Pink Floyd: The best CD mastering of Dark side of the moon is...? 9 versions to compare

Comparison and subjective ranking of 9 different red book cd masterings of the 1973 album Dark side of the moon by Pink Floyd. All cd's in my personal collection.
Listened to all of these a countless number of times using a Panasonic discman from 2005 with BOSE OE2 headphones, and alternatively a Technics HiFi from the 90s with Technics speakers or Sennheiser HD280 pro headphones.
Collaborate with the channel by buying my album of original music on bandcamp:
jmgalie.bandcamp.com/
Donations: www.paypal.com/donate?hosted_...
To check what mastering of the album on CD you have, install free EAC software in a PC with a drive, insert cd, go to action, test selected tracks. It will create a text file with peak levels for each track. If it matches this: 39.9 / 43.3 / 70.1 / 55.2 / 72.3 / 44.5 / 53.9 / 54.6 / 61.2 , you have the first mastering considered the Holy Grail. All versions of DSOTM are good, except that for collectionist freaks and audiophiles, the above version is most cherished...
To identify your versions and more info on Pink Floyd's DSOTM:
forums.stevehoffman.tv/thread...
pinkfloydarchives.com/DiscTOC.htm
#darksideofthemoon #cdcollection #vinylcommunity

[@bobbiehart39]

Cool video, I remember buying the 1992/3 boxed anniversary edition new in 1993. I forgot all about it, after watching this video a week ago I went downstairs, started digging through boxes and found the sucker today !! Thanks for jogging my memory !!

[@amateurmusicresearch1972]

It's the nicest edition in terms of packaging for sure.

[@aussierob7177]

I have the Mobile Fidelity Sound Lab Ultradisc gold plated version of both Dark Side of the Moon(Harvest) and- Breakfast in America by Supertramp (A & M ) Both were made in Japan. When i listen to these CD's in stereo, i use cross-talk cancellation to achieve a dramatic 3 dimensional sound stage. where the walls of the listening room "disappear" and the depth of the soundstage appears to extend behind the speakers about 20 feet.

[@SafeAndSoundTXAudioExcursion]

How does one get cross talk cancellation operable?

[@markphilpot8734]

The first one is by far the best. Like the ToshibaEMI on vinyl, the first pressing is the best followed by the MFSL ultradisc. Everyone who loves this album has an opinion. Mine is just one of many. Your opinion matters because you love the music and the music is what really matters. It’s why we listen. Stay safe my mates!😊👍🏻😷

[@amateurmusicresearch1972]

👍

[@Andersljungberg]

Then the question is how good AD converters were in 1983 or 1984. So that would convert the analog sound into digital data

[@Andersljungberg]

Analog Productions / Acoustic sound has also released Pink Floyd Dark Side of the Moon on SACD this year

[@markphilpot8734]

@@Andersljungberg, Mr Anders, I’m sure there are those who disagree with me. I’m hardly the last word. It is possible to find favorites that fit your ears and taste. The thing is enjoying what you listen to and what you listen to them on. Each must find their own path and what makes them happy. The vintage Luxman CD player D-06 as it plays SACDs and is a superb stand alone player. I don’t have one, but my former boss does and it is silky!

[@Andersljungberg]

@@markphilpot8734 Just like with CD players, it matters who made it. A Marantz, for example, probably doesn't sound the same

[@8068]

The 1988 Mobile Fidelity release of "Dark Side of The Moon" DID use the first generation, stereo master tapes. EMI put both tapes (Side A and Side B) on a transatlantic flight, from London to Los Angles, with an EMI Staffer personally holding the tapes the entire journey. Once the EMI Staffer cleared customs in Los Angles, he was driven to the Mobil Fidelity Mastering Lab which was in Sebastopol CA.

[@amateurmusicresearch1972]

good info, 1988

[@jackcooper021]

Wow!!

[@JnL_SSBM]

And the 1993 Mobile Fidelity re-release with Gain System didn't?

[@jackcooper021]

@@SPAZZOID100 Sure, dsd is even more quality

[@JnL_SSBM]

@@SPAZZOID100 Tapes gets moldy and decompose overtime. Collectors knows nothing and they careless about this.

[@diegomendivil7101]

For me the best is the Doug Sax 20th anniversary, detailed, warm and punchy.

[@domfjbrown75]

I have that one... It's great...

[@StinkFingerr]

I have the MFSL Ultradisc and I can recommend it.

[@DJGallifrey]

I have the mobile fidelity version and always thought it sounded great. (I also have the mobile fidelity version of The Wall as well)

[@amateurmusicresearch1972]

thanks for watching

[@gregkoblentz7872]

For my ears and my high end speakers the SACD is it for me.

[@kngkrmson2179]

'94 remaster is one of my favourites here. New artwork, nice booklet, simple packaging. I also have the 2011 Experience Edition which comes with an extra disc.

[@amateurmusicresearch1972]

Agreed, the packaging for that release was the best!

[@johnmoreno96]

So glad I have the 1st Sony Japan Mastering cd, that I bought back in the 80’s. Great video…✌️

[@amateurmusicresearch1972]

the holy grail!

[@bikemike1118]

Usually cd recordings from the 80s aren’t known for superior recording quality! Recording engineers thought they could lean back and reduce their own effort…as the cd format itself would do a good part of their actual job. Which is so wrong!!

[@stonesfan285]

I like my 2011 CDs just fine. Yeah I've had all the MFSL ones, a few of the old Harvest ones. 2011 is affordable, easy to get and generally sounds great.

[@bobe3250]

I have several CD's of this too. Bought the Mofi gold cd. Not sure what to believe when they state something. Great video! Thanks for sharing.

[@FarrellMcGovern]

I have a few of those versions. The 20th, the Box set and one of the early CD pressings. I like the Box set version of the three. There is also another version bouncing around that I like, the Alan Parsons quad mix. Someone got their hands on the masters that were never used...it was rejected by the band, and turned it into a DVD-A, along with a Stereo mix. They also added a sub channel, so it is technically a 4.1 version of the album. Fascating to listen to!

