 
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
|
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
96.232.182.38
worth the extra $$$$?
Follow Ups:
Mo-Fi really was the leader of Audiophile-quality recordings back in the day. They had competition from others along the way, but they lasted the longest. I have a bunch of their 70's/80's/2000's pressings...but things have really changed for them. Ever since the whole DSD file issue, they really have kinda taken a lesser approach to the quality of their vinyl records from what I've personally experienced. They discontinued the nice card stalk inserts with the whole "The Art And Science of Mobile Fidelity Sound Labs" info and pictures of their releases and equipment available. The last few titles I bought from them were defective and had to be returned. "Tango In The Night" had one disc that was bad and had to be replaced. Needless to say, I didn't bother with the "Mirage" release as I already had the one they did in 1984 which is fantastic so why get another copy that's made from a DSD copy of what we hope is the Original Master Tape. Now, I will say their SACD's are TOPS!!! I love em' but again, they have been striping the packaging down so I don't enjoy them as a "special product" any more.
I would say for NEW Audiophile titles on Vinyl, Acoustic Sounds ANALOGUE PRODUCTIONS 45rpm releases are fantastic and I've not been disappointed with them. However, I've not had good luck with their crazy expensive UHQR releases. I don't think they sound like they're worth $100+ and again, my Jethro Tull "Aqualung" was defective and had to be replaced. Recently, I picked up a Blu-Ray audio disc that was mastered in Dolby ATMOS of David Bowie's Ziggy Stardust and it blew my mind. I also have a bunch of multi-channel and Quad SA-CD's that are freaking amazing. Rhino just did a series of Blu-Ray audio discs called QUADIO mastered in DTS Master Audio and to be honest, I really haven't been messing around with records that much... Waiting for the Dolby ATOMS mix of "Purple Rain" to arrive Friday...can't wait. Just my 2 cents, take it for what it is.
If you are a collector then you will buy it just because it is another variation. If you just want the music then the original is how the artist intended you to hear their work.
I view them as remasters which are just "another opinion" of how the record should sound. I buy them out of curiosity to hear what the new opinion is. They aren't necessarily better...just different.
The MoFI One Step of Michael Jackson Thriller was very different to the original. If you want to listen to an exciting sound that "makes you want to dance" type of record, then stick with the original. If you want to hear a more analytical recording then the MoFI is possibly "better" in that regard. However, I found it unexceptional if you just want to enjoy the music and couldn't see myself buying another One Step of that type of music.
Take it this way, if you love the album and accept that MoFi or Acoustic Sounds is just another opinion of the sound rather than a definitive version then they are worth buying.
However, it is worth remembering that, using the Steely Dan UHQRs, sometimes they are using exactly the same master as a new recent reissue so you are paying USD125 for 2x45 rpm special vinyl and packaging for exactly the same Bernie Grundman master which might otherwise cost you USD30 (I don't know what the standard cost in the US is...).
The only difference is that the UmE edition is taken off the digital transfer whereas AP used the direct analog feed. If you believe that the high resolution digital transfer of the same master is inferior to the analogue feed used for the AP edition, then pay the difference and get the UHQR. Just be aware that you will get exactly the same tape dropouts and level changes in the channels and other tape blemishes just at "higher fidelity" (given the 45 rpm and perhaps quieter vinyl). The music will still sound the same.
Regards Anthony
"Beauty is Truth, Truth Beauty.." Keats
RE : The music will still sound the same
Just to clarify it seems you saying that adjustments made to the analog signal, or any sonic effects of parameters used to cut the vinyl, by the mastering engineer are included in the high resolution digital feed stored for creating other products (analog or digital). I've been thinking mastering a 2LP 45 rpm and a 33 rpm record would be 2 different jobs regardless of the source. One spin of the master, yes but 2 mastering jobs. I don't know but it seems intuitive to me. My first observation with 45 rpm is more bass - not sure if it's because 45 rpm allows more bass so the engineer lets it through or the engineer boosts it a bit.And who knows what kind of tweaking can go on in the digital realm? When I started writing this response my point was going to be that the playback system (the sonic character of the source components) could be the biggest reason they don't sound the same.
I'll agree that over time good analog and good digital tend to sound more similar and it seems that any lossless media format could "sound" the same as any other lossless media format. What's kind of BS though as CD quality and LP quality are only lossless in theory - practically speaking neither are likely to be lossless. I think 48/96 flac files are my best chances of getting lossless quality and an SACD player or a reel to reel tape player would be needed to support an actual lossless physical media in my home. I don't think things are going to sound the same when CDs and vinyl are involved.
Edits: 04/16/25
Yes, I am saying that the digital file is identical in that specific case - AP produced an SACD at the same time as the UHQR. That digital file is the one used by Ume for the standard 33rpm reissue.
"Remastering" doesn't necessarily mean that anything actually changes - take the Classic Records reissue of Kind of Blue by Bernie Grundman. The story goes that apart from pitch correcting the first side, Bernie pretty much did a straight transfer without EQ because the tapes were in such excellent condition and the brief was to give an experience as close to the Master as possible.
