Pink Floyd: are the "Ultradiscs" the gold standard?

Also, unless you have very revealing audio gear and a really, really good cartridge, you probably won't realize the subtle differences in the pressings.

The CDs were done by MOFI and called Ultradisc...they use a gold foil.

You really need a CD player with a great transport (the part that spins and reads--laser assembly) to hear the differences.


If you want the most telling version, download a 24 bit/96k hi-rez version or an MQA version and send it to a good DAC.

quote:

---

they use a gold foil

---

Which makes no difference whatsoever.

quote:

---

Someone told me the gold discs are more useful in terms of disc preservation, but I never bothered to fact-check it, lol...

---

Yeah, well, I've got 30+ y/o CDs that AccurateRip like new, and 20 y/o CDs I burned that are still perfect.

quote:

---

It's amazing tho, how everything in technology has been on the upswing, yet music mastering has increasingly gotten worse. I can crank up a CD like the DSOTM Ultradisc, and you can still hear the separation in the instruments...yet, if I buy something comparable released within the last few years, it sounds like a fricking mess at loud volume.

---

Mastering of course is where the differences lie, sometimes big differences anyone can hear. It's got nothing to do with bullshite like "gold foil," which is pure audiophool nonsense.

The cases look something like that...they definitely stand out from the "standard" version...

Edit: My bad, I might've misinterpreted your post...

quote:

---

I also have an original CBS "MasterSounds" Half-Speed master of The Wall and I prefer it to the reissue though. It sells for around $600 nowadays.

---

You could have fooled me:

LINK


Kind of surprised you don't have the Japan Master Sound version? Or perhaps an original UK?

quote:

---

Which makes no difference whatsoever.

---

I never said it did make a difference.

I mentioned that as a reference that they can be easily spotted among other CDs.

quote:

---

Kind of surprised you don't have the Japan Master Sound version? Or perhaps an original UK?

---

I only play PF once every couple years or so now...I grew up with it so I am kinda burned out on it now.

The pressings I have are plenty good enough for me.

quote:

---

I'm guessing anyone who posts on this forum could probably vouch on that statement. We're probably not the doofs who leave CDs exposed in a hot car, or have them scattered all over the floor, lol... I have several CDs I bought in the early 80's, and they still play without a hitch. But, of course, I know others who care for their CDs like shite, so of course they'll be useless after a short while...

---

There should be absolutely no degradation of sound quality on a CD assuming it can be read by the CD player.

For anything originally recorded in analog, go with vinyl. I would guess those pink floyd albums were recorded in analog. An analog recording is best replicated wtih an analog medium.

Now if it was from digital, then use a digital medium (FLAC is prolly best).

Also, avoid remasters especially in the 80s and 90s, where all they did was raise the volume. They are usually shite.

With all that said, I cannot tell the difference. I have a decent ear for stuff like that, and I just can't tell the difference between vinyl/CD or FLAC/MP3. I do have friends that swear they can tell the difference.