[@johndrx165]

I have the US version I got when it came out and it still sounds great. Glad to see it was one of the better ones.

[@ComicRhema]

Excellent presentation of one of the most important albums in my life. Thank you for sharing. God bless

[@amateurmusicresearch1972]

👍

[@holasoyjuli3163]

I Watched this video in your other channel, but I love this new version!

[@amateurmusicresearch1972]

😀😀😀

[@SpeakerBuilder]

Big problem with CD versions of old classic LP's is the irresistible temptation to screw with the mix and eq and screw up the recording really badly. I have a half dozen CD's of some of my LP"s where this is the case, and an authentic CD that truly improves on the LP is rare. For Dark Side of the Moon, my solution was to simply buy the new LP version, really glad I did, it sounds EXACTLY like the original recording, just like I remember it, it was perfect then, and needs NO improvement.

[@kevintomb]

I doubt anyone thinks it was literally "Perfect". But the goal should be to reproduce what was DONE on the recording back then. And I am sure it COULD be improved, as it was a very good recording, but not spectacular. If they went back to the truly ORIGINAL multi track tapes it could easily be improved.

[@SpeakerBuilder]

@@kevintomb But that is rarely done due to the cost. Most often, they take the master and re-EQ it for CD, and that is where the trouble starts. But yes, absolutely if any of the CD's of this classic were remixed, they could really bring more life to it. But then it just would not sound the same, and there is value in the character of the original recording, IMHO.

[@billbrookyn3259]

@@SpeakerBuilder I have the original it's still perfect I'm very careful with my records I hate the sound of C d's Is in general

[@philfyphil]

@@SpeakerBuilder And I expect the original tapes will have deteriorated somewhat, making it very difficult to re-mix and re-master to a modern standard.

[@philfyphil]

@@OWEN-CASH Not to mention the rumble, wow and flutter!

[@federicopamparatov8805]

I have the 1993 20 anniversary edition and sounds amazing . I have heard a lot of cassette versión and one i'm Vinyl , and the 20 anniversary sounds much more clear and clean . My favorite .

[@amateurmusicresearch1972]

and the nicest packaging too

[@yorkemar]

Wow...I've got a uk harvest. Great gig sounds great on this. Very dynamic.

[@billyrayvalentine7972]

My favorite was the quadrophonic 8 track running through my Craig powerplay quadrophonic car stereo with Jensen coaxial and triaxal speakers. Incredible for its day.

[@jamesrandall3192]

The blu-ray disc of this record is multi-channel also. It sounds stellar.

[@KRAFTWERK2K6]

yeah and thankfully it also includes the 4.0 quadrophonic-mix by Alan Parsons.

[@gumersindoreguera4757]

La verdad...quede muerto Simplemente tengo el blueray Un sintoamplificador thompson..una bandeja sony para vinilos .otra para cds.yamaha..y un par de columnas jbl..y despues de escucharte no se que decir..tengp algunos vinilos Cds-hdm..y ahí termina mi Intención de escuchar mejor..sin duda muy lejos de todo...tengo 72 años y me costaron muchas privaciones tenerlo..nada de auto...vacaciones etc .ya hace 7 años q lo tengo..comprar ya ni pienso. Pero mis felicitaciones.. Sigo pensanddo que es el mejor disco q he escuchado...genesis crimson.yes.e.l.p. jethro..en ese estilo..claro que mi amor es el blues...y hendrix zepp.purple who.stones.vaughan..con zappa tengo probleemas.. Quizas sea muy elevado para mi..bueno un abrazo..mientras no palme..seguire escuchando Una pena q no pueda..por motivos económicos..apreciar plenamente ..um abrazo

[@Bozlee22]

Once I listened to the SACD in 5.1, I never looked for another 2 ch version again

[@genefloyd2002]

Excelente video. Yo tengo la versión en LP de 1988 que fue hecho en Venezuela que el sonido es muy bueno y en cd tengo la versión del 20 aniversario y la versión de 1994 que según el video es la misma del 20 aniversario. Definitivamente uno de mejores álbum de todos los tiempos.

[@amateurmusicresearch1972]

gracias hermano latinoamericano!

[@PinkFloydCollectors]

Wow thank you, great video…

[@Andersljungberg]

Analog Productions / Acoustic sound has also released Pink Floyd Dark Side of the Moon on SACD this year

[@amateurmusicresearch1972]

yes, I finally got a used Sony bluray player with SACD, after almost 20 years of waiting I'll get to hear to the SACD layer of the 2003 DSOTM...

[@JaredLekites]

The Doug Sax remaster still takes the prize for me. It's beautiful.

[@amateurmusicresearch1972]

that's a good one and probably the best booklet design.

[@fanclub670]

I have the MFSL (1981, not 1979 version), mint state and listen only twice... It sounds incredible !!🔥

[@amateurmusicresearch1972]

that's a good one, from master tapes

[@omsk13]

Interesting choice for background music :)

[@jpsalazar706]

I have the Mofi gold disc and it's incredible!

[@meneerjansen00]

Great video. What about the "Immersion" boxed set release? It had Quadraphonic, 5.1 and stereo mixes in Bluray, DVD and CD.

[@amateurmusicresearch1972]

Have it! but this vid was only on cd, and the 2011 remaster is the same as the cd that comes in the box set.

[@meneerjansen00]

@@amateurmusicresearch1972 Would it be nice to compare the multichannel editions of DSotM? I personally like the good old Quad mix by Alan Parsons best, which is somewhere on the Immersion version (the box or the standalone, don't remember exactly). The instruments (read: band members) are very separated. On each channel an instrument. Whereas the modern 5.1 mixes are all over the place.

