Music On Vinyl uses digital sources?

I'm a big fan of early Golden Earring.By "early",I go no further than Eight Miles High.I even have a bunch of their Dutch picture sleeve 45s from the 60s,including the Coca-Cola one.

One of my favorite records,60s or otherwise,is their 1967 2nd album Winter Harvest,which has a very heavy '65-'66 Who influence.If you never heard any of it,go to YouTube,and pull up "Another Man In Town".Never laid eyes on an original pressing,but I have a later Dutch mono Polydor pressing,with a date of 1980 on the sleeve I got years ago on ebay Holland for $6.75.It's all analog,sounds great,pretty scarce now by itself,and I'm happy with it.

I have never come across a copy of their more beat(les) influenced first album Just Earrings.I had not looked for it on ebay in ages,and I looked for it just now.I found it was reissued last year by Music on Vinyl,who has been discussed here before.

This is the listing I looked at
http://www.ebay.com/itm/Golden-Earr...7882081?pt=Music_on_Vinyl&hash=item2c7397b0e1

This listing is unusual,in that it gives a bunch of detail,including a SPAR code for the record

OK.Here we have a record that was recorded in 1965,all in mono,most likely on tube equipment.Why f*** is it DDD?Does Universal Holland no longer have the original '65 master?As a rule,I don't buy these new reissues,even the fancy box sets.A big reason is this practice of creating new digital files for "masters".I know labels do this,because they feel the coolness factor of vinyl alone will sell it,and most people won't notice it's "mastered" from a digital file.

It still blows though.

 

The DDD spars code is just a generic entry put in that field which is often left untouched. The recording obviously cannot be DDD, and it's not uncommon to see websites listing many albums as simply DDD or N/A, if they even list the spars code at all.


However, with that said, I'm pretty certain MoV does use digital sources. The question is really WHICH digital sources.


There's this current scenario;

The recent MoV preorder for Brand New's "The Devil & God are Raging Inside Me" has been blowing up all over the web lately, and for many well warranted reasons (although I've yet to see even a single mention on this board - go figure)

The release is clearly not sanctioned by the band and they do not support it. Fans just want a way to buy the album without having to spend $100+ and MoV is smart enough to know there's a huge market and copies will most likely sell out quicker than they can press it.
The album was licensed from the original label, and pressed in the US before. This enfuriated the band, and led them to quickly put out their own "official" pressing. The label vowed to never license out their music again.

So fast forward a few years and now MoV licenses the title from Sony, as they own/distribute the album in Europe, and clearly operate very independently from the smaller indie label that handles their music in the states. This record is fully and legally licensed in the EU, yet not band sanctioned, and is being imported into the US for sale, leading fans to incorrectly refer to it as a "bootleg" of sorts.

A bootleg, it is not, but I must ask the question; if they are not dealing with the original label or the band, exactly what type of access do they have to masters, or even artwork for this release?

My bet's on this coming from a CD. It may as well be a bootleg. And I'm sure they won't openly admit to this "small" and "inconsequential" detail. And it can only make you wonder what other albums they will do it for when they don't have access to hi-res files or master tapes/copies.

 

If you email MOV a detailed question about the source material, they will probably email you a detailed reply. I have, as have others. No reason to post like they are bad guys or afraid to tell people.

 

a lot of assumptions in this post.

 

I don't mean to blast the company, they have done excellent work in the past and now that I think of it, their communication with customers in regards to this release so far has been top-notch. So I think I actually will shoot them a message to get to the bottom of this, to fulfill my own personal curiosity. All I'm saying is that when a less than ideal source is all that is available they may or may not choose to use that anyway, and they may or may not publicly disclose that, and that is very troubling when people are shelling out cash for a premium product. The only assumption I made is in regards to what type of source would be used for this particular release.

 

Wanted to chime in with the same reply. @the OP -- email them and there's a good chance they'll actually tell you if it's a digital source or not -- I've done this in the past and MOV have replied back to me.

 

so the DDD code...which is only applicable to CDs I thought, is being applied by eBay? who cares what eBay says? eBay isn't a legitimate resource for this information.

 

It's really not a 'premium product'...it's a simple reissue. Yes it's expensive in North America but thats because they are imports and not really made to be sold here....their prices in the EU are not all that expensive- certainly nothing like audiophile LPs.

 

Well....digital doesn't mean the CD. Many times the labels will send them hi rez of the master tapes. That might not please everyone, but its hardly poor selection of source material. There are companies who have reportedly cut from CD, but those would be companies that generally have no ties. MOV can get hi rez files of Stone Temple Pilots or the original metals for Rage Against the Machine. Them using a CD would be a shock, and not impossible, but it would also require more than theories.