AP acquired the metal work from Classic Records when they bought it out so, from Chad's own mouth, the AP 2x45rpm UHQR and 33rpm UHQR are identical to the Classic Records "remastering". Any differences you might hear between the two editions are down to the mechanical anomalies that get transferred during the new 33rpm cut, plating/stamper duplication, QRP pressing quality and playback equipment. Each lacquer cut is in itself a unique sonic experience because the lathe rotation speed stability, the tape wow/flutter are all subtly variable. When you playback a digital file it is reproducing exactly the conditions at the time of the transfer.
The Impex reissue of Getz/Gilberto has the same dropouts and blemishes as the AP version because that it is the state of the master. For me personally, I don't find that acceptable to listen to or pay for if I can enjoy a blemish free version on an earlier edition. I also don't appreciate hearing tape wow. I wish the Plangent process was applied to a digital transfer. To each their own though.
The Tone Poet reissue of John Coltrane Blue Train is the same master for the digital release and the TonePoet vinyl - I compared the two and the dynamic range and frequency response are identical. No additional compression was used for the digital release and the peak level was well below FS. So playing the Tone Poet vinyl edition is just a more troublesome way of playing the CD IMO!
LP is the most lossy - don't forget that as the groove radius decreases, the HF output is rolled off due to the groove wavelengths decreasing. Most styli are oversized and can't trace the inner grooves accurately - the SLC is 7um, the Ortofon Fine Line is 8um, FG/Replicant is 5um, Shibata 6um. You need 5um or less to trace 20kHz on the inner grooves and even finer as the amplitude goes up. So the Ogura PF 3um or MicroLine are the only two that meet that requirement.
That's even before you factor in alignment issues, antiskate problems, azimuth problems, vibrations and everything adding distortion to the signal.
45 rpm would sound better overall partly because of the higher rotational speed improves the HF retrieval with the normal styli in common use and secondly because the higher rotational speed reduces the distortion due to tracking error by a factor of 1.35 which improves phase consistency between channels and therefore better sonic imaging. The subjective improvement in the bass is possibly also related to the bearing rumble shifting up in frequency and potentially being masked more by the signal being played. Interestingly I have read an interview with some (pop) cutting engineers from The Exchange (in an article in HFNRR) who said they preferred the sound of 33 and thought it had a better bottom end. They would cut at both speeds and let the client decide for themselves. I don't take their opinion seriously .....
CDs sound like s@#$ if they have been poorly mastered which many are unfortunately. An incredible number from the 80s, 90s and early 2000s all have clipped waveforms because the morons mastering them set the gain to hit 0dB even before they start compressing the hell out of the master.
Regards Anthony
"Beauty is Truth, Truth Beauty.." Keats
I don't disagree that the analog signal on the tape is identical to a high resolution digital capture derived from it. It's probably an academic exercise given the right software to convert that digital back into an analog signal and compare the 2 to determine if they are identical enough. What I disagree with is that what gets cut into the 33 rpm metal work and the resulting LPs are going to be identical to what is cut into the 45 rpm metal work and the resulting LPs. And even in your response you describe why these differences exist even if everything is done to make them as same as possible. Records pressed off the same stampers can sound different. The idea the a 45 rpm and 33 rpm from the same master tape are going to sound the same doesn't ring true to me in the least even if every effort possible to make it true - and in some ways this might not be the best for either of the cuts. I would think mastering choices would be made to get the most out of the master based on getting the most out of media which would be contrary to making them sound the same. Unless of course there are not real advantages to doing 45 rpm and it's just a marketing gimmick to sell records at higher prices.
We actually agree on the 33rpm, 45rpm thing - 45 rpm definitely sounds better.
Perhaps I wasn't clear, but I meant that when I said:
"Any differences you might hear between the two editions are down to the mechanical anomalies that get transferred during the new 33rpm cut, plating/stamper duplication, QRP pressing quality and playback equipment. Each lacquer cut is in itself a unique sonic experience because the lathe rotation speed stability, the tape wow/flutter are all subtly variable."
The point being that the act of cutting a new lacquer, whether at 33 or 45rpm is itself a unique sonic version. Absolutely we will hear differences.
Also, I commented on how 45rpm would definitely sound better in relation to the immediate 1.35x reduction in distortion and wider bandwidth possible which also means that "real world" styli in common use such as the SLC, Shibata and Fine Line types as well as plain vanilla elliptical tips which are all around the 6 to 8 um range will perform far better with 45rpm.
My point was that the Steely Dan records are fundamentally taken from the same master. For some, knowing that the Ume edition is from a digital source makes it a hard pass, but I'm not such a SD fan that I would buy the UHQR. I am comfortable in knowing that the Ume edition for <1/4 the price would be "most of the way" there in equivalence and I use a Microline or SAS for playback so the differences between 33 and 45 are less significant to me. I am of course at the mercy of the vinyl pressing quality which is often a little noisier than UHQRs and there isn't the same pride of ownership that comes with the UHQR. If the aim is to get as close as possible to the master used to cut the disc, then IMO, 45rpm is the best and I have many. I passed on the 33rpm AP Kind of Blue UHQR and waited for the 2x45rpm UHQR specifically to get "the best" version. 45 rpm does mean that surface noise shifts up in frequency a bit (you hear it in the lead in groove) and the records have to be flat to fully realize the quality.
