Oh believe me I`ve compared them many times and am in agreement with you on most of the titles Randy. I find it amazing that so many people write off the MOFIs .I`m listening on some fairly expensive equipment ( LP12 Ekos Troika , Naim amps and Tannoy LGMs ) and sure I`d rather have a mint original but you can`t beat the mofis for subtle detail even if the tone is different. I`ve heard things on the