"Better Records" website and their business practices as they apply to our hobby*

Huh?

 

I'm still making peace with the fact that someone in the world paid forty bucks for a common-as-muck Linda Ronstadt LP. Audiophiles, y'all crazy.

 

I buy the basic premise that pressings vary and that spectacular ones do turn up. If it were a 180 gram Record Store Day repressing it would have cost about the same.

 

Exactly.

Look at the verbiage from the Analogue Productions Guaraldi reissue I posted:

"hall of shame pressing"

"debunked"

"consistently execrable"

"purveyors of bad sounding vinyl from day one"

"goes off the rails"

"bloated"

"much-too-heavy"

"poorly-defined"

"makes a mess"

"$50 waste of money" (now THAT'S an interesting comment, considering)

"Bad records don't get played much" (thanks for clearing that up for us, but that isn't the only reason a particular record might remain pristine--it might have a careful owner who keeps it that way)

WOW.

Actually, I don't mind a vicious negative review if I can be reasonably certain the reviewer hates it in good faith.

I've bought plenty of reissues over the years that infuriated me for bad sound. Most involved really ****ty digital masterings that were simply pressed to vinyl, put in deluxe packaging, priced sky high and marketed as something 'audiophile' when in reality they represented real crap ass throwaway audio.

The Analogue Productions Vince Guaraldi reissue of Jazz Impressions of Black Orpheus isn't one of them. I doubt I'll ever get rid of mine.

For me, the samples I've posted using my copy as a reference to examine TP's review of it puts the credibility issue into very sharp perspective.

That's all I need.

YMMV.

 

I was wondering when this would come up.

 

I prefer my bass notes to be note-like. The more note-like the better I say.

 

The only problem is they can become too note-like, and threaten to become actual notes. We don't want that.

 

My theory: TP and his cohorts did their Jazz Impressions of Black Orpheus shoot-out in some kind of blind-test, playing all of their originals and reissues, and through some kind of mix-up TP's notes actually refer to the MFSL reissue from the early '80s. That would make some kind of sense.

I digitized the Analogue Productions vinyl version at 24/192 when I listened to it last night.

I'm listening to that audio file right now.

As far as I can tell, what I am hearing bears no relationship whatsoever to TP's review.

None.

 

Could take an F-grade down to F-minus.

 

Thank you so much for that thoughtful, insightful response, and thank you for sharing your story!

 

I have to hand it to everyone here. Really. I've largely been lurking on this thread. Where TP is happy to get down in the muck and insult on a dime, this thread has been far more diplomatic. I know that's by "Gort" force but, given that our fearless leader's work was trashed, it can't be an easy directive to follow. Way to take the higher and far more respectable road.

Ed

 

Yes basically, according to the WA uppercrust afficianados a US pressing no matter how hot is hampered from day one by poor mastering of copy tapes, or just poor mastering http://forums.stevehoffman.tv/threads/beatles-white-album-what-pressing.280899/ -somethings up anyway and that link is a place to start. With all the different styles and recording techniques on it, I suppose the whole mastering thing can get glossed over on this record as being less of an issue than the issues with recording -see the link above...

White Album quoted because: it makes no sense for someone who would want a nice copy of an album like that, to buy one and not even know the country of origin or release year -what, does he tell you after the credit card or Paypal has gone through? It seems even sillier if the hot stamper is a US copy when compared with opinions on a site like this (see link above). I just thought it kind of mattered to know something more about a record if I am going to plunk down 250% more for it then normal, Dusty Groove was mentioned because they throw tons of stuff up daily -with actual pictures! -and descriptions! -it's crazy! -they make no hot stamper claims, Dusty just does a better job telling you what you are buying and they don't try to hawk the price up the wazoo.
A site that sells high dollar vinyl should at least show a picture and be more descriptive.
They are only as credible as the average clown Ebay seller as far as I'm concerned if their description of the White Album is just the title and a stock photo with a price.

I don't remember mentioning Sabbath, but maybe?
I was kind of verbally steamrolling my post I suppose. Somehow all the trimmings just make it confusing, so all I can say is that my post probably should have read like this:
the idea of a hot stamper: yes. It makes sense and of course it's true.
Are these guys the legit and holy grail hot stamper resource? No.

 

I'm a copywriter by trade, and I must say I admire Tom Port's chops in this area.

 

Lean back on the couch for half an hour with a moist towel on your forehead and the feeling will go away.

 

Just as a compare and contrast to TP's review of the Analogue Productions reissue of Jazz Impressions of Black Orpheus, I thought I'd provide this review from Vinylphile Magazine, issue #1, which you can download here:

http://www.vinylphilemag.com/magazine/vinylphile-001.php



I'm on the same page as this reviewer when he says "...Steve Hoffman and Kevin Gray have done a wonderful job...The clarity, dynamics, and top-to-bottom coherency are fantastic, belying this recording's age...it is worth every penny."

Like the reviewer, I haven't heard an original, but my interest is so piqued now I may go into town this weekend and look for one.

In the meantime...I have heard an original mono (didn't like it and didn't keep it), the early 80s MFSL (which I still have in storage somewhere but haven't listened to in decades -- I remember it having really over-the-top EQ boosts like a lot of MFSL from the era), seems like I had another issue 15 or 20 years ago...did Speakers Corner ever issue this? No memory of the sound, but I think I have a least one more copy of this album somewhere and I vaguely remember it being Speakers Corner but I could be wrong about that ...

Fast forward 10 or 15 years and I bought the Analogue Productions reissue and very pleased with it within the first few seconds of dropping the needle into track 1, disk 1 and have been ever since. It is hard for me to conceive of someone being displeased with this and the TP review of it has no bearing to reality IMO. Either through error or outright disingenuousness it sounds like he substituted his notes on a completely different reissue of the title and grafted them onto his review of the Analogue Productions issue.

Now, might an original sound better? Sure, that's a press of a 50-year younger tape. Is it certain to sound better? Not at all. I don't have a huge collection of SH remasters, but those I do have I prefer by and large to the originals I also own.

And (I'm listening to the AP Impressions ... again as I write) I enjoy the hell out of this issue each and every time. Very happy with the purchase.

Going back to the TP review, I am reminded that anytime you read reviews, editorials, op-ed's, etc., you have to be on the lookout for weasel phrasing, like this:

"Seaching the web I am glad to see that no one seems to have anything nice to say about it as of this writing. No one should, but that has not deterred the reviewers and forum posters in the past."

I was surprised at first reading that phrase -- it said to me the AP reissue had garnered bad reviews by dint of the phrase "...no one seems to have anything nice to say about it as of this writing." I read, "nothing nice to say = something bad to say."

Not.

I have scanned the 'Net for several days and I have found one, count it -- one review and that's the one I posted above and it's a good one.

So, one has to ask oneself how does there being no reviews (save the one I posted above) equate to "...no one seems to have anything nice to say about it..." ?

It only equates if you engage in a little bit of linguistic sleight-of-hand, which, of course, I call BS on.

YMMV.

 

And I agree. I recall the day (and it was only a few years ago by my recollection) that Raunch (I do believe he was the first to discover this, so he gets the credit) that I A-B'd a Doors MH Monarch orig. big E logo red label to a non Monarch with the same label. The winner was clear - the Monarch. You learn something every day. And I am happy to admit it. Same goes for the sf/atl Deja Vu, the RL Band & LZ II, the pecko LP's and so on and so on.

 

