MoFi Tommy - UD I vs. UD II

There's been a lot of discussion here about how all UD (I) titles are better than their UD II counterparts. Tommy was mentioned as being one of these titles. Well, I've had a UD II copy for awhile, and just got a UD I copy to sample. My findings?

They are, for all intents and purposes, the same.

First of all, they just sound the same to me. Of course, my ears probably aren't the best, so I did the old invert trick - line them up side by side, then invert one, then play them back together. If they are the same, everything should cancel and you should get silence.

Doing so revealed an almost inaudible amount of white noise - you certainly have to turn things way up to hear it. No hint of the song itself, just noise.

Then for the heck of it, I decided to go back to the original (un-inverted) copies and add a little EQ to one, just to see what would happen (which is what MoFi supposedly did for the UDII, according to some). I then inverted the results and played them back - you can clearly hear the music, not just white noise.

Then, I thought, well, maybe the volume is a bit off on one due to the EQ, let's normalize both files. End result? Same thing - you can clearly hear the music.

Now, I'm not saying the two are bit accurate, but they are DAMN close - any differences have to be due to production, not any "tweaking" of the tapes for the UD II.

Conclusion? If you have the UDII, stick with it - don't bother hunting down a UDI.

 

Luke,

Thank you for all the time and effort spent researching this. I had my doubts, too, about the claims that the UDI is different than the UDII.

Need your further thoughts on something I tried with Dark Side of the Moon. I a/b'ed both the UDI and the UDII. While I found the UDII a bit crisper, brighter, both had good bottom end. Also they both have the same total playing time to the second. Would that confirm that the same source tape was used for both (albeit with eq'ing)?

Appreciate your thoughts!

Brian

 

Well, I don't have either copy, so I can't really confirm anything...

It sounds like they're probably from the same digital tape in some form or another. Try doing what I did and see what happens...

 

Go for it Luke.
Could the differences relate to different jitter levels in the 2 masterings? This (big unsupported speculation without knowledge to back it up) would cause a near cancellation. The data could even be exactly the same and the results sound different. It would be interesting to do a bit for bit analysis.

 

I'm assuming it's something along those lines - the same tape used, just small differences due to the equipment or whatnot.

Whatever the case, it's simply not enough to get excited about.

 

Does the computer analize definition, staging and seperation depth? Does the computer know what a real snare drum sounds like?

 

Hi Luke,

Great thread!!!

-Jeffrey

 

btomarra,

You mean you can't tell that the UD2 has a much skinnier sound stage or that the cymbals on the UD1 aren't muddy?

 

Yeah, it sure would. The more differences between the two, the more stuff you'll be able to hear when you do such a test.

Adding even the slightest bit of EQ or compression would make the result very audible. I even showed that. What we've got here is an almost inaudible amount of white noise.

They sure sound like it to me...

 

See my other posts. If the differences you say are there exist, they'd show up in such a test. They don't.

My ears tell me that the two are the same...

 

The sound stage is just as wide on the two copies.

The cymbals sound the same.

There are FAR greater differences between, say, the original Japanese Who's Next and the Canadian CD, and the differences there aren't even that great.

 

Someone (anyone with the tech know how) should do a jitter analysis of these 2 discs. If the data is the same, there can only be jitter differences causing these alterations in sound. Luke's experiment is an excellent idea, but needs to be extended.
Stereophile did stuff like this a while back and they were then at the cutting edge of tying sound comparisons to the tech problems causing the differences.
At any rate, who cares when you can listen to the far superior remix (pass me the ear trumpet, love.... Oh you're not my wife. Come closer so I can see you)

 

Originally posted by Dave
You mean you can't tell that the UD2 has a much skinnier sound stage or that the cymbals on the UD1 aren't muddy?

Luke,

I believe that you're gettin' side tracked here as I was referring to DSOTM and not Tommy here. With Tommy there is a slight difference in the sound, not a big one like with DSOTM. With a lot of the UD2's the only difference is that it sounds veiled and not as open (real) as the UD1 and not only once, but every time.

I've had friends try to fool my hearing before, by randomly choosing the UD1 or UD2 versions (me with my eyes closed), and so far I've caught it every single time. Coincidence? I don't think so, not over 20 times.

 

Hi Luke,
Do you have the older 2 cd edition of "Tommy"? If so, compare the track "Eyesite To Th Blind" listen to the drum parts after the guitar intro. The Drums are HUGE on the original 2 CD set, all but dried up on the MFSL release. Overall I like the original better all around and dumped my MFSL years ago! Way before EBAY!

 

Keep in mind the version found on the MoFi is a totally different mix. That could explain the differences...

I got rid of the 2 CD version a long time ago.

 

Since the thread was about Tommy I assumed that's what you were talking.

I suppose something could have been done with DSOTM - I haven't heard it, so...

Here's a test for you - make CD-Rs of both the UD and UDII Tommy CDs. Compare those. I'd be curious to see what you think...

I don't hear any "veil" over my UDII Tommy as compared to my UDI.

 

Sorry Luke, this old dinosaur of a computer that I use can't do cd-r's, but I'll do even better. I'll go listen to the 2 UD's and report back.

Crap!! Just remembered, after looking for, that I sold it (the UD2) after I got the UD1 and compared them about 3 mos. ago.

 

Quoting Dave:

Dave, I noticed a little more bottom end and not as much high end on the UDI. I like the UDI better, but I also read on one of the post a problem with the vocals on one of the tracks on the UDI.

From Humorem about the UDI DSOTM.

So, it appears no MOFI is perfect. And yes, where I can see that the UDI edges out the UDII. I don't notice any muddiness in the UDII nor do I feel the UDII is skinny with a narrow separation. At least not enough to give the UDII a big thumbs down.

Dave, just to reiterate...I do prefer the UDI over the UDII, but, I don't dislike the UDII.

Brian

 

Hi Dave,

Were ya talking about the DSOTM when ya made this comparison? Did ya do the same comparison w/ the two Tommy's when ya had both of them and if so could ya always tell them apart?

-Jeffrey

 

Jeffrey,

It is the same with all of around 20 comparisons that I did. Doesn't matter, pick any UD1/UD2 combination, I can tell them apart. Yes, Tommy was in there too.

 

Hi,

Thanks for the info, Dave. Wow, this is a hot thread! Luke's analysis seems sound while the odds of Dave being able to go 20 for 20 picking them apart everytime is practically impossible if they are not different. Sure do wish this thread was getting more action!

-Jeffrey