Ok, I have had my copy of Pink Floyds "Dark side of the moon" on SACD and I am wondering who has this and your thoughts. I am writing a detailed review of this for an upcoming issue here at recording.org (RO) This SACD is presented in 3 formats on the single CD. 1. Redbook layer 16 bit 44.1K Stereo 2. Super Audio compact disc (SACD) direct stream digital (DSD) in 2 Channel. Single Bit 2.82MhZ Stream rate. 3. SACD-DSD 5.1 Surround. 5.1 surround uses a Left channel/Right channel/Center channel/Left rear channel/Right rear channel/Sub bass channel. The Album/Album Quad/CD/CD moFi(mobile fidelity release)/Reel/8track 2ch/8 track 4 channel/cassette of this classic was done using back-up tapes of the original 2 channel Ampex. This 30th anniversary release used the original 16 channel master remixed, and the original 2 track tape remastered. Those who have it feel free to comment on your overall impression of this. I will give a full report of it soon and I would like to here your impressions...especially those of the mastering engineers here that are moderators. I am doing a blow by blow of it. Go ahead..Any questions, feel free, I will answer basic quiestions but the full review will "Shed some light" on the DSOtM. Start of Blow By Blow. First of all. The files you see were converted from DSD to 16/192 and 1/4 Master tape to 16/192. The sound I hear is conducive to the waves you see. No transfer error in dynamics or frequency response outside 0.0002% My conclusion may come as a shock to many. A gentle hint, I can hear the inaccuracies in the monitoring loudspeakers big time for this cherished and holy grail work, for this disc. They stick out like a sore thumb. I am hearing an inverse blueprint of their House curve VS the best Vinyl and the masters I have had the luxury to use./ I want folks to listen carefully to the 2 mix (it was not down-mixed at all from the 16 track, just original 2 track remastered) The 5.1 is a new "mix" from the 16tk tape. The most important hint, is that modern loudspeakers are uncalibrated from the old professional realm. Alan Parsons knows this, that he was not approached, made the huge difference. See, it is like this. We mixed and mastered for the loudspeakers of that day then. Any attempt to try to "fix it" to sound like it use to on modern loudspeakers, will result in problems from the original. The state of the art has been watered down by "audiophile standards of abuse". That mastering engineers are using audiophile speakers in the mastering, the true reference is left to be tainted. The germs are in my face. Such a nice transfer, only to be equalized to a set of speakers, not many will be able to afford..and even if you could, they are not dynamically accurate to the standards of the recording of yesteryear. It is a new can of worms that is not part of the continuation of this great art. Now this is 2 track commentary, not a review. The review will encompass time on the CD and certain things that were done with improper EQ curves in listening. Basic calibration. You have to calibrate to the standard of the year it was born, not to today for it to travel as it should to todays aspects. The blow by blow will be of serious interest. It may not change things, but it is in my face for sure. I can hear "ticket to ride" (an out-take from Beatles rehearsals) at the end of eclipse, they re-used tapes at abbey road and the erasure was not complete..even on this disc they missed it...or knew and left it alone for Floridians in the "know" Oh. BTW, the master EATS the SACD that audiophiles and engineers feel is "perfect sound forever" To bad they are in baby steps. More to come. OK, I added this.. Here is side 2. Notice the limiting. The top File is the SACD. The bottom is the untouched copy of the master. Why the limiting? SACD is supposed to mirror the master. Once again, studio electronics got in the way of folks getting to hear how this classic recording "really" sounds. Now, I can rest my case about the problems with SACD. It is a wonderful format...but it is suffering the same fate as redbook. Anyone so far wants a mastering comparison CD, it can be ava. (I do have the quad setup for reference as well) Next, I will post the file of my final mastering of this 2 track wonder. I am not grandstanding but simply making a point. I have contacted some individuals on this. It will not change the sacd but I would like to provide a copy of the finest DSOM that is avalable for those who wish it...with clearance. The Clearance may be a tough sell as it underminds what the "best" did. So far "the point" of this post, some of the "best" mastering enginners are still not paying careful attention to the art.