and Roger feel way more closer, just like he was in front of me, singing.

[@virgogreg]

The 2022 release impressed me the clipping was insignficant and the dynamics was as per original .. loudness wars are over i hope

[@recordtheraphy8852]

Super

[@andydogdixon1]

I will go in my listening room later today and play both of these CDs on my high quality CD player going into my audio research reference preamp to my decware tube amplifier and out to my Klipsch Cornwall Four, large speakers. Then I’ll come back here and write what I have experienced.❤

[@anadialog]

Yes, please do!

[@kosmosyche]

I always thought the original Animals was a very well recorded album to begin with. After listening to this comparison I think I'll stick to the original version, don't hear much of an improvement (and didn't expect it tbh), and frankly I'm not sure this remix was really necessary.

[@NicolaDiNisio]

2018 ReMix all the way for me 🙂

[@fraula1]

On « Pigs on the wing » I really prefer the fullness of the guitar in the 86’s version. It has more low medium and is more vibrant. You can hear the wood of the guitar. On The 2018 version, the guitar fullness is gone. Too bad really…. But the voice is fuller. Too bad they don’t bring the fullness of the guitar in the 86’s version with the fullness of the voice of the 2018’s version. Really frustrating. Ps: I was listening on on my beautiful 3 way speaker B&W DM6 (1976) an amazing speaker ♥️

[@madnezz1961]

I AB comparred by playing the new mix on Tidal and the old mix through Music Bee........ran through my Dac Magic 200M and thought the new mix was deeper, the toms sounded more like toms, the voice and guitars fuller

[@kevinbossick8374]

I'll be getting the Bluray for the 5.1.

[@luizromagnoli]

The moment I heard the drum snare on the second track I knew which was which

[@basvanbeers7687]

I really like the AAD version. In your own example at the end, with the guitar and voice, I miss the echoey analog studio atmosphere on both of them.

[@Lasse3]

Hahaha the analog track 1 with sheep, was endlessly better. Right from the first notes from Richard, with the birds chirping around - there is an abundance of spatial information, soundstage so wide and deep, lots of 3D and see-through, oozing with warmth and pleasing timbre, scale and size - large soundstage. Puts on track two, music becomes flat as a piece of cardboard, soundstage claustrophobicly narrow, without any 3D of any kind, timbre is now very thin and jarring. Why does remaster always have to mean "raised upper-frequencies" "Reduced dynamics" "Clipped peaks" "Flat soundstage" I've heard pigs on the wings on vinyl blackbird MC pick-up, over exotic tube-amps, and exotic scanspeak drivers. It isn't recessed, it just requires very good gear before it comes to it's right, and it sounds magical, -I'll admit that here on my smartphone speakers 'pigs on the wings' made more sense on the new remaster.

[@frankiepavinato]

Being a multichannel enthusiast I bought the US import SACD version. Album is fantastic but we all know that and I wanted the best version out there and to me the SACD is really great.

[@tommymathieu9722]

The sound of the Guitar in the quick second test is cleary better and sound hotter and emotional in AAD 1986 version.

[@MrBonger88]

The difference in the top end is very surprising

[@MacXpert74]

To me the difference between the two versions is actually huge. It's like a blanket is lifted off the speakers. The original CD sounds rather muffled and dull in the high-end and at the same time too boomy in the bass. All of that was fixed in the 2018 version. For the first example (Sheep) I much preferred the 2018 version. The only thing I liked a little less in that version was that the Rhodes piano is pushed a bit to the background in the mix. But it's not a big issue, as the overal sound is nicely balanced. On the second example (Pigs on the wing) with just the guitar and vocals the difference is more subtle though. The biggest difference in the 2018 version seems to be in the use of less reverb on the vocals, making the voice more intimate sounding. Which sounds good, although the reverb in the original is fine by me too.

[@circattle]

You raise an excellent point. The outboards are often not present on the original multitrack recordings as they are only added on the 2 track mix - it all depends on how it was recorded and mixed, and every session is different. It could well be that we are listening to a completely different reverb and / or compressor on some tracks than was used in the original mix.

[@sonijam]

To my ears the 1986 AAD version sounds more alive and real. It has more emotion and feeling.

