Pink Floyd Wish You Were Here 2011 Rar

1 view
Skip to first unread message

Christel Malden

unread,
Jun 11, 2024, 9:34:31 AM6/11/24
to hardjourkitas

On 5 June 1975, on the eve of Pink Floyd's second US tour that year, Gilmour married his first wife, Ginger.[nb 2] That day, the band were completing the mix of "Shine On You Crazy Diamond"[nb 3] when an overweight man with shaven head and eyebrows entered, carrying a plastic bag. Waters did not recognise him.[8] Gilmour presumed he was an EMI staff member.[22] Wright presumed he was a friend of Waters, but realised it was Barrett.[25] Mason also failed to recognise him and was "horrified" when Gilmour identified him. In Mason's Pink Floyd memoir Inside Out, he recalled Barrett's conversation as "desultory and not entirely sensible".[26] Cover artist Storm Thorgerson reflected on Barrett's presence: "Two or three people cried. He sat round and talked for a bit but he wasn't really there."[27] According to Gilmour, Barrett "came two or three days and then he didn't come anymore.".[28]

Additionally, there was a manufacturing period of 2 or 3 years where the tapes were particularly unstable. Of course, they appeared fine at the time. Both 'The Wall' and 'The Final Cut' albums are recorded on the peak of that bad tape.

pink floyd wish you were here 2011 rar


DOWNLOAD https://t.co/dHfYnhQwc4



James: You'd have to ask them that! We do have a great working relationship. As far as the 5.1 mixes are concerned, they leave me to get on with it and then when I have a mix that sounds good, I present it to them for their input. As far as archival material that may be suitable for release is concerned: In the case of the latest campaign, I was consulted, but the final decisions were made by panel. In fact, many of the elements were chosen by some of the band managers and EMI, whereas with the 'Echoes' release of 2001, the content was all chosen by the band and myself. So it varies from project to project.

When the compact disc was introduced in 1984 (using late 70's digital standards), the digital medium promoted as new and improved took a bit of time and refining before compact disc playback lived up to its own sonic potential. If a compact disc is engineered or reproduced improperly anywhere in the production or playback chain, the music can be fatiguing or even unlistenable. Early digital adopters discovered this first hand, as their CD players were quite harsh sounding and the discs themselves were not much better. All normal resolution CDs are based on the Redbook digital audio standard using the sampling rate of 44.1kHz and 16 bit quantization. This digital domain mastering process is known as Pulse Code Modulation (PCM), where sampling and quantization are the digital keys to the world of digital audio. Yet as good as a normal resolution compact disc is, it has been proven that compact disc specifications are not sufficient to encode all the musical information humans can hear. We are naturally programmed to hear in analog. Live music or the smooth waveforms flowing from vinyl, not compromised digital bitstreams, when presented properly sound best to us. While vinyl has its own measurable distortions and impulse noises, the brain has an uncanny ability to filter out most of these imperfections. Digital audio has its own objectionable distortions and these are more problematic. Most digital errors are sourced to technical limitations inherent in the mastering itself, imperfect digital-to-analog conversion, and the overworked error correction engines working inside our cd players, attempting to correct all the digital errors in real time on a 250+ rpm spinning disc. The one absolute constant issue in digital, regardless of format or interface, is mechanical and electronic jitter, which manifests itself as an artificial brightness or a grating harshness in the music. Despite this and amazingly so, properly engineered compact discs can offer near excellent sound quality - dynamic, transparent, articulate and so on, but Direct Stream Digital (DSD) technology can do so much better.

The preceding Surround Sound equipment setup was used for evaluating the 5.1 Surround mix. Without getting into equipment specifics, I also have an audiophile grade stereo system with a Super Audio CD player, as well a normal CD player. This audio setup was used to evaluate the high resolution stereo mix of the SACD. Granted the individual components are not 'cost-no-object reference grade' or on the same performance scale of a Playback Systems SACD player or ATC Pro Monitors, but in reality, my equipment is much closer in quality to what most music loving audiophiles have in their home. Most importantly, I am very familiar with my equipment's sonic capabilities and inherent limitations. In regards to the Surround Sound system; I made sure the system was performing at its optimum state - no digital sound processing was selected, or in other words, straight sound with no sonic embellishments such as EQ or DSP. I also selected Pure Mode on the Blu-ray player which turns off all unnecessary circuitry to eliminate any possible degradation of the sound. The 5.1 speaker system was carefully calibrated to balance the sound levels relative to my listening position. Subwoofer levels were variable without being excessive.

Super Audio CD Stereo: For my next listening session I cued up the Wish You Were Here SACD on a dedicated player. Because the same DSD high resolution layer is being sourced for the stereo mix, the sound quality ideally should be the same, but presented in two channel stereo instead of the five channel surround. To my surprise the immediacy of the music leapt from the speakers in exquisite detail, forming an enhanced stereo image. The imaging could not have been more breathtaking as the space between the speakers bloomed with music, filling the room from top to bottom, and from side to side with intoxicating sound. The quality of sound here is considerably more focused, richer and deeper, presenting the familiar stereo mix with a stunning realism. The album's dynamics were in a word - stunning, no compression at all was detected. Everything just sounded right; warm tonality was ever present in the guitars and Hammond organ, abundant in the multi-layered vocals, and entrancing in the soaring saxophone notes during 'Shine On (Parts 1-5)'.

Tasked with making the follow-up to their landmark Dark Side of the Moon album (one of the best-selling records of all time), bassist Roger Waters, guitarist David Gilmour, drummer Nick Mason and keyboardist Rick Wright certainly weren't in the mindset where they could be super productive in the studio and write another Dark Side.

Waters notes the band in 1975 was "at a watershed then and we could have easily split up, but we didn't because we were frightened of the great out there beyond the umbrella of this extraordinarily powerful and valuable trade name: Pink Floyd".

"That collaboration between David and I is really good," said Waters. "It's a much more universal expression of my feelings about absence. Because I felt that we weren't really there. We were very absent."

582128177f
Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages