Bruce Springsteen BORN TO RUN, final comparison of 3 CBS/Columbia CD versions by SH..

Had to go back and look. Real odd that the same matrix can have two different masterings. New one on me, but it seems to be the case based on this thread. Learn something new every day.

 

Ah, OK. Yeah...much to the chagrin (I imagine) of those looking for mastering #2.

Honestly, I suspect plenty of people would find mastering #1 preferable for this album. #2 doesn't just sound like #1 but with an increase in resolution. There is a significant shift in tonal balance, which may or may not be to someone's taste.

 

Just as well, because mastering #2 is very hard to find in the UK. I've manage to find a copy of the 35DP-21-1 1A1 matrix version, yet never set eyes on a US made copy.

 

Hah! Much earlier than my 41A7 then! Is that a Japan-for-Europe release?

My remarks reflect in part my own impression when I picked up mastering #2 a while back after first having #1. Some (many?) of the comments in this thread had me expecting something a bit different than what I got. Steve's comment on #2 is instructive - "Don't tell me about the guitar, don't care, the sax, don't care, drums, don't care." On the other hand, if I try to match EQ on the two, they do sound similar. #2 seems to have been made using (as Steve suggested) a better ADC, though, which evident both in listening to it and in analysis using some DSP tools. For me at least, #2's relative strengths are mostly enjoyed after re-EQing it.

 

I wonder how the new remaster will match up to version 2 ? I'm certainly going to keep my old copy no matter what.

 

Yes, that's a Japan for Europe one. A Japan one would be much harder to find, and probably more expensive. My new replaces my 41A7 one, which has seen better days (doesn't rip without one or two errors).

 

Fun reading

 

I think the new box set is going to use the recent remasters for "Born to Run" and "Darkness...." Is that not the case?

 

I've got a question for those of us in the UK. I have a non-barcode Japan for Europe CD, matrix 35DP-21 41A6+++++ which IIRC features mastering #1.

Which mastering is featured on the non-barcode (later) pressings made in Austria? #1 or #2?

 

No, the Bob Ludwig interview on backstreets.com indicates new remasters for both although in the case of BtR he mentions how happy Bruce was with the previous remaster so I'm not expecting a significant difference but I'm hopeful because in the same interview he has some encouraging comments about the over-compression and the loudness wars.

http://backstreets.com/remasters.html

 

I think it might be a case by case basis. I asked a seller who had one and the matrix was the same as a later mastering 3 US version.

 

Cool - thank.

 

What about the best LP pressing of Born to Run?

 

My favorite (I have three different ones) is the very first pressing. It usually has a sticker on the back updating the producer info. It'll have "M.C.R." in the deadwax, for "Master Cutting Room."

 

Bah! Took a chance at Half Price Books.....ended up getting a #3. The 'Made In Japan' got me. It is a 'Made in Japan Matrix 1A CK33795 16B'. Oh well, only out $5.42.

 

I'm not even sure...

 

http://www.ebay.com/itm/Born-to-Run...151448254087?pt=Music_CDs&hash=item234304f687

This peaked my interest for a moment thinking it was a cheap "mastering # 2" in the bin but the matrix is DIDP 50021 21B3 but apparently does have the Digital Audio Corp in the hub. I guess it is not one of the confirmed mastering # 2.

 

The B's are the 3's

 

Is there a way of identifying #2 without seeing the disc? The local places I usually frequent have the used discs sealed in plastic so all I can see I'd the case.

 

Very unlikely, especially here in Europe (need an US pressed disc).

 

My copy is a DIDP-050021 G2 1A 11. Is this confirmed as a #3?

 

Nope. I have seen much artwork that matches but almost always a #3 inside. Also have seen smooth cases now 3 times with correct artwork that had #3's inside. The Matrix must be viewed to determine or EAC peak values

If it's not on the chart then get the EAC peaks using EAC or CueTools. The times also vary slightly but that may differ between the type of device or transport so should not be used as primary ID method.

{below courtesy of Ben}
Mastering #2. EAC levels: 73.4, 89.4, 69.8, etc. EAC time: 39:34:07
Mastering #3. EAC levels: 93.5, 99.9, 86.4, etc. EAC time: 39:28:20


P.S. Contrary to the opinions of the recent Springsteen remasters fans, in my opinion #2 still great exceeds the 2014 mastering. As the OP mentioned in first post the vocals are the key to this album and how it was recorded + mixed. #2 has that aplenty and #1 is not bad in that respect, the 2014 lacks all that in favor of emphasizing the parts that won't sound good unless played via AM radio. People like different types of sound of course, no one is wrong or right, but for fans of this album please don't settle for the 2014 until you have least heard and compared it to the #2 [heh heh I said number 2]

 

I'm not fan of articles written in this style, especially the pedantic tripe of the last 3 paragraphs, however the guy does make some good points about the 2014 Born To Run remaster.

http://ultimateclassicrock.com/is-remastering-always-a-good-idea/

 

So I took another listen to this album today. I think this time around, I'm feeling a stronger preference for mastering #2 than I'd had previously. I do think it benefits from a bit of EQ still, though.

This disc is surprisingly scarce. I haven't seen another one since I found mine. Does anyone know how many cases there are of a unique early-DADC mastering? I think my copy of Dylan's Real Live might be another one, but I'm not sure. It seems like it was not a particularly common occurrence.