MFSL now doing 7 Bob Dylan titles in mono (hybrid SACD)

Discussion in 'Music Corner' started by agentalbert, Sep 8, 2016.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. teag

    teag Forum Resident

    Location:
    Colorado
    And you 2 will buy it!!
    :laugh:
     
  2. John1026

    John1026 Member

    Location:
    Valencia
    No, I won't. CD is good enough for mono, but even ripping it to MP3 320kbps, you can't tell the difference.
     
  3. Richard--W

    Richard--W Forum Resident

    MFSL may have given up on mono Dylan vinyl and SACD's now that THE MONO BOX has been released, do you think?
     
  4. lil.fred

    lil.fred SeƱor Sock

    Location:
    The East Bay

    Huh? The mono box was in 2010, yet a steady stream of MFSL Dylan monos have come out since then and are listed as forthcoming.
     
    Shvartze Shabbos and George P like this.
  5. Richard--W

    Richard--W Forum Resident

    Was it that long ago? How times flies.
     
  6. This Heat

    This Heat Forum Resident

    Location:
    Chicago, IL
    This thread is confusing

    Why not issue it in 128 mp3s. Who says you need 320? I mean you really just need a Crosley to play those old times mono records from the 1960s recorded with a big cone because microphones hadn't been invented yet or something
     
    InStepWithTheStars and CBackley like this.
  7. Flaming Torch

    Flaming Torch Forum Resident

    Just got BIABH mono MFSL sacd. Opened it up and inside is a Ry Cooder sacd Paradise and Lunch. Not the fault of the UK based dealer 0f high end audio as the sacd was sealed and numbered. Anyone else had this sort of thing happen with the incredibly expensive MFSL.
    Also got the mono sacd of Bob Dylan and that is fine.
     
  8. mr.datsun

    mr.datsun Incompletist

    Location:
    London
    Can you tell us who you ordered from? I'm thinking of buying and don't want the hassle of returning it.

    Also, is there any idea that it is a particlular range of s/n's that is at fault? Could people who have experienced tell us which no. they have, please?
     
  9. teag

    teag Forum Resident

    Location:
    Colorado
    Wow. That is amusing.
     
    CBackley likes this.
  10. Flaming Torch

    Flaming Torch Forum Resident

    It was Diversevinyl UK but as the sacd was sealed this was how they would have received it. I have often bought from them and they are very good. I pre ordered ages ago when the series of MFSL mono sacds/vinyl was announced. My number for BIABH is 002077. The debut mono Bob Dylan sacd is fine and sounds lovely to my wooden ears on my tin system.
    I agree re the hassle of returning it and BIABH is no longer showing in stock at Diversevinyl so that will be a good 3 to 4 week delay I guess.
    I have bought over a 1000 cds and records over the years and the only comparable incident like this was an EMI musicassette of Deep Purple Who Do We Think We Are that was faulty that EMI at Hayes replaced when I wrote to them ( back in 1973. Have to say not very impressed with the ridiculously expensive Mr MFSL.
     
  11. mr.datsun

    mr.datsun Incompletist

    Location:
    London
    Thank-you. I'm not going to hold it against diverse vinyl, but there are cheaper places I have in mind, anyway. And thanks for the number. One or two more s/n's might indicate the extent of the problem....
     
  12. Flaming Torch

    Flaming Torch Forum Resident

    Thanks. Hopefully the 3000 copies will hang around for a bit before they are all gone.
     
  13. mr.datsun

    mr.datsun Incompletist

    Location:
    London
    Yes, I bought the stereo Bringing It quite a while after it first came out.
     
  14. John1026

    John1026 Member

    Location:
    Valencia
    I was serious, not trying to be amusing.
     
  15. mr.datsun

    mr.datsun Incompletist

    Location:
    London
    You seem to be suggesting all sorts of things with no evidential support. That old recordings (analogue) are automatically reduced in quality (do you mean frequency response?) compared with modern (digital) recordings. And that for some reason a mono recording encodes to mp3 better than a stereo recording. But more than that you are suggesting that a mono recording compressed to 320 mp3 is somehow lossless.

    I guess that that's why you are not being taken too seriously at this moment.
     
  16. teag

    teag Forum Resident

    Location:
    Colorado
    That's why it's so funny.
     
    CBackley and George P like this.
  17. You said it all!
     
    teag likes this.
  18. John1026

    John1026 Member

    Location:
    Valencia
    How can old recordings on degrade analog tape be considered worthy for SACD? And mono recordings on SACD? It's an overkill. MP3 @ 320kpbs is good enough for mono.
     
  19. mpayan

    mpayan A Tad Rolled Off

    Why stop at mono?
     
    mr.datsun likes this.
  20. For a guy with such a cool avatar, you seem to be unaware of the format potential. "old recording on degraded tape" is nonsense. To begin with, Google - MFSL Blues In Orbit SACD and then go from there.
     
    eelkiller likes this.
  21. John1026

    John1026 Member

    Location:
    Valencia
    I love SACD, but old analog tapes with hiss and tape noise, that were poor quality tape and were recorded with a tapehead that wasn't aligned properly or cleaned, is not worthy of SACD. SACD is for high resolution analog tape that was properly recorded on clean equipment.
     
  22. I see. To my ears, the two Bob Dylan mono SACD's do sound superior vs the redbook from the mono box. YMMV.
     
  23. This Heat

    This Heat Forum Resident

    Location:
    Chicago, IL

    And you know that this is not the case with the Dylan mono SACDS how exactly?
     
    Shvartze Shabbos likes this.
  24. John1026

    John1026 Member

    Location:
    Valencia
    Because if Dylan's recordings are in mono, it means they were recorded way back in the late 1950s or early 1960s, before stereo recording was introduced. Poor quality analog tapes from those years are degraded and are not worthy of SACD.
     
  25. This Heat

    This Heat Forum Resident

    Location:
    Chicago, IL

    Um.... you do realize they were recording in stereo at that point but still mixing a mono version?

    Do you actually know anything about how tapes are transferred into the digital realm?

    I am going to assume you are just having fun trolling this thread.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page

molar-endocrine