[@Slammy555]

I completely understand about the compression issues and I agree it distracts from the quality of the title but there's something about multichannel Pink Floyd I find really enjoyable. I have the '94 remasters, I remember hearing them and deciding I needed to update my AAD versions (though, admittedly, I didn't have a system at the time to do a proper comparison).

[@amateurmusicresearch1972]

I only reviewed the stereo cd layer of the SACD, sadly I don't have the equipment to read the SACD layer yet, but I'm sure it must be awesome.

[@Slammy555]

@@amateurmusicresearch1972 If you can find the dsf files you could play them on any modern PC, there are several front ends that can do that, I use Foobar2000 with an addon. Also, newer Sony DVD players can play them but it tends to sound like movie music in my experience (probably part of how I calibrate. I think which is better is subjective depending on equipment, arrangement, and experience/personal preferences in music. I don't think my system is representative.

[@daviddru942]

I have the MFSL version. Gonna keep an eye out for the original.

[@MrOpossum76]

I do own the 20th anniversary, MFSL and SACD versions. To my ears the MFSL master sounds very close to analoge versions very smooth and warm. It is my personal favorite. I don‘t really like the 20th anniversary version because subjectively it sound too analytically. I can‘t describe it any better. As always the quality of reproduction depends also on the quality of your gear. The best master will sound crappy if you play it on low end equipment.

[@amateurmusicresearch1972]

I have a Technics system which is fairly high end, but even on my discman with bose headphones, this album sounds amazing. I agree, 20th anniversary does not grab me emotionally as much as other versions.

[@myronhelton4441]

@@amateurmusicresearch1972 Something digital was added in 1972. There is nothing special in the sound of Dark Side of the Mon, especially compared some 1971 & before albums.

[@billblake4029]

Right there with you brother.😎

[@clivemetcalfe2304]

The SACD and Immersion Box Set Blu Ray editions in 5.1 surround are the best I have heard apart from hearing it played live prior to it's original release. That was quadraphonic in the theatre.

[@amateurmusicresearch1972]

the immersion box set also has a DVD with a surround version, do you if it's the same, or less resolution?

[@garcia20801]

@Nicholas the mfsl is taken from the original quadmix and mixed down to stereo (the immersionbox got also got the original quad mix (witch is the best played on a quadraphonic audio set not on a 5,1 surround set)

[@giuseppepiccirillo8502]

Great job, I have about 40 copies of various nationalities all different from each other.

[@amateurmusicresearch1972]

wow, impressive!

[@stevegreen5552]

I didn't instantly switch to CDs, sticking to vinyl a while longer than many, so I didn't buy DSOTM in digital format until then. By chance it was the 20th anniversary box set which sounded fine to me. Around the same time I bought a partial Shine On set in a record fair (funds being a consideration) that didn't have DSOTM (so couldn't compare) but did comprise Wish You Were Here, Animals and the two Wall discs. In all cases I've not compared them to my vinyl copies, but it wouldn't surprise me if there were differences. In particular, my CD copies of Physical Graffiti & Mott omit inter-track interjections by the band. It's interesting that these different CD releases are audibly distinct.

[@amateurmusicresearch1972]

vinyl is great, but cd has its strong points too

[@Unisonic]

I agree! 1st Sony Japan is the one! None of the others beat it.

[@amateurmusicresearch1972]

totally!

[@andrewhaines3259]

What about the discovery and Oh by the Way editions? Thankfully I have the 20th Anniversary and Shine On copies as well as the sacd so won't be needing any more. Still stick my solid blue triangle vinyl on the turntable occasionally though!

[@amateurmusicresearch1972]

discovery is the same as the 2011 remaster, and oh by the way is the same mastering as 30th anniversary, but would like to have those box sets too!

[@andrewhaines3259]

@@amateurmusicresearch1972 ah. I see now. I have the Oh by the Way set, but don't play those as it's a real fiddle getting the discs in and out of the thick card sleeves. I think my copy is the early one with the printing errors. Discovery set still to purchase, but there are loads of fakes out there!

[@josephwood499]

How good or bad is the sound on the Shine On version? I always wanted to have that box but didn't had the money for it.

[@starshineraiser6729]

I’ve got the mid 80’s US version and it’s been my favorite so far.

[@amateurmusicresearch1972]

thanks for watching

[@donaldwatson4991]

I've got the mobile fidelity and the new 50th anniversary blu-ray in atmos surround sound that sounds amazing

[@amateurmusicresearch1972]

cool, I have a bluray player but my amp probably doesn't decode atmos anyway

[@donaldwatson4991]

@@amateurmusicresearch1972 it also has 5.1 mix , uncompressed 24bit/96khz ,dts hd master , uncompressed 24bit/192khz and remastered stereo mix

[@h0ll0wm9n]

Have owned/heard all the ones in this video. Sony Japan (1983) is best. Maybe because the tape was only 10 years young at the time. The best way to hear this album digitally is to get ahold of a very good 1st press vinyl version and carefully rip that to digital. Orig. UK, German and Holland pressings come to mind.

[@carlesmartinez4014]

Hello. I’d like to know in which units are the peak levels that you shows in the video? Thank you. I have the SACD/CD version.

[@amateurmusicresearch1972]

they are in percentages, 100 being the loudest possible, 0 is silence.

[@PedrSion]

I have the EMI Centenary CD. The mastering was done by Doug Sax in 1992. It’s the simple version of the 20th Anniversary edition. I also have the 30th anniversary SACD. I bought this in Andorra.

[@amateurmusicresearch1972]

so many versions

[@liamdell6319]

First and only version I listened to in full was the 2011 master which I have no problem with. I do however have a problem with my copy of The Wall due to not being able to hear the final track unless the volume is cranked up to the max. Not sure if that's how it's supposed to be or not.

[@davestryjak6042]

No it's not supposed to do that, sorry friend. ( sorry I remembered wrong it is hard to hear!)

[@KRAFTWERK2K6]

The MFSL Ultradisc release is the only CD i have of this album and i am very happy with it. In fact i think if you have this CD, you really don't need the MFSL vinyl release as it seem to suffer a little in the high frequencies for some reason. My MFSL disc also still comes with the original Disc holding mechanics that flips out and unhooks the Disc. However i am not sure if mine is from 1988 or the early 90s re-issue. Imho it still sounds better than the 20th anniversary CD with the white prism. The booklet of the first Japanese and US release is really nice. Much nicer than the VERY plain text info in the MFSL release. You really don't collect the Ultradisc version for the booklet but really ONLY for the Master.

[@jamiebeach3243]

I bought a New, the Wall vinyl & took it back.it didn't have the right sound to it I was looking for a old version for a while then one day i came out of a book/music store & by the free bin I found a box of old records w/ dark side & the Wall in it plus alot more awesome finds Free!

[@vladimirdoskocil399]

Perfect collection! .. but one version missing - mini LP replica from "Oh by the way" box.

[@amateurmusicresearch1972]

thanks! missing that one....but mastering seems to be the same as the 30th anniversary

[@XX-121]

you mean the 2011 mastering? it's up there.

[@kennethl4172]

I still have the UK Harvest, USA Capital, 20 Anniversary Edition and 24K CD. I also have the 1/2 speed master LP.

[@jonsingle1614]

I have the first Japanese pressing I bought in Germany in the early 80s.....is this version worth anything ? My go to listening version is the SACD which was not really addressed here

[@XX-121]

tell me you didn't watch the video without telling me you didn't watch the video...

[@jonsingle1614]

@XX-121 what video !?

[@donneumann6546]

I also have the first Japanese version and an early album pressing.

[@mr.t8148]

I have a question about Sony/Capitol CD CDP-7460012 US made from this video (3). It there any different in sound quality between DIDX-000226 and DIDX-226 and if any different in sound between Doug Sax Remastering 20th anniversary made in US and in Canada?

[@amateurmusicresearch1972]

check out the different USA versions here: www.pinkfloydarchives.com/DUSCDPF.htm#DSOTM6 also, the Doug Sax are the same everywhere.

[@mr.t8148]

Thank you for info. In my knowledge the US made CD always sound better comparing to the same CD made in Canada.@@amateurmusicresearch1972

[@alas8estrenamos]

Sin ningún tipo de duda. La Cuadrophonica de Parsons!!!

[@nickspann20]

The only japanese issues I can find on discogs have a black triangle on the disc. I could not find any that were listed like yours. I have seen some that look like yours on ebay but that do not specify 1983. Could you help, I genuinely would like to get a reasonable early mastering version but I want to get the right one. Thanks

[@amateurmusicresearch1972]

Check pinkfloydarchives.com/DiscTOC.htm then go to japan flag, it will help you identify the cd. My version at that page is under the USA section as the first made in japan import.

[@kevinfagan1968]

You can get the second pressing of the Toshiba Black triangle CD from 1986. It uses the same matrix (CP35-3017) but is far cheaper. A great sounding CD.

[@trumps-not-rightfor-us5603]

I have a question for you why did you not include the dark side of the Moon collector's edition with the two gold CDs one being the quadraphonic remix and the alternate stereo mix.. very good sound awesome to listen to with what I have is an 8-channel Klipsch model 30 setup with model twenties as center and side channels powered by 8 BND 135 watt per channel into 8 ohm amplifiers.. coupled with Sony t e a 2000 digital preamplifiers.. absolutely adore the analog sound that this system sets up now may we please have everything louder than everything else thank you very much..

[@amateurmusicresearch1972]

hello, I did not know about that one, but it seems it's an unofficial release. The quadrophonic and surround mixes can both be found on the 2011 Immersion box set .

[@trumps-not-rightfor-us5603]

@@amateurmusicresearch1972 hey it's an SQ release unofficial of course two gold discs set quadraphonic mix ripped from vinyl.. second disc ripped from vinyl called alternate with ripped audio from by the Pompeii release back in 1973.. you most likely can find this SQ release which is called the collector's edition online for about 20 to 25 bucks approximately 6,500 copies were produced buy a German bootlegger back in 2002.. again an interesting little collector's piece you might want to spend a few bucks to pick it up you'll find it online without a problem just make sure that it's the two CD Gold version of the dark side of the Moon collector's edition on SQ records..

[@Fontsman]

One has to wonder about the condition of the UK master and mulitrack. Whether it's worthwhile producing a new DSD version, or have the original tapes deteriorated too much. I have the 2003 SACD and it's excellent, but alas, I no longer have a multichannel system.

[@FleagleSangria]

Yeah alot of these tapes have to be getting old and tired. Its like with The Beatles. They need to do AAA of the stereo catalogue like they did with the mono set. Instead the tapes just set there deteriorating each day. Seems silly to me. What are they going to do when the tapes are useless? Put them in a museum to oggle at?

[@DocStrangelyStrange]

I actually love the SACD stereo mix. It is probably my “go to” version of this album. I presume the stereo mix that got voted as the poorest version is the standard CD stereo mix, not the SACD stereo mix. I also have an Italian CD pressing from 94. But I think it’s just the same as the UK version.

[@amateurmusicresearch1972]

my bluray with those mixes is faulty, but I was able to get a download, and hear it through plex, it does sound great.

[@Flowerbranche]

The version I've got isn't included here: the master from the Oh By The Way (2007) box set. It's said to be a 2003 remaster, but not the SACD. What's your opinion on that one? I don't think it sounds very good, so I would like to buy another version of the album.

[@amateurmusicresearch1972]

That one's the same as the 2003 James Guthrie cd layer mastering. Never seen it but it supposedly comes in a mini LP cover. thanks for posting!

