The Later Years 1986-2014

General discussion about Pink Floyd.
mabewa
Axe
Axe
Posts: 93
Joined: Mon Sep 09, 2019 6:32 am

Re: The Later Years 1986-2014

Post by mabewa »

Yeah, the snatches of Signs of Live and Terminal Frost both sound very promising. Previously, I thought that Signs of Life was OK and disliked TF, but TF in particular sounds transformed by the bit of it we can hear on the podcast. Fingers crossed!
User avatar
azza200
Judge!
Judge!
Posts: 2384
Joined: Wed Jan 07, 2004 2:18 pm

Re: The Later Years 1986-2014

Post by azza200 »

The new edit of Sorrow is fucking awesome extended solo too <.8.> <ii>
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EgW4LOKjS9Y
Jimi Dean Barrett
Judge!
Judge!
Posts: 1592
Joined: Fri Apr 02, 2010 1:30 pm

Re: The Later Years 1986-2014

Post by Jimi Dean Barrett »

And if you scroll down your YouTube feeds you should find loads more material waiting to premiere tomorrow.
Comfortably Numb and SOYCD both from Knebworth. On The Turning Away studio.
Hoping to buy the one CD pre-box release next Tuesday.
User avatar
azza200
Judge!
Judge!
Posts: 2384
Joined: Wed Jan 07, 2004 2:18 pm

Re: The Later Years 1986-2014

Post by azza200 »

The highlights cd is already up on Spotify
User avatar
theaussiefloydian
Hammer
Hammer
Posts: 667
Joined: Mon Apr 17, 2017 6:57 pm
Gender: Male

Re: The Later Years 1986-2014

Post by theaussiefloydian »

azza200 wrote: Fri Nov 29, 2019 12:19 am The highlights cd is already up on Spotify
Not here in Canada. I suspect I'll have to wait a couple more hours
raisemyrent
Knife
Knife
Posts: 453
Joined: Thu Jul 24, 2014 10:57 pm

Re: The Later Years 1986-2014

Post by raisemyrent »

Oh man. That on the turning away version. D
Not sure what we gained. I like the new mix. As in the sound, but the Mason drums, well, it’s Mason. So that’s a plus. I guess. The other ones were certainly out of character so to speak. But the new vocal track sounds lifted from a Live take and I just don’t get it. The choruses also sound different and the snare sound boomy during them. I think it’s a bit of a Frankenstein and I don’t think I like it. Not much new in the way of keyboard either. Not even the intro from delicate sound of thunder. I’m a bit confused. The guitar solo does sound a lot better. The vocal track seems to revert to the studi one after a bit. Maybe they didn’t have each track separately to remaster or something like that (vocals came with drums or so). Weird. The new comfortably numb is... a tease. And I’m being generous. Kneb worth sounds great. Us and them is us and them. I prefer pulse. And I prefer dark side to both. It’s the slower tempo. Marooned Jam is great but certainly a jam. Lost for words is an absolute highlight. Beautiful work even if it does feel like going through the motions a bit and guy Pratt having fun almost ruins it. Learning to fly, I prefer pulse by a lot. Sorrow I prefer pulse for sure and I still hate the drums. Wywh and run like hell I prefer pulse as well. Last but not least proto high hopes is very interesting mostly because it’s so close to the final version and the solo is beautiful in its own way. One slip... I’ve listened to that sing about 4 times... 4 times too many for a lifetime.
mabewa
Axe
Axe
Posts: 93
Joined: Mon Sep 09, 2019 6:32 am

Re: The Later Years 1986-2014

Post by mabewa »

I really like the new mix of On the Turning Away! It's really organic and warm-sounding. Especially like the instrumental sections--really sounds like a Dave/Rick/Nick/Tony PF. Very tasteful and classic-sounding, and so nice to get rid of those booming drum effects. Not sure if the Rick organ parts are new or just more cranked up version of the original parts (it was one of the songs he definitely played on), but they definitely work better in this version.

My only issue with it is that the decision to make some of the female backing vox really loud during parts of the last verse--gives it an almost gospel-like feel for a moment that might be overkill, though maybe I'll get used to it soon. But for now it's an easy improvement.

From what I've heard so far (skipping around a lot), the Marooned Jam is really nice--tasty guitar playing from Dave, and Lost For Words is a really good version too--a lot more presence than the studio version. Though not 100% sure about the more driving bass line in places.
User avatar
Keith Jordan
Site Admin
Site Admin
Posts: 17151
Joined: Wed Jun 12, 2002 6:54 pm
Gender: Male
Location: Cheshire, England

Re: The Later Years 1986-2014

Post by Keith Jordan »

I had best give this new highlights album a listen to on Spotify. 8)
raisemyrent
Knife
Knife
Posts: 453
Joined: Thu Jul 24, 2014 10:57 pm

Re: The Later Years 1986-2014

Post by raisemyrent »

Agreed the new sound mix for on the turning away is way better. Less metallic or so. And I agree with the almost gospel bits. I just don’t get why the first few verses are from what sounds like an imperfect live take. A bit cringey even
Nooma Sheen
Embryo
Embryo
Posts: 4
Joined: Mon Oct 28, 2019 11:26 pm

Re: The Later Years 1986-2014

Post by Nooma Sheen »

On the Turning Away remix -

WHY did they use a different vocal?!?
Besides that I’ve heard this version for over 30 years and I’m used to every nuance...it just sounds like a live version.
Gilmour’s original vocal was his trademark quiet gentle style. The replacement ( which somebody said was from DSOT ) is sung louder and more forcefully, as one would sing live. If I wanna hear that sort of glory, I’ll listen to a live version, even the one on the same box set with the exact same vocal. And the weird reverbs they added to it sound more 80’s somehow than the original ! It spoils the harmonies, too. “Using words you will find are strange “ was a perfect blend and always moves me but not here.

