<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Pink Floyd &#8211; At The Beeb Volume I (Culombia (sic) PFATB6769)</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.collectorsmusicreviews.com/pink-floyd/pink-floyd-at-the-beeb-volume-i-culombia-sic-pfatb6769/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.collectorsmusicreviews.com/pink-floyd/pink-floyd-at-the-beeb-volume-i-culombia-sic-pfatb6769/</link>
	<description>The Standard In Live Release Analysis</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 24 May 2013 20:37:33 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.5.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: mk2004</title>
		<link>http://www.collectorsmusicreviews.com/pink-floyd/pink-floyd-at-the-beeb-volume-i-culombia-sic-pfatb6769/comment-page-1/#comment-628</link>
		<dc:creator>mk2004</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 02 Aug 2008 23:35:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.collectorsmusicreviews.com/pink-floyd/pink-floyd-at-the-beeb-volume-i-culombia-sic-pfatb6769/#comment-628</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Vol. 2 contains only the September 30th 1971 session.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Vol. 2 contains only the September 30th 1971 session.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: eddie77</title>
		<link>http://www.collectorsmusicreviews.com/pink-floyd/pink-floyd-at-the-beeb-volume-i-culombia-sic-pfatb6769/comment-page-1/#comment-624</link>
		<dc:creator>eddie77</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 02 Aug 2008 13:17:37 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.collectorsmusicreviews.com/pink-floyd/pink-floyd-at-the-beeb-volume-i-culombia-sic-pfatb6769/#comment-624</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Does Volume II also include the session of July 16, 1970 or is it just September 30th, 1971?]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Does Volume II also include the session of July 16, 1970 or is it just September 30th, 1971?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: strummerville</title>
		<link>http://www.collectorsmusicreviews.com/pink-floyd/pink-floyd-at-the-beeb-volume-i-culombia-sic-pfatb6769/comment-page-1/#comment-611</link>
		<dc:creator>strummerville</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 30 Jul 2008 12:05:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.collectorsmusicreviews.com/pink-floyd/pink-floyd-at-the-beeb-volume-i-culombia-sic-pfatb6769/#comment-611</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I have both &quot;Celestial Voices&quot; and &quot;At The Beeb Volume I&quot; discs, and there are a few very subtle differences. 

Firstly, the first and third BBC shows are slightly louder and more powerful sounding on &quot;Celestial Voices&quot;, with a more pronounced bass sound. These same shows on &quot;At The Beeb Volume I&quot; sound a fraction thinner, slightly crisper, but more &quot;hollow&quot;... if that makes sense. Strangely, the Culombia [sic] label seems to have added reverb/echo to the tracks on the first and third BBC shows. This is clealy audible at the start of each song, just as John Peel finishes talking, the last second of his introduction gets an added whoosh of echo, as if he&#039;s suddenly entered an echo chamber. I don&#039;t know if Culombia [sic] have added the echo deliberately, to give the songs a spacier, more atmospheric feel. 

Also, on &quot;Celestial Voices&quot; there are a couple of tiny digital glitches at the start of &quot;Grantchester Meadows&quot; which don&#039;t appear on &quot;At The Beeb Volume I&quot;, and some of John Peel&#039;s introductions are considerably longer on &quot;At The Beeb&quot;.

Overall, I prefer &quot;Celestial Voices&quot;, as the sound quality is consistent throughout. On &quot;At The Beeb Volume I&quot; there are different sources used, with fluctuations in sound quality. This is clearly evident on &quot;Interstellar Overdrive&quot;, which for some strange reason suffers terribly from what sounds like amp buzz throughout. I can&#039;t imagine it is a mastering problem, as it&#039;s hard to imagine Culombia [sic] releasing this CD with such a lot of irritating noise ruining that particular track. Then again, it&#039;s hard to imagine the BBC broadcasting that particular session track if it was marred by persistent amp buzz. Weird.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I have both &#8220;Celestial Voices&#8221; and &#8220;At The Beeb Volume I&#8221; discs, and there are a few very subtle differences. </p>
<p>Firstly, the first and third BBC shows are slightly louder and more powerful sounding on &#8220;Celestial Voices&#8221;, with a more pronounced bass sound. These same shows on &#8220;At The Beeb Volume I&#8221; sound a fraction thinner, slightly crisper, but more &#8220;hollow&#8221;&#8230; if that makes sense. Strangely, the Culombia [sic] label seems to have added reverb/echo to the tracks on the first and third BBC shows. This is clealy audible at the start of each song, just as John Peel finishes talking, the last second of his introduction gets an added whoosh of echo, as if he&#8217;s suddenly entered an echo chamber. I don&#8217;t know if Culombia [sic] have added the echo deliberately, to give the songs a spacier, more atmospheric feel. </p>
<p>Also, on &#8220;Celestial Voices&#8221; there are a couple of tiny digital glitches at the start of &#8220;Grantchester Meadows&#8221; which don&#8217;t appear on &#8220;At The Beeb Volume I&#8221;, and some of John Peel&#8217;s introductions are considerably longer on &#8220;At The Beeb&#8221;.</p>
<p>Overall, I prefer &#8220;Celestial Voices&#8221;, as the sound quality is consistent throughout. On &#8220;At The Beeb Volume I&#8221; there are different sources used, with fluctuations in sound quality. This is clearly evident on &#8220;Interstellar Overdrive&#8221;, which for some strange reason suffers terribly from what sounds like amp buzz throughout. I can&#8217;t imagine it is a mastering problem, as it&#8217;s hard to imagine Culombia [sic] releasing this CD with such a lot of irritating noise ruining that particular track. Then again, it&#8217;s hard to imagine the BBC broadcasting that particular session track if it was marred by persistent amp buzz. Weird.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