Regards Anthony
"Beauty is Truth, Truth Beauty.." Keats
Yep and I agreed with you on that stuff but I thought somewhere in that response you doubled down on the they will sound the same (or be identical comment) comment. No need for me to go back and try to prove it, if I'm wrong I apologize. At this point it seems we are on the same page.
I really like the 45 rpm versions and am willing to spend more on them than 33 rpm version (from the same label). That said for the Doors LA Woman the 45 rpm was my favorites until I heard the 33 rpm UHQR. The process, vinyl formulations and playback speed are different. I wish I could say the process, special vinyl and playback speed are solely responsible for the differences but I don't really know how much the mastering engineer has to do with it.
It was probably my own fault - by talking about the digital source vs analogue source thing and also the anecdote about the UK cutting engineers saying they preferred 33rpm.
Anyway, we are definitely on the same team I think for appreciating 45 rpm when done well.
The mastering engineer thing is an interesting one that I am on the fence about. Chad is using several different ones to do his products, BernieG, Kevin Gray, Ryan K Smith and someone else I can't remember.
The way I see it is that putting EQ choices aside (if indeed any are applied to the original), you are also basically hearing the recording through the Mastering playback system so it's like taking your favourite record around to a friend's place to hear it through their system.
As a consumer, it is impossible for us to know which mastering system equipment is "best".
Kevin Gray has done a cut for Kind Of Blue apparently - I tried to get a copy but I keep getting sent the wrong pressing so I have given up on that, but I wouldn't be suprised to hear it sounding different to my other versions, although I wouldn't have a clue which is closer to the original master tape particularly as the tape degrades slightly with each play. BG's version is possibly the closest but may or may not "sound" the best depending on so many factors related to the mastering chain. KPG has his reference tube based system which possibly might make the vintage jazz stuff sound better.
As I mentioned before, I am OK with remasters and MoFi reissues and AP reissues - I treat them as just another opinion on the sound. Some I may like and others not so, but that's OK for me. The only problem is I end up with an ever-growing collection!
Regards Anthony
"Beauty is Truth, Truth Beauty.." Keats
Of course Id like to pay less for high quality pressings, but most of mine have been received as gifts. Better to get a $60.00 gift you love than a more expensive one you wont use.
My experience is they are quite good to great.
All have been very quiet, clearer, more dynamic, lively and present than most run of the mill standard pressings.
I find I rarely listen to most of my original '70s, '80s as they pale in comparison to High quality pressings.
Just last night I played an Analog Production's pressing of Jazz at the Pawn Shop. Had my eyes closed and actually caught myself smiling from some of the sounds coming through the speakers. At times almost felt as if I was there.
Ive posted previously about how good and very good pressings/ digital files sound great on my mid level, revealing system. However, fair and just ok pressings or digital versions can be lackluster, fatigueing or annoying to listen to.
So yes, $$$ pressings are worth the cost if that is what you value and enjoy.
I own at least a 20 MoFi pressings; some are worth the hype and some are just "good" but not better than the originals of the same recordings. It's hard to predict which is which.
Even the ones made after JVC stopped making supervinyl are very good.
I don't know much about the albums made after Mo-Fi declared bankruptcy in November 1999 and sold out to Music Direct.
I do know that they do not do 1/2 speed mastering anymore and that they were cutting their albums from a digital copy of the master tape instead of the master tape and didn't bother to tell their customers about it.
They got sued over that and lost.
Tre'
Have Fun and Enjoy the Music
"Still Working the Problem"
Worth is in the ear of the listener.
Although the majority of those I've bought do sound better than originals.
.
That's something you have to decide. IMO usually they aren't my favorite versions of the LPs when I compare them but most of them sound pretty good and are somewhat a bargain when trying to find nm originals. I do both, used to only buy high quality of reissues of my favorite LPs, but these days I do less of that and actually prefer new high quality reissues of albums that I've never owned before.
My favorite reissues are 2 LP 45 rpm editions of single disk originals but those are usually $60 each. I've also found 2LP 33 rpm reissues of single disk 33 rpm originals that sound great too (usually these are records that were like 25 minutes per side in the original release.
It's very frustrating trying to buy nm early pressings or originals through the mail. It's like the market is full of dumpster divers who seem to think record grading is a subjective thing. Most of them seem to think adjusting the price is a fair solution if you don't agree with the grade they put on the disk. It's hard to find good sellers.
Original label reissues can be had for $20 or so and some of them sound great, same thing for many analog era pressings especially if nm is not required. So it's really only worth it if someone doesn't mind spending the money.
the speakers are fantastic for the money, I would not hesitate to get one of their TTs.
...regards...tr
| FAQ |
Post a Message! |
Forgot Password? |
|
||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Top of Page ]
[ Contact Us ]
[ Support/Wish List ]
[ Copyright © 2025, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]