Hi-Res Download News (HDTracks, ProStudioMasters, Pono, etc.) & Software/Mastering Part 12**

Somehow the US analog masters for Countdown To Ecstasy and Pretzel Logic sounded just fine when they were transferred to DSD in 2014 for the Japan SACD...

 

I'm not sure any of the remasters best the original digital masters Nichols supervised in the '80s. But those can be hard to come by.

 

Technics Tracks is closing end June and Hi-Res catalogue seems to be disappearing off the site, so if anyone (like me) needs to remember to use that £50 voucher before the end of the month, get to it. Any good box set ideas?

 

Maybe they do or maybe they don’t (IMO they do). But they certainly show there’s nothing wrong with the tapes.

 

In your opinion. Plenty of people don't care for the subsequent remasters, and Steely Dan's actual engineer said the tapes were in bad shape.

Who you gonna believe? Their engineer, or a rando on the Internet?

 

Actually I trust my ears and Nichols has said some things over the years that were headscratchers.

In the end, do you think those SACDs sound like the tapes are in bad shape?

 

I thought Gaucho sounded pretty good when it came out on multichannel SACD in the 2000's. But that was a full remix.

I thought the remastered Dan CDs that came out around the same time sounded OK, but there was a ton of debate about them, including multiple threads here on the forum. If the guy who engineered the albums said the tapes didn't sound pristine anymore, I'm taking his word for it.

 

Why do you keep talking about the old sub-optimally mastered remasters? I specifically only mentioned the 2014 SHM-SACDs of Countdown To Ecstasy and Pretzel Logic which were transfered flat (I think) to DSD from the US analog masters - mostly because they are examples of what the analog masters to DSD transfers being used for upcoming MQA CDs might sound like.

Have you heard those? I don’t see how anyone who has heard those can say those tapes (if they are indeed the original masters) are in bad shape - regardless of what Roger Nichols said. And if they’re not the original analog masters, they sound at least as good - if not better - than Nichols’ transfers.

 

There's been considerable debate regarding whether those SMH-SACDs were taken from the actual original masters. Some people thought they sounded great, others thought they sounded grainy and slightly compressed. YMMV.

 

Minutiae. You can find pedantic criticism about pretty much everything here. Hell, people argue about digitally identically files. And many people who throw the word “compression” around, but have little idea what it actually sounds like (and even argue that things which are demonstrably less compressed are more compressed - and vice versa).

So I take it you haven’t actually heard them, but are coming down on the side of those who debate their provenance and quality?

 

Agree completely about the Countdown and Pretzel SHM-SACDs. After hearing so many comments about issues, or possible issues with the master tapes, transfers, etc, those disks sound incredibly good. Best I've ever heard those albums.

 

Anyone bite on the two recent 38 Special releases? How do they sound?

 

Where did you hear that?

 

According to Rolling Stone "The album will be available as a double CD or a triple LP." No mention of digital.

The Who Prep 'Live at the Fillmore East 1968' Album

 

I heard samples posted here and thought they sounded slightly grainy and compressed, like analog copies. Not bad, and not dramatically different, but not superior in any way. Both the original masters from the '80s and the final remasters Nichols did sounded better to me.

But that's a lotta lettuce to shell out for a marginal difference at best (and no "improvement" to my ears).

YMMV.

 

Well that's disappointing, I held off buying the CD to wait for a higher res version. Guess I'll pick up the CD this afternoon . Thanks.

 

I’m trying to find out the same thing.

 

Of course you know if you do that it will be at HDTracks next week, 192/24...

 

Thewho.com Administrator, Richard told me.

 

Absolutely! I just picked up a vinyl copy this afternoon, so I'll wait awhile for a digital version to see what shakes out.

 

But mastering decisions aside, did the tapes sound like they were in bad shape?

 

Based on the samples, they sounded grainy and compressed. That can be a symptom of degradation, yes. I would expect pristine tapes to never exhibit more of either attribute than was found on earlier transfers.

 

So not in “bad” shape?

 

Sounds like bad shape to me, if transfers done literally decades earlier sound better.

Unless you're asserting there's something wrong with the transfers themselves. Which I suppose is always possible.

 

Ummm...ok.