Within reason it is always good to listen to vintage US pressings from wherever in the country they came from, sure we know a MO will likely sound good. In many cases the best might just be a Monarch, but certainly not always -I've had about 4 or 5 MO pressings of Goat's Head Soup and only one had that verified MO sound that is alluring. I also had a RI pressing that had an identical signature in the sound, which I think is telling of the parts for pressing coming from the same lacquer. Come to think of it I know the magic comes from some CTH pressings as well, and I think SO or Sonic on the east coast was affiliated with Monarch. I have a few rock lps from Columbia that came out in the seventies that sound amazing with hand etchings that I have yet to figure out where they came from, so I think some veer off the map with no plant code and unknown etchings.
As far as Pecko, or Porkys, ATGPs or whatever, there are no guarantees because I have had some stinkers with the Pecko etching and some GPs that didn't cut it. I also have a LZ2 (second cat. number) with GP on both sides pressed at RI that sounds way better than either a MO or PR RL LZ2 that I have had -to be fair condition was a factor in all of them but that particular GP press kicked butt over either RLs I had, and an earlier GP that I had.
This is all on my system of course and with a different deck and cartridge in place now my impressions might change.
I do have bias against certain plants when I see their codes on a label and expect them to sound dull -but have learned to ignore that and just listen sometimes because you might just be surprised.
I thought of this mainly because of that big E MH pressing you mentioned, I had a copy that I just fell in love with a couple of years ago, but sold it because I had a keeper copy on the shelf already and needed to sell some stuff.
It really sounded magical and live -I never found out where it was pressed, and didn't keep that disc because it had a line across one side and I always think that down the road the mark will affect the value, so it gets put in the out bin.
Because I came across it out here in the midwest I'm doubtful that it was a MO, but it really delivered whatever it was.
This is essentially the meat of what hot pressings are and it is fascinating and fun archaeology to discover them. I came upon an Australian pressing last year that was from the very early eighties that just blew my mind how good it sounded, all scuffed up to boot, -but I read stuff that is all over the place on them and certainly can't expect every record I stumble on that comes from down under to do the same.
BTW what does the sf stand for where you use it in your second to last line: sf/atl Deja Vu?

 

Sam Feldman, legendary mastering engineer who worked for Bell Sound, and Atlantic Studios later.

http://www.discogs.com/artist/517916-Sam-Feldman

 

It's absolutely plausible; the majors pressed far more per stamper than the generally held view that the limit is around 1,000 records.
The manager of production at EMI UK put their plants figure at up to 5,000 records per stamper, but note too that back in the day they also had a dedicated music test department that religiously auditioned for pressing faults.

Now ask yourself, given the choice, which record would you choose from a 10,000 pressing run, the 100th or the 10,000th?

 

I had heard 2,000 more than once but never 1,000.

Well if the 100th pressing had a warp or non-fill and the 10,000th didn't I'd probably go for the 10,000th. If I couldn't listen to the records, sure, I'd take the earlier copy--why not avoid any potential problems that the quality control team might miss? But besides the fact that in reality there is no way to know when a record was pressed in a stamper's life from looking at matrix numbers or the package, I have never seen any hard evidence comparing two copies of an album where one copy is of higher fidelity and where that record is known with some degree of certainty to be from the beginning of a stamper run whereas the inferior sounding copy is known to be from the end of a stamper run. I think the biggest problem with proving that this difference is related to stamper life is that in most scenarios both records will be used and there's all kinds of differences that can arise from usage through the years.

I've never fashioned myself to have any type of superhuman hearing, which probably has something to do with why I put faith in the factories to carry out quality control in such a way that I won't be able to hear a difference between two unplayed copies of an album from the same stamper where one is from the beginning and one from the end of the stamper's run. I do in fact believe that there's value in providing a service where one sifts out the inferior-sounding copies of a record, I just can't help but think it has more to do with the equipment each record has been played on.

 

In bold:
I'm not so sure, back in the late 60's through late 70's the plants were pumping out an amazing number of LP's. As I understand it they pushed the number of pressings per stamper as far as they could and still get a decent LP. Speaking of mainly US pressings. Take the title Who's Next. Big difference between a W1/W2 press, and the others. And I have heard 1C pressings that sounder sharper than 1A's. Stamper life maybe?

 

A little late to the thread and not wanting to go through 40 pages, has anyone blind A-B tested your best copy vs something you bought from better records ?

I'm going to do just that with LZ4 I have 1st UK version 1 in flawless condition that sound incredible and I just but a super hot from the site for $399 to do my own shoot out for my own piece of mind. I realize sonics aside my original will always be worth more than the super hot but I'm in it for the sonics not the collectibility

 

I look forward to the results

 

Either that or Port is a con artist. I've come across a fair number of con artists like Port in my life and I can spot them real fast. As I said previously, I spoke with Port on the phone once about 15 years ago and he tried take advantage of my ignorance and scam me out of something valuable I had in a trade for something of little value that he had, but he was not successful. That's the first and last time I had dealings with him. I have a deep hatred for people like Tom Port because I've been used and abused by people like him in the past. He's the worst kind of human being and I can only hope that karma will bite him real hard some day. If he was drowning I'd throw him a faulty life preserver. That's my opinion of Tom Port.