Pink Floyd vinyl reissues 2016

From what I've read PF's 2016 vinyl series is based on their 2011 CD remasters, so digital set to vinyl. I suppose if these were all-analog productions it would be stated explicitly on the PF site, as well as on the album sticker, with the same fanfare that accompanied the Beatles' mono vinyl.

Sound-wise, I cannot detect any obvious differences between the 2012 and 2016 vinyl issues, so that is my guess too that they are both from the same digital master.

The reissue campaign is digital but I have to say it is done very well. The 2016 release of the Wall is a material upgrade from the 2012 release. Really looking forward to the next round of releases. 

Gary

From Elusive disc 

180g Vinyl Double LP!
Remastered From Original Analogue Tapes by James Guthrie, Joel Plante, and Bernie Grundman!

The 2012 reissue was horrendous 

Just because a vinyl release has been remastered from the original analogue tapes doesn't mean it has been cut from an analogue remaster.  Most likely it was remastered from the original tapes to 24bit digital and then cut from that.

But before getting too hot and bothered about that, Isn't the whole analogue or digital debate for vinyl a bit of a moot point these days?  Considering most all cutting is done with a digital delay, why not use a hi-res digital remaster to cut from?

What's really interesting are the rare occasions where any digitisation in the chain is studiously avoided. I don't just mean cutting from analogue tapes.  You have to go further... Reading about the recording and cutting sessions for Nitin Sawhney's Onezero album, it would appear that quite apart from being a direct cut recording, they had to fix the cutting pitch so they could avoid the digital delay of the cutter preview. It was cut at 45rpm and only just over 8 minutes per side. A rare treat indeed for those who delight in all-analogue vinyl.

I got lost in the digital analogue debate but what I can say is the 2016 sounds bloody good! Getting hold of an original without background noise is a tough gig - I have tried three times and all copies I bought were desribed as mint but all had surface noise that no cleaning could address.

if you have a good clean original then stick if you dont and you want a great sounding copy the the 2016 is the one to go for - the 2012 release was not that great...

Gary

Meddle, OBC and AHM released on Friday, getting good reviews on the SH forum. Still waiting for Amazn to deliver mine.....

Either way all the indications point to the fact the DSOTM and Animals should be done well too.

Gary

Very impressed with Meddle - LP not perfectly flat but not bad enough to send back. Good packaging too - no nasty sandpaper inner sleeve. Got WYWH on order also

Good isn't it, now listening AHM  - also very good.

Gary

Listening to OBC - very happy with how it sounds.  I think they've really nailed these reissues.  I've got them all so far, wish that other vinyl reissue programmes would emulate the care and attention that has been taken with these

As far as I know there is no official statement about this from the label (actually labels, Warner in Europe and Columbia in the USA) or from the engineers/studios involved in the remastering process.

That being said, the most likely scenario (I mean with 99.99999% probability) is that these were cut from high resolution digital transfers of the master tapes. The main question seems to be what transfers were used, if they went back to the same digital transfers made around 2011, or if brand new transfers were actually made for these 2016 reissues. This is a tricky question, not easy to consider this new transfers scenario (hitting the original master tapes again, another high-risk procedure just 5 years after they did just that), unless for contratual / legal reasons. But it's not impossible, they might have done it

Anyway, overall these reissues are good, great performance/price ratio, at this price, cut by Bernie Grundman, I would recommend them without reserve. I don't think they are the best, not at all, but the best in really good shape would cost so much more that it makes any comparison just a silly effort.