Digitally sourced vinyl that equals or betters the AAA original pressings.

Can we have some examples of titles were forum members have found the digitally remastered vinyl to better a first AAA pressing? Also colouration is not inherent in either vinyl or digital playback. Inferior playback equipment will introduce colouration. The aim of the best vinyl playback equipment is to eliminate colouration.

Looking for actual titles rather than the theory or opinion of why vinyl may sound different to CD. What digital files or CDs sound like of the same title is not relevant. Some comparisons between recent vinyl reissues based on hi-res files and the first pressings would be relevant to the thread title.

 

I have found none.
Also the Springsteen, if you refer to The Album Collection Vol 1 1973-1984, by all accounts was remastered by using the original analog master tapes with the exception of The River and Nebraska for obvious reasons.

 

Yes but the tapes were run through the Plangent process which converts to hi-res digital. Hi res files with improved sound taken from the masters.

 

You are right, I had totally forgotten about the Plangent!

 

Exactly.

The next time I hear somebody say that vinyl is inherently "warm" or that it always has "euphonic colorations" I think my head just might explode. If something is recorded/mastered warm then it should sound warm. If something is recorded/mastered thin and bright then it should sound thin and bright.

Also, let's not forget that there were plenty of inferior AAA reissues that were produced in the late 70's and early 80's (in the USA at least) that sound worse than nearly every new digitally sourced version.

 

My opinion is that digital is like a parabolic curve that approaches but never quite reaches the solid line of analogue. So for me, digital will be inferior, while still serving a purpose.

That said, in rare circumstances it maybe possible that a digitally remastered vinyl reissue could sound better than a first pressing. For example, a record pressed in the early 50's was incapable of reproducing all of the signal present on a full track 30 ips Ampex recorded master tape. It is known that several record companies deliberately compressed dynamics and rolled off frequency extremes because of limitations in cutting technology and home listening equipment. A careful high res digital remaster of the original tape, pressed with current technology into clean vinyl should be capable of better fidelity to the master than a circa early 50's pressing.

Best, Ross

 

The recent digital remaster of Kind of Blue sounds very, very nice on Vinyl. Still, I have it as a high resolution download, and I have a very fine DAC. There really is no reason to put another medium in the way when I can listen to it directly. Or so would seem to make the most sense. Still, there is something about the sound of the vinyl. Hard to explain.

 

The Stones ABKCO box is one of the best sounding examples of digital transfers to vinyl.

 

I'll go with the Kevin Gray cut of a Tommy and the recent reissue of the Who Sells Out

 

I'm usually a "vinyl guy" I suppose but I have a definite preference for the HDTracks mono 24.192 FLAC over the mono 180g LP reissue for Kind Of Blue. I figured the LP would sound better when I bought it, but the high-res digitial file was clearly better on my system. I'd chalk this up to the fact that a high-res digital source was used for the vinyl, but I have a few other examples where the LP beats the FLAC files somehow. For what it's worth, I find my analog and digital setups to be pretty comparable in sound quality.

I think that in theory AAA should sound better than high-res digital, but in reality there is significant perception bias involved. If someone knows an LP is AAA, they are much more likely to hear it as "natural" or "better" than the digital version.

 

I'm going to retract this previous statement. Last night, I compared some original gray label Capitol LPs of Frank Sinatra - Close to You to the 1983 MoFi reissue (which is possibly digital). I had to go through several vintage copies to find one that played cleanly on a song or two. In direct comparison, I ended up preferring best sounding original gray label to the MoFi. This was in terms of vibrancy, realism and natural eq. The Mofi of course killed the 1950s record in the surface noise department. But the voice was much more convincing on the original.

So, I'm back to this: I cannot think of a single title in my collection where a pressing that includes a digital step in the making will be preferable to the best all-analog pressing (if an AAA version exists).

 

I haven't had the opportunity to hear those. Are they preferable (to your ears) to the best UK originals and Classic Records reissues?

