Floyd's "Piper at the Gates of Dawn" Re-release
Printed From: Progarchives.com
Category: Progressive Music Lounges
Forum Name: Prog Bands, Artists and Genres Appreciation
Forum Description: Discuss specific prog bands and their members or a specific sub-genre
URL: http://www.progarchives.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=44687
Printed Date: March 06 2025 at 13:45
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 11.01 - http://www.webwizforums.com
Topic: Floyd's "Piper at the Gates of Dawn" Re-release
Posted By: dralan
Subject: Floyd's "Piper at the Gates of Dawn" Re-release
Date Posted: December 21 2007 at 16:12
| I was out Chrismas shopping and I ran across the newly repackaged and rereleased version of "Piper". Can anyone explain to me why you would want a mono and a stereo mix of the album in the same package? I already ownt the remastered version, so aside from the nostalgia factor I guess, what would be the point of owning this? |
Replies:
Posted By: erik neuteboom
Date Posted: December 21 2007 at 16:44
|
Pecunia non olet
 ! |
Posted By: Andrea Cortese
Date Posted: December 21 2007 at 16:47
|
^^^
Yeah, that's why I don't buy very often PF's albums... prices are usually higher than any other classic prog rock band.
|
Posted By: jammun
Date Posted: December 21 2007 at 17:07
|
I bought the 3-disk re-release, which includes mono and stereo mixes of the album, plus a third disk of singlesof the era and alternate takes of a couple of tracks.
Now, why would one buy this? My situation is probably different from others. I had never owned this album previously (in spite of having all PF albums from Ummagumma forward), so it was a no-brainer for me to finally add this to my collection.
Typically, mono and stereo mixes from albums of this era differ in small but significant ways. Generally, the original was recorded in mono and later artificially ported to stereo (I am assuming but not certain that's the case with Piper). So vocal/instrument balances may be different between the two mixes and there may be other slight differences. I have not had an opportunity to spend adequate time with the two mixes of Piper to detail why would want one, or the other, or both. I'm sure there are others far more familiar with this one who could point out the major differences.
In any case I'm very happy with this set. It is one of the extremely few times that the band and/or record company has only gotten my $ once for a given album!
|
Posted By: dralan
Date Posted: December 21 2007 at 17:57
| Well I would be interested in the 3-disc set for the alternate takes and singels. I guess they must have released two versions cuz the one I saw at Best Buy just had the two mixes of Piper. But yea Floyd must be running a close second behind Yes for compilations and re-releases. |
Posted By: crimhead
Date Posted: December 21 2007 at 18:02
Thankfully no prog band has reached the reissue/digging into the vaults as Hendrix has. |
dralan wrote:Posted By: jammun
Date Posted: December 21 2007 at 18:31
Well the Hendrix catalog has been a mess/joke for years. Thankfully we are now at the point where someone just wanting the meat has to be a mere five albums.
|
Posted By: jammun
Date Posted: December 21 2007 at 18:33
|
Meant to add, for Hendrix at least we are at a point now where a mere five CD's will get you the meat of his studio output, and none of it debased by Alan Douglas. |
Posted By: Witchwoodhermit
Date Posted: December 22 2007 at 02:57
|
The mono mix of Piper IS different from the stereo. Lucifer Sam is slightly longer, pow r. toc h. is different vocally. In those days, mono began to take a back seat to stereo. They had to rework the recording process to simulate a stereo feel for a mono player. The music, although subtle, is different. For hard core fans only. ------------- Here I'm shadowed by a dragon fig tree's fan ringed by ants and musing over man. |