[@patbarr1351]

Thanks. I've ordered the SACD-- I want to support the format! But even listening to your post on my table radio here in my office the new mix sounds bolder & somewhat clearer. It's hard for me to believe one could get superior sound by sticking a 2-track stereo in the chain. Let's eliminate the middleman :¬D

[@RUfromthe40s]

i have a spec-1 and a spec-2 with a set of HPM-150 speakers in my office with the computer conected to the aux ,it sounds loud and good but not as when putting to play my 77 record in a plc-590(or close) also from pioneer with a AT cartridge and needle that were very expensive at the time, more than a shure ,the SACD i bought it because i was told that it would sound like the vinil but it´s there disconected ,a sony that cost me in late 90´s almost what today is 500€ ,this in a big surface where they sale from Beef to playstations

[@patbarr1351]

@@RUfromthe40s I definitely don't want an SACD to sound like the vinyl. I want it to be close to the master tape. I'm sure that many people like the particular sound the LP process imparts on a recording, especially with their favorite cartridge, but I'm not really fond of it.

[@RUfromthe40s]

@@patbarr1351 that you will never get , they wouldn´t allow it ,even original reels were better than the vinil but it also depends on our own sound system and tapes with years they get worse but not bad , that´s why when they talked about releasing a sacd they compare it with the vinil version ,because was not limited as the digital version ,this in the 90´s

[@izwanshaari9854]

The AAD version got my vote👍🏻

[@yehor25]

I like 1986 AAD version more because it sounds warmer and more punchy to me and I like slight reverb in vocals I think this older version sounds more complete, on the other side 2018 version sounds a bit more crisp and clear especially in vocals but I don't like that voice don't have reverb it sounds like it was recorded in a small box and it don't lines up perfectly with the synthesizer sound which goes after voice. In the end I like both versions but would prefer AAD variant

[@jaroslavmaly3333]

i bought this album because of the cover i really liked the building and i thought it didn t even exist-and later i found out that its a power station in battersea and when i finally got to see it in reality it was an experience -otherwise i prefer pink floyd in the 60s-Jerry from the Czech Republic

[@koprcord5338]

I must say I truly enjoy the new remix but I also very much like the original cassette played through my nakamichi. Maybe it's in my head but knowing there is nothing digital on the cassette makes me feel like hey this is how it should sound.

[@coolcat23]

I listened to both versions on KZbin through headphones and while the second version sounds cleaner, I much prefer the first version, warts and all. I was sure the first version had to be the original and I don't understand why anyone saw the need to create the second version. Same with Elton John's eponymous album; yes, the original is not a sparkly mix, but it sounds more organic and coherent than the remix.

[@gildardorivasvalles6368]

I have to say, I did like the AAD a little better -- as you say, both are very good quality, but this is just a matter of taste. Thank you for your analysis.

[@dannyb7005]

Hi there, i can not quicly find your surname so i call you “there😅” I’m useally not from giving reactions but i now would like to give a big compliment and also give you a big thank you 👏🏻👍🏻 I am watching a lot of your videos on you channel and i especially like you videos when you go into the music, this one but also your previous comparising with Money of Pink Floyd and your favorite vinyl jazz and audiophile records, great to watch and listen👌🏻 My reaction on this video about the voices that are much more present on the 2018 version is the following. The last track pigs was really clear what the difference was in the voices, but the question is “ What was ever ment when Pink Floyd recorded this album back in the days❓❓❓ Thanks again and keep up with your great channel, and please more videos on music👍🏻👍🏻👍🏻 Ciao Danny.

[@anadialog]

Thanks for your input...my name is Guido!

[@saramartinelli5642]

ciao , ma veramente che il tuo canale è veramente magnifico! Credo che sia possibile caricare dei cambioni delle tue versioni ,credo che se siano 30 secondi ,sia del tutto legale , magari un video su dard side e whish you .Insomma dei clip audio 16bit 44.100, Sacd multi canale con le frequenze a 48k o superiore. Anche qualche video sui amplificatori leggendari o casse degli anni 70 o 80 , integrali pesanti 30kg , mi è capitato un lettore cd da 15kg almeno della Philips.Qualche video in italiano ? lo sai che assomigli a Lars lo sai ,il mio preferito ♫♫♫

[@anadialog]

Grazie Sara! DSOTM è stato il mio video di maggiore successo (immeritato): kzbin.info/www/bejne/l53Qlat_bJt3hdk

[@justinbyrne5736]

I noticed on Dogs track on 2018 mix of Pink Floyd Animals that when at 10.45 someone is Whistling it is almost taken off the track compared to original version, where you can hear someone Whistling lot clearer

[@KRAZEEIZATION]

The original mix always seemed to pass me by but the new mix I really enjoyed the whole album. Maybe I was more attentive because it’s a new mix!