 

OK I will chip in with a couple of examples but will not swear they are better than UK first pressings but only damn close. Both were done from hi-res copies of masters cut at BG mastering using tube gear. They are the Mid period Fleetwood Mac box set and The Eagles box set. One can't say they are closer or further from the master tape sound but certainly the later Eagles albums are an improvement over Warner pressed originals. Of course I prefer the SH Hotel California to this and all versions I have heard. Mostly the FMs are better than the 'original' copies I have.

 

The recent Who reissues spank the Classic Records reissues to my ears, certainly for the first 3 LPs. I have an original "A Quick One" and the reissue is incredibly close to the sound of the original, unlike the Classic Records which is a mess.

 

It's been reported that D'Angelo's Black Messiah (All analog recording and mix) sounds better on vinyl cut from high res than the available high res download. Maybe mastering moves or flat digital transfer was given to the vinyl mastering engineer?

 

F'n human psychology...it's a mutha.

 

What about the Aerosmith reissues, most people have reported they are better than the originals. These were never confirmed all analog IIRC, they stated "Mastered form Original Source Tapes" or something like that but maybe they are AAA.

Lou Reed Rock n Rock Animal Kevin Gray mastering sounded better than the original to me.

What about some of the Sundazed reissues, they are typically cut from high res? Some of the Leonard Cohen ones sound outstanding. I need to compare here.

What about Hendrix reissue of COL and RB? I think it was stated these may have had a digital step. They are really good.

 

The Clash reissues by Drastic Plastic are VERY competitive with original pressings. For the self-titled debut, I remember comparing the Drastic Plastic reissue with my original UK. In some ways the Drastic Plastic was better, in others I preferred the original, but they were definitely on equal footing . I ended up keeping my original pressing, but it was personal preference. I wouldn't say one was better than the other.

I also have the Black Market Clash reissue that they did, and it sounds fantastic. I have no inclination to seek out an original.

 

Fela Kuti reissues on the Knitting Factory label sound outstanding. I haven't heard original pressings but I'd be willing to bet these are just as good, if not better. I'm just speculating, but originals might have been pressed on low quality vinyl.

 

I've always wondered about digital vinyl. I suppose some of the music is lost from the analogue tape, but somehow the vinyl groove, by definition, must add something, even if it is not the same as what is missing in the first place.

 

I have a Simply Vinyl pressing of the Byrds' Dr. Byrds & Mr. Hyde that is clearly mastered from a cd, but sounds better to my ears than any other pressing I've heard, including the cd itself and one of Tom Port's hot stampers.

 

Some have observed that the very low level noise from stylus/groove friction adds a subtle sense of ambience or space, especially if you have a system and room that reproduces low bass well. That may be so, but it is an artificial addition not present in the recording itself. I suppose this can give relatively dry and close-miked multi-track studio recording mixdowns a boost in that area where they might normally suffer by comparison to the real ambience of live recordings..

 

The stereo original of Sell Out on Track isn't that great. The UK twofer with A Quick One is actually better sounding. I really like this new pressing. It holds it own. I've yet to do an A/B with the Classic Records stereo LP. I remember thinking that the Classic pressing was on the brighter side, but my system has been completely overhauled since I last gave it a listen.

Tommy is closer. I remember being knocked out by the sound of the latest pressing when I spun it for the first time. I'd take it over the Classic. It doesn't make me want to reach for the original Track pressing either, although I'm sure most would disagree with me.

 

The Smashing Pumpkin 24/96 vinyl reissues of Mellon Collie and Adore sound overall better than the original vinyl pressings.

Trouble is, both original mixes were a little muddy - especially Adore. the digital mastering sounds better not due to the digital mastering but the remixing of the original tapes.

If the re-issues were done in analog and not 24/96 they would no doubt sound even better

 

I enjoy MOV's press of ELO's Out Of The Blue over the old US Jet