[@sonidosanto]

Tengo la MOFI y la SACD, la MOFI es muy fiel a las cintas Master, solo que en algunos momentos el transfer a digital les jugó una mala pasada creo yo, el CD lo tengo como Nuevo todavía y desde siempre escuché en un par de momentos unos clicks digitales... obviamente lo probé en no se cuánto equipo pude desde hace décadas ya, así que intuyo fue un defecto del transfer, ya que no me suena a defecto de fabricación, suena a que el Audio así fue grabado, así que creo que el error estuvo en la Digitalización del Master. El SACD me suena muy bien de todas maneras, más claro y abierto que el MOFI (que suena con agudos más opacos) pero es verdad que no suena tan "orgánico" y puede terminar agotado el oído, sobre todo si se escucha con auriculares. Ambas versiones son muy buenas de todas formas. Saludos!

[@amateurmusicresearch1972]

En algún lado leí, no recuerdo muy bien donde, que algunos clicks tienen que ver con el equipo que usaron para transferir a digital, un equipo de TV usando cintas VHS, algo por el estilo.

[@Vince_Tasciotti]

I have the 1993/1994 Doug Sax mastering and the 2003 SACD versions.

[@leethomas2155]

I have no 7. Sounds great to me!

[@brendanhoffmann8402]

I have a few versions including the new 50th anniversary one. I like the 2003 SACD version best, mostly because it is much higher fidelity running DSD to DSD.

[@amateurmusicresearch1972]

not sure if the 50th cd is a new remaster or the same as before...

[@augmentedhat16]

There’s also the SACD version which has a sort of gold/blue colour splash on the front cover. It would have been nice if the video included sound samples from each version.

[@amateurmusicresearch1972]

youtube only lets you insert sound samples of about 4 seconds, not great

[@Andersljungberg]

You must have an SACD player or a Blu-ray player that supports SACD to get maximum sound quality from the Super Audio CD disc. It must therefore be able to decode DSD. The normal CD track is Normal PCM and only 16 Bit

[@barebarekun161]

I only have the 2003 SACD Hybrid version as I got it used for $20. CD layer does sound a bit brick walled and lacks punch. SACD layer on the other hand was pretty good dynamic detailed and punchy a tad bright on certain songs with guitar solo but it was great overall. Quad mix on the other hand as I didn't have the right equipment so a stereo playing with missing channels is all I can managed but even so I still enjoyed half Quad experience. Wished they made SQ Quadraphonic mix on Vinyl release so the stereo playback still sound decent and not as jarring as the Discrete Quad Vinyl or SACD Quad. Either way I stuck with this version as the folks at Discogs will make sure that certain CD version will fetch stupid high prices as usual.

[@aquilapicco]

Thank you.

[@billyz5088]

DSOTM has sold an estimated 45+ million copies - vinyl - 8-track - cassette - then you have the multiple CD - DVD - Blu-ray versions etc. - digital downloads - rips .. Way back when - we'd record the vinyl onto HQ cassette for use in the car - almost never bought any official release cassette versions in record shops - but still I must have purchased this record at least a dozen times over the years in various formats. There are probably even more copies out there in one form or another than anyone could ever possibly account for. So assuming they can still find a copy or 2 laying around to listen to ( lol ) - what on Earth will they think about it in the year 2073 - or 2173 ?

[@amateurmusicresearch1972]

I bought a cassette version of DSOTM just for the sake of collecting, and fixed my walkman to listen to it, it sounds good, but has the usual wear of cassetes, due to years of use. I think 2073 will be a mix of hunger games and mad max, not much time for music...😁

[@slipwagon7944]

That first Harvest release is my favorite. I own 2 copies.

[@amateurmusicresearch1972]

!!!

[@capitolemiproducer]

I have owned 11 copies 6 vinyl 5 digital. The two best are the first Japanese for USA and the Mo-Fi ultradisc

[@amateurmusicresearch1972]

we concur 👍

[@The4thDensity]

So used to the 2011 version now that it's my go to DSOTM. I can't really fault it, but I'm no audiophile.

[@amateurmusicresearch1972]

thanks for watching

[@rich_t]

I've yet to find a "bad" sounding version of DSOTM.😎👍

[@bjrnsjohnsen1278]

That’s just like The Wall also

[@jamesjackson2766]

The Blu Ray Dolby Atmos blows all of these away,

[@amateurmusicresearch1972]

probably, but this was only a comparison of cd versions

[@JMG72ARG]

very complete!

[@amateurmusicresearch1972]

thanks 😁

[@user-nu7xx7pc1d]

yo tengo una version en LP de 1973 impresa en Argentina que herede de mi padre. No tiene rayas y suena bien. No obstante, mi version favorita es un CD de una edicion de 1994 de fabricacion UK que salieron cuando lanzaron Division Bell. Me gusta mucho la dinamica y no tiene esa compresion molesta que ponen tanto ahora.

[@amateurmusicresearch1972]

yo también tengo el lp argentino, de las primeras ediciones, siempre el vinilo tiene más onda

[@MrWils25]

All of them are the best album ever made.

[@frankcoffey]

It's amazing how many different releases of the same album there are on CD. I do my own remasters so I try to find the older ones as source.

[@softwhiteglowmusic]

I've always listened to the 1994 Doug Sax master on CD, then when I bought the 2016 CD it was so sad to hear that so much of the dynamics had been squeezed away.. just going into Eclipse it didn't climax anywhere near like the 94.. sad that so many new listeners won't hear it like that, and even more so if it's through digital streaming! Same with Final Cut - 1st track when Roger sings "Should we shout....." his voice is lower than earlier and the drum fill in doesn't climax either.. way over compressed!

[@amateurmusicresearch1972]

I totally agree, thanks for commenting

[@toustin]

Waiting for the Blu Ray!

[@Mariazellerbahn]

I have the 7th version BUT the label side has crumbled away. It still plays though, so it would seem that the playing surface is sandwiched between the plastic faces ... unlike a Beatles album I had which did the same. In that instance, the label underside was the playing surface and so was left with a transparent disc that played nothing.

[@amateurmusicresearch1972]

good thing, usually if label goes, so does the sound, long live pink floyd

[@brucemibus9523]

Have 6 different versions of the CD, oddly the version that I like did not get a mention here, it's a Toshiba EMI print sometime in mid 90s. It has low noise floor along with clarity right across all tracks. Have MoFi version and it's not too bad.