That said, the rest sounds great and right.
LOVE the way the drums don’t sound like a power ballad,
and the guitar, well, F’ YEAH !
I can take or leave the squeaky 4 string bass. Interesting enough. Sounds more like Roger, I suppose.

I wonder if I can edit the intro to the original version up to “ on the wings of the night” and cut to the new mix ? MAYBE.

Sorry to complain but man, I have been way looking forward to this. Replacing the vocal on an actual album was just wrong.
mabewa
Axe
Axe
Posts: 93
Joined: Mon Sep 09, 2019 6:32 am

Re: The Later Years 1986-2014

Post by mabewa »

Funny, I didn't notice that the vocal (or at least the beginning vocal) was different, but since you guys seem to have, I imagine you've caught something that I haven't.

I hope it's not the same one as DSoT, just because that seems awfully repetitive. I can imagine that if they felt the vocal wasn't good enough, they could replace it with a live take, but I'd hope they'd use one from an unreleased live take. I'm going to go listen to the various versions and see if I can tell...

But yeah, I think the drums are a massive improvement, the much louder-organ is nice and the song overall sounds great, except for maybe the one line on the last verse with the really-loud backing vocals.
mabewa
Axe
Axe
Posts: 93
Joined: Mon Sep 09, 2019 6:32 am

Re: The Later Years 1986-2014

Post by mabewa »

I just compared the new mix to the DSoT version a few times, and while I'm not 100%, they strike me as not being the same vocal take. Especially on the line 'Don't accept that what's happening' on the live version, Dave's voice kind of clips a bit, like he was running out of breath, but I don't hear that on the new mix. It's possible I'm hearing it differently because the lack of crowd noise and the different keyboards, but the two versions don't seem the same to me.
mabewa
Axe
Axe
Posts: 93
Joined: Mon Sep 09, 2019 6:32 am

Re: The Later Years 1986-2014

Post by mabewa »

...now listening to the new version compared to the original studio version, and yeah, they seem different. It's not like Dave is totally belting it out on the new version, but his voice is richer (which I like) but also a bit less lilting and soft (which may be a loss). I find the difference especially noticeable on the line 'Light is changing to shadow.'

The reverb on the new version sounds a lot more vintage, and I DO like that aspect better. The old version has this very 80's effect where the entire line echoes--not something that I really noticed much on hearing it over speakers, but it's distracting on headphones. I'm not sure if the reverb effect on the new one is the best they could have chosen, but glad to not have the whole-line-repeating thing going on.
raisemyrent
Knife
Knife
Posts: 453
Joined: Thu Jul 24, 2014 10:57 pm

Re: The Later Years 1986-2014

Post by raisemyrent »

I’m with nooma sheen here. I just. Don’t. Get. It.
The new version is definitely a different take and it sounds love. There is no way it’s from a studio. It’s not perfect. It’s cringe worthy to hear on a “studio album” especially from a perfectionist band. My take on this is that they really wanted something else, like a keyboard track live, as per the brief, and used a good but previously unreleased live vocal from the “endless tour”.
I suppose they absolutely have the masters for the album, with each track basically etc as it was recorded, but live, looking for input here, I assume they recorded a few things onto the same “tape”. Or actually tape, rather. These guys were running 100+ channels to the sound board so I doubt they had 100 cassette tapes cued. I personally don’t think the string sounding keyboard at the beginning (or whole song including the organ?) were worth it... but whatever. If this had the original vocal (a clean high and pristine Gilmour), the song would be close to “perfect” for me. Even if the snare is all over the place and likely has some live parts mixed in. Sometimes it’s boomy (chorus) and sometimes it’s crisp again (solo). There’s even what sounds like a double snare with Wallis at some point but I’ve only had a chance to listen while driving this week. The guitar solo is reborn and this wasn’t a Stratocaster right??
mabewa
Axe
Axe
Posts: 93
Joined: Mon Sep 09, 2019 6:32 am

Re: The Later Years 1986-2014

Post by mabewa »

It's definitely a different vocal take at least for the first verse, but don't think that they used it just because there was a keyboard part they wanted. Listen to the into keyboard synth parts on the live versions and they are actually quite different. The intro synth sounds just like the one on the original studio version, just louder and warmer. No point in lifting a live keyboard part just for that.

I agree that the part is definitely different, but I'm not sure whether it's really from a live performance. Usually, bands record several lead vocal takes and 'comp' them together with what the producer thinks are the best versions (sometimes they do this line-by-line). It could be that they just used unused Gilmour vocal takes from the original version. If it is a live version, they did an incredible job of getting rid of all the crowd noise--usually, that's not hard with an instrumental part, but much harder with a borderline acapella vocal part.

Anyway, my best guess is that they wanted to get rid of the 80's power-ballad aspects of the song, so they made a drier, more straightforward version that sounds like a warmer version of The Wall in terms of production, and they wanted a slightly less-pretty intro lead vocal for that. It works extremely well for me overall, though I agree that the original part had more expression.