 

I have to respectfully disagree. When people are buying vinyl it's for the sound quality and/or the artwork and enhanced packaging. The music has been readily available for years, on YouTube, cd, mp3, iTunes... Whether it's 3 dollars more or 30 dollars more, people are definitely paying a premium for an enhanced experience with a vinyl record. It's certainly not the mainstream consumer format and it's not how most new music is being purchased or digested these days.

 

I dont disagree with what you are saying but when something is referred to as a 'premium product' I don't know if the first thing in peoples minds would be a reissued LP that is the US equivalent of Sony Legacy records.

 

Agreed that vinyl is essentially a premium product, as a rule (A modern LP will usually run ~$18 USD over a comparable $11 CD). But I think what noname74 was getting at is that MOV releases, for us, are import only and thus even extra money to shell out. So we perceive them a little differently, but they are imports of what is essentially a standard resissue.

 

Even if it is digitally sourced, wouldn't the "coloration" make it sound better than the CD?

 

must...not...hijack....thread.

 

Thank you for translating from noname-anese.

 

I just spent $80 on a Dylan Blonde on Blonde. That is a premium product. Being on vinyl doesn't make it premium. MOV is like a fairly safe label....they have a few that will be top notch sources, with mediocre jackets, but the bad ones are far from what some companies try to put out. Also, many buy vinyl because its trendy. If they cared about sound quality the trash in the new arrivals bins wouldn't disappear so fast.

 

$80 isn't a premium price -- that's a "this had better sound better than anything I've ever heard before or I'm going to flog myself" price.

 

I started a thread about this very topic around the time I joined - in that case specifically mentioned the remix of Kiss Destroyer - which had a digital master. It seemed to be that yes, this may not be so unusual these days.

http://forums.stevehoffman.tv/threads/mastered-from-tape.329445/

 

The Dylan MOV (mono) titles are from Sterling lacquers as are the US box set - so this boarders on premium. Most of MOV output uses old stampers or most commonly hi-res digital files. As I have said before their in house cutting is a digital chain with DMM lath. The result is that older all analogue recordings are not a good proposition on MOV in general, unless the original analogue LP is scarce and expensive. The recent Brutal Youth was claimed to be hi-res digital by MOV but is obviously a 16/44.1 source as it sounds very close to the admittedly well mastered CD. I would be surprised if they used an actual CD as a source. Some stuff recorded 16bit may not sound significantly better than CD though on vinyl depending on the mastering. MOV though not audiophile as they often claim is certainly not cheap or sold for standard vinyl price even in the EU.

 

As for Music On Vinyl using a CD as a source it is just not true. This is posted in their FAQ list:

"Which masters do you use?
We use the best audio available to cut our records. We receive and use different kinds of masters: analogue tapes, original metal parts, lacquers cut from analogue tapes and high res digital files 192/96khz/24 bit. Music On Vinyl does not use CD's as masters."

I know we all would like reissued vinyl to be from an all analog source but many labels are digitally archiving their analog tapes. I've been impressed with Music On Vinyl's releases and it's nice to have some releases on vinyl for the first time. For example Lucinda Williams "Car Wheels On A Gravel Road" was never released on vinyl until MOV did just a month ago. It's also nice to not have to spend hundreds of dollars for some of the 1990's LPs that were pressed in limited quantities and are being reissued by MOV. Their vinyl is dead quiet, flat and nicely packaged. Some of the art work you can tell was blown up from a small file but as long as the music sounds good I'm happy.

 

Does anyone know if MOV used original masters for any of their releases?

 

Not on the older stuff they didn't.Probably for the 90s and later recordings they did.

 

Everytime I've asked them about a specific album they said high rez. 192/24 or 96/24

 

If analogue is a nr.1 requirement then I would skip MOV and look for those that focus on that as a USP. If you want a high quality pressing that is silent, flat , hard to get on original and overall very good master then go for MOV. I still prefer a great digital MOV version against a crappy all analogue one. Don't believe that just because it's analogue it super great. That will make you more disappointed than buying a MOV release with music you love.

 

My experience with MOV is very positive. For every release I've heard, the mastering is unique and is less compressed than the CD equivalent. The Stone Temple Pilots reissues are a good example. I put MOV up there with Rhino, MFSL, and ORG. Their quality is reliable. It doesn't really matter that their releases are hi-res digital sometimes rather than analogue; their mastering is excellent.