[@amateurmusicresearch1972]

Probably need more info but It looks like the Toshiba Emi version you mention has the Doug Sax 1992 mastering.

[@glennquagmire7696]

Have two picks here: 1 - Japan and 6 - Sax Really enjoy the "Quad" on the Immersion. If you don't have a 5.1, check out Brain Damage/Eclipse on the 1983 "Works" compile. It's a fold-down of front/rear right into the right, and the same with the other side. But, there's things you'll hear not on the regulars.

[@amateurmusicresearch1972]

have the immersion box but never listened to the quad mix, will try it...

[@glennquagmire7696]

@@amateurmusicresearch1972 It's easy to disregard; didn't mess with it for months. Was more into the 1972 rough draft Parsons did. Anyhow, enjoy.

[@ChromeDestiny]

I tend to agree with those version preferences. If I get into rebuilding my Pink Floyd physical CD collection I think I'm going to go for the '94 version of the Sax remaster. I like the streamlined revision of the packaging from the '92 collector's set.

[@markwallerich1455]

Is the 1983 Japanese version you have the later authorized release or the earlier pirated illegal version? Also, the SACD that has the 5.1 surround mix is derived from the original 1972 Quadraphonic tape. This was how Pink Floyd originally wanted the record to sound like. I personally prefer the 20th anniversary version of which they used the UK original master tapes. PS - You also need better equipment for this kind of evaluation. Note that these CDs are not really bad, but there are several Dark Side records out there that sound better than any of the CD's.

[@amateurmusicresearch1972]

hello, my 1983 version is shown in pinkfloydarchives.com under the USA section as the Harvest Records first issue with matrix CDP 7-46001 2 CP35-3017 26B2, made in japan, Sony Japan Mastering. That page is awesome for this kind of info.

[@GabrielMartinez-pe6ln]

Very nice, can you do one of miles Davis kind of blue?

[@amateurmusicresearch1972]

I only have that one on cd (90's remaster) and vinyl (transparent edition), both of them sound awesome.

[@GabrielMartinez-pe6ln]

@@amateurmusicresearch1972 honestly I think the 1997 version is too bright to my ears

[@nacarp2000]

Too bad about the 30th Anniversary CD layer, because the 30th Anniversary LP sounds amazing. I have the SACD - I'll have to compare the CD stereo layer to the SACD stereo layer now in my Oppo.

[@amateurmusicresearch1972]

please do! and let us know, I have the SACD but no SACD player unfortunately...

[@FleagleSangria]

This is my take (I have all of the versions in the video also): There are many that will always go with the rare and expensive. Which are usually japanese first pressings. Sometimes this is true as far as best sound quality, many times its not. One has to know what they are looking at in the matrices. That is the most important part. That and matching mastering peak level numbers. More on that later. My philosophy on sound quality... For me, the ultimate comparison is: How does a particular DSOTM hold up against the best UK lp pressing? And what exactly constitutes "best sound"? And why is the UK lp the best? (note: I am not an lp only guy. I believe whatever medium serves the music and sound quality best and most realistic is the medium I want. Just so happened the original UK got it right on DSOTM. Therefore why not use it for the gold standard comparison.) Lets look at this starting with question 2: IMO, what constitutes best sound is what ever makes the band and the vocalist seem more realistic. Like real instruments with space yet detail and a vocal that is also "alive" and the least processed sounding. Balanced eq, no bad compression (brickwalling) and the least amount of anamolies (tape drag, dropouts etc) as possible. No noise reduction, no fiddling about with mastering trickery that compromises the music and dynamics. Why is the original UK lp the standard for best sound on DSOTM? Because it not only checks off all the above boxes but in addition it has a nearly three dimensional sound that seems to float in the room around you. Im a very analytical type person and dont buy too much into "fairy dust" sound. Much of it is hyperbole. But in this case, it is not. If one has ever heard the best lp pressings of DSOTM played on a stellar system or even a midrange system, then you know exactly what I mean. Having established the best in which to do comparisons to for those positive qualities the UK lp exhibits helps to hear which CD/digital version comes closest to this. First, let me say a "bad" version of DSOTM takes a alot of effort to find. Its a well recorded album. Perhaps the best recorded album in rock history. Given that..there are good, better and best.. I do not think the MFSL does the best job or even second best. The eq, while initially impressive, has midrange issues. So it gets a thumbs down from me for that reason. Also one can tell in comparison to the best early digital versions that the tapes just arent as fresh sounding here. The Doug Sax would come in second. It has a balance of all qualities as you mention, yet it lacks one thing: That three dimensional quality of the best UK lp. The others have various flaws that I agree with in your video. Im not a fan of the sterile sounding James Guthrie, nor of the KG mastered sacd (though the 30th Anniversary lp comes in second to the UK lp and is a very good version). And there are a couple of versions that you didnt mention that lean more towards the shrill or blanketed sound. So what digital versiondoes come close to that three dimensionality sound of the best UK lp? For me it is the first japanese pressing Black Triangle or Black Face Harvest. However.... One thing to realize is not all Japan for Japan black triangle CP35 and Jpn for Jpn Harvest black faced cds are equal. That is, some are from the later '86 transfer. That is why I believe I can hear a difference in japanese first pressings at times. Which was always confusing. Again, I am not one to get into some "pressing plant differences" or "fairy dust" or whatever first pressing fetish one may choose. Its the mastering that is the judge. And when we can match the matrices with the peak levels of the best masterings then we can determine the best sounding versions. After blind tests A/B with a friend and then also my gf (who couldnt care less about the album), we all chose one above the rest: CP35-3017-2 1A1 The CD pressings using the original CBS/Sony Records Japan digital transfer. Whether that is the CP-35 Black Triangle or Harvest Black face or even a certain US Capitaol pressed cd, they must share the same mastering. Again, not all Black Faces, Japanese triangles are the same. This must be determined by checking certain signifiers on the disc and/or the mastering peak levels. This is where the confusion sometimes lies with the "TO and non-TO" discussion. The TO is not a determining signifier. There is other info in the matrices that are though. Or rather the lack of them. I wont go into all that. But I will simply say that one has to be careful when looking. Those matrices are very important to determine whether you are getting a correct best sounding version. So while I agree with you on the black face, one still has to be careful. Not all of them are the best mastering.

