I've honestly enjoyed this thread more than this show!
would you agree that the recent release of Echoes does sound quite differently from the Immersion release of the Wembley concert. I think it is much more dry, at least the voice from David...
Is it? I can't really answer. Who knows? We know now that at least two different stereo mixdown exists from November 16th. One where the audience is muted during the first set, and the released one with the audience mics. Or maybe it was mixed in QUAD with the audience at the back XD That's all that survives since the multitrack from the 16th is lost (and after analysis so far, I believe it to be true). A good thing for the 16th recording is that there is no "Frankenstein" involved at all.
Originally Posted by Skinny12
Last edited by Eckoes; 01-12-2017 at 08:03 PM.
I don't have Black Holes In The Sky (anymore?). I'm good with the cass[M]>DAT>CDR source, the static/crackle is really very slight, not something to make a big deal of in my opinion. Jon R's sample sounds much better than the cass[M]>DAT>CDR transfer, same analog source but much better preserved and a much better transfer. A shame it's only the first 7-8 minutes of the show (part of the pre-show announcements and tunings and the first 4 mins of SOYCD).
Originally Posted by goldenband
Last edited by Bert13; 01-13-2017 at 12:45 AM.
Okay, I was trying to analyse the first set... oh boy. It sounds like November 15th, I think it is, but... No spoilers yet, but MASSIVE tinkering/adjustments/fix/patch has been applied.
I've gotten to the point I can't listen to Dogs and Sheep and vastly prefer You've Got to Be Crazy 1974 and Raving and Drooling 1974. Raving and Drooling is a keyboard led instrumental with the rhythm guitar mimicking the gnashing of teeth and the cymbals the rending of claws.. how that became Sheep is certainly some kind of Irony... no doubt intentional but it does neuter the song quite a bit. Yes, the 1975 version does climax better after the rush is over after the first lyrical passage; The audience isn't clapping that the new track is over but that they're liking what they hear. However I feel this rush ruins the middle part of the song which is greatly exemplified from the French version which correctly places the climax at the end of the piece prior to the Sheepish coda. In order to do this, the band physically stops the song to do a slow build to the second lyrical passage. For me, the British Winter tour version meets the balance between the two... not completely stopping right after the song starts and more importantly, not blowing its load with another seven minutes to go.
Originally Posted by Eckoes
You've Got to Be Crazy 74... there's the slow build version of Nov 16 and everything prior and then there's the restart version that debuted on the 17. I prefer the later version as it comes of less of a slow realization after the middle "stone" lyrics but more of a sudden inward redirection... after all the "you"s used in the first half, this is where the "us", "they" and "I" show up and it works better as direct contrast rather than just a bridge to the first half. Things I love: The dual guitar/keyboard solos, insane rhyming pattern and frantic singing, the AHM era return of harmonizing/scat and the overall words on their own which become more distanced being relatable with each rewrite. Oh and the song itself, I probably should repeat that.
The 1975 version is awful but can we all agree on that? They took five minutes of music and harmonizing out of the song and made all the lyrics... less biting as well as less literally spat out and already more considerate with the slowed down singing... but also closer together giving no one time to reflect. Lyrics, solo, bridge, lyrics, solo and closer. It's still not a song but it's no longer a piece.
Dogs put the time back in... good, I can't complain about that; I always thought that Pink Floyd (1987) didn't play the song was less because Gilmour didn't like the album or the song but because he couldn't deflate the song like he did with Shine On... but with the firm emphasis put on the subject being one of the titular Dogs, how does the song relate to you now? Not just you you but the "you" of the song. Is it you are all Dogs or are the Dogs all you?
And that's my main problem with the Animals album; It come a lot less Animal Farm and a lot more like the writer put these names/masks on people. Somehow these songs went from the simple and direct finger pointing of "You" and "I" to "Ha ha, we all are Sheep, Pigs and Dogs; Divy up among yourselves which are which. By the way, I'm a Dog but only when it's convenient. That is, when pigs fly."
I also like the saxophone in Echoes as it does a better job of distancing the song from its 71 era origin and puts it firmly alongside the completed works of Dark Side of the Moon and Wish You Were Here.
Of course, I also think the band peaked creatively with Atom Heart Mother and everything past that is just seeing where and how words stick to the music.
Next time: Rating Dark Sides by the right spot and why: Any Colour You Like.