[@leon9021]

Well written, I agree with everything here. Except that DSotM has an especially 3D or etherial feel to it on the UK LP. I have most of the relevant LP cuts and while the UK is great I wouldnt say its leaps and bounds ahead. I might have said thats the case before, but Im now more familiar with other fantastic audiophile recordings which do a much better job of creating a 3D illusion than any Pink Floyd album.

[@FleagleSangria]

@@leon9021 While Im sure there are other albums that have just as good or even better dimensionality than DSOTM's first solid blue triangle press or "second pressings" (and even the japanese first emi/odeon is close), I was using the best early pressings as the gold standard for this trait as far as choosing a digital version. A gauge if you will. As it has been pretty well established that later earliest versions of DSOTM are the best sounding concerning this three dimensional quality. By the way, Im not a real fan of the term "three dimensional" but it seems to be a term most can relate to. Maybe a "floaty" quality describes it best. Or perhaps more specifically the illusion of not just a bigger wider soundstage but one in which one can hear more depth front to back in the soundstage. I have a hunch that the freshness of the tapes may contribute to this auditory illusion by showing the instruments finer tonal detail (especially the drums) as much as eq or mastering magic. Thus the reason why the early digital versions are able to present this quality also. The later is more speculatory than factual. Whatever the reasons, I can certainly hear it. It is kind of difficult to describe this 3D quality. Its like the difference in seeing a Mark Rothko abstract expressionist painting on a print and seeing the actual painting in a museum in front of you. One can "see through" the painting if that makes sense. And by doing so the actual real piece of art brings out emotions one is just not going to be able to experience in a litho. A quality even harder to conceptualize in music as an audible description I suppose. Whatever and however one chooses to describe this sound quality as, I simply do not hear that quality in later masterings nearly as much. Perhaps due to many factors (differing equipment, modernization of equipment, tubes, eq choices, fresher tapes vs degeneration of tapes and even vinyl quality (small influence perhaps)?) I dont know for certain. Too many variables to be able to repeat the magic of the early pressings I would assume. But, to my ears, there is no doubt the right early lp pressings have that spacey depth, freshness, clarity, punchiness, snap, additional detail, dynamics, imaging etc other later pressings simply do not have. Vocal distortion is less, clarity is increased. Blind testing that I have done several years apart plays this out every time. And the correct black triangle/black harvest cds get very close to that experience. Probably about as close to it as digital can. Or at least so far. Though I think digitals potential and perhaps even the mastering of this album has not been reached. The later is also simply speculation and opinion. Also, to the point of other albums having even a better dimensionality to them than Dark Side: That may be so, but I cant really use a completely different album to do this A/B'ing with. Though I understand what you are stating in principal. Whatever the case, Parson certainly had a knack for making amazing sounding recordings didint he?

[@amateurmusicresearch1972]

hello, very complete analysis. I have 3 versions of DSOTM on LP, not a UK version unfortunately, but an Argentina first pressing, which supposedly should be similar. Argentina still had good pressing plants back in the 70's. I see what you mean with the non-TO issue, the peak levels are the key to determining the mastering version. I find that the LP is best when heard on a good hifi system in your living room, with generous speakers; the CD is best for headphone listening, I use my discman outside on the balcony for example or when in bed.

[@Smallick29]

I have the black triangle version and the code in the inner rim reads CP35-3017 U 1A1 TO

[@FleagleSangria]

@@Smallick29 What are the peak levels? Looking at the matrix numbers in yours it may not match the peak levels refered to in the video. Also, Im curious, an extremely faint orchestral Ticket to Ride (like an elevator music version) can be heard at the very end of "Eclipse" Just after the last voice snippet, as the heartbeat fades out. Can you hear this faint "Ticket To Ride" with headphones? You can at the end of the last track 'Eclipse'. 39 secs before the end of the disc, the following words can be heard: 'There is no dark side in the moon really. As a matter of fact it's all dark.' At about 27 secs before the end of the disc, the orchestra starts faintly playing 'Ticket to Ride'. You have to play it very loud, starting 27 (or 39) secs before the end of the disc. If you start, say 44 secs before the end, you can hurt your ears! You should use heaphones and play it loud. (yes I am serious)

[@codyserucsak2501]

First copy i got was the 93/1994 remaster. . Later on i found an original Harvest japan copy. Compared by ear with my headphones and my old sony cd player. .. i havent listened to the later version since. That old Japan cd sounds much more natural and the stereo sound and little details are all there it just sounds much better.

[@amateurmusicresearch1972]

Totally agree, thanks for commenting

[@codyserucsak2501]

@@amateurmusicresearch1972 no problem , so many people i know think if its a cd its just digital its all the same. And i keep sayin no. Especially if its from a analog master. There can be cds mastered wrong or bad remasters. And it really grinds my gears when you see an old fully digital recording. DDD disc thats been remastered.. like. What the heck could have possibly been wrong that it needed that?. Almost every one ive listened to the original sounded best. .. but then you have older ones mastered for LP production which do not sound right on a cd.. any cd should just be a flat eq curve since there really is no mechanical limits or anything that need addressed. LP needs its own treatment. Most tapes cut off beyond the average persons hearing range but it might be tapered lower before the cut off so it may take a little treatment. .. I was big on cassette tapes. And have a nice technics that has a full auto calibration feature for blanks. It sets bias. EQ curve and leveling so the red zone on the meters is actually where the tape starts becoming over-saturated. Since many tape formulations are different. This feature is very handy. I had recorded a few cds onto some Sony LNX 60 type 1 tapes no dolby no nothing just calibrate and set the input levels and go. .. and with headphones besides the expected tape hiss noise heard between tracks or at low level bits of the songs i almost couldn't even tell the difference. Very clean recording capability that machine has. It might not be a top end Nakamichi but its still a pretty good performer. Either way i can run out copies on tape from CD that sound notably better than commercially released cassettes.

[@near1650]

i have the mobile fidelity version but it has a different case, the disc "lifts" when its fully opened, not sure if it's fake or if it's a special version.

[@amateurmusicresearch1972]

It's that way, not fake, I switched my case with another MFSL cd.

[@motherfromwayback]

MSFL is by far the best master recording of all.

[@amateurmusicresearch1972]

it's up there

[@matiasgallidj]

Totally agree

[@audiophool864]

I have listened to every version of Dark Side of the Moon. Including the Mobile Fidelity vinyl. The best version is the 24 bit bluray/high resolution audio version. This was a new master created by Pink Floyd from the source takes. Since all the source tapes were directly converted to digital there were no overdubs. It was originally released in the Immersion box set but now available for download. No 16 bit cd can compete with 24 bit. The Doug Sax version is the best 16 bit cd version. All the earlier versions were a bit bright in the upper frequency. Doug Sax corrected this making the sound more even.

[@amateurmusicresearch1972]

I have the immersion box set, haven't taken that one out in a while, will give it a try...

[@audiophool864]

@@amateurmusicresearch1972 The live version from immersion box set is also awesome 👌

[@tomhirschel8524]

What CD player did you use to compare? Amplifier ? Loudspeakers? Headphones? It all makes a difference.

[@amateurmusicresearch1972]

I used a Panasonic discman from 2005 with Bose OE2 headphones, all this stuff is subjective anyway, it's my personal appreciation.

[@Finn-McCool]

What about the Analog Productions Acoustic Sounds SACD version?

[@amateurmusicresearch1972]

I didn't buy that one yet, it's the same as the old SACD with different packaging...

[@Finn-McCool]

@@amateurmusicresearch1972 👍🏼

[@nicholassheffo5723]

The Super Audio CD 5.1 mix can sound good, but some moments sound bad, like vocals on GREAT GIG and the heartbeat is dead center at the album's opening when I is supposed to be not he side like the human heart. It was meant to supplant the 4-track Alan Parsons Quad mix form the 1970s no one liked, including the band and Parsons, but they both are a ways and available on the out of print IMMERSION box set. I have the MOBILE version and like it the best of all, even over the first CD, but the new MOON box will have the album in 12-track Dolby Atmos, so the album might FINALLY get the surround mix it deserves and maybe even the best stereo version yet. However, the vinyl versions will be a separate matter and we'll see about that too. Great video!

[@amateurmusicresearch1972]

thanks! glad you liked it

[@TWEAKER01]

The early CD versions are from master tapes EQ'd for vinyl (harsher mid range, less bass, and harsher sounding digital converters of the time). *Objectively speaking* the "best" CD versions are those from the earliest possible generation tapes, well mastered (in my opinion, Doug Sax's masters). The original 2 track 1/4" master tape is long worn out, no oxide layer left. Only the remixes are from the first gen multi-track tapes.

[@amateurmusicresearch1972]

Doug SAx is up there, and also has the best booklet.

[@Andersljungberg]

You can choose whether you want to listen in SACD quality in stereo or multi channel. You don't get SACD quality with a regular CD player that doesn't support SACD. SACD is DSD not PCM

[@mateomiguel2210]

Tengo curiosidad - A que se le dice "Santo Grial"?? Y - Teóricamente cual seria, de todos los prensado CD, el "Santo Grial"?? (O por lo menos el más proximo) - (Esto es por ignorancia) Porque los niveles de pico influyen en el prensado??

[@amateurmusicresearch1972]

Seria la primer edición japonesa, con mastering de sony. Algunos fabricados para japón, otros exportados a EEUU.

[@amateurmusicresearch1972]

el analisis de los picos sirven para identificar cual es la versión que uno tiene, porque hay muchísimas

[@michaelrogers8126]

Just picked up the drag sax version today at a CD & Record show for $4 I think it sounded good

[@amateurmusicresearch1972]

good deal

I owned the sixth. I'm proud..🤘🤩

[@angustong5976]

For CD I only have the MoFi UltraDisk 2 , and a German pressed Harvest LP my friend gave me.

[@amateurmusicresearch1972]

Y sii..gracias por comentar!

[@danielj.glowny4108]

You incorrectly stated on the hybrid SACD the two channel SACD version can be played back on standard CD player,you can only playback the standard two channel not the SACD two channel version on the SACD copy Dark Side Of The Moon.The SACD has 3 versions of the album 2channel Stereo SACD , Multi channel SACD , 2 channel Stereo standard CD .

[@amateurmusicresearch1972]

naa, I said you need special equipment for the SACD, the automated voice is not always clear.

[@NicolaDiNisio]

@@amateurmusicresearch1972 have you had a chance to listen to the 2003 SACD stereo track? In my system it is more lively and present than the corresponding CD track on the same disk. Money is a track that well shows the difference to me.

[@amateurmusicresearch1972]

@@NicolaDiNisio sadly no, I might have to fix an old PS3 I have in order to do this...

[@markofsaltburn]

Expect a new version in 2023 to celebrate the 30th anniversary of the 20th anniversary remaster 😀

[@amateurmusicresearch1972]

for sure, 50th anniversary, the Beatles did remixes for the 50th, maybe a remixed version of DSOTM? not really necessary...

[@markofsaltburn]

@@tyronebunne2220 SDE is where you know me from - unless you’re a police officer!

[@stevenj2380]

Harvest, MFSL and 20th Anniv 'box' . And the Harvest "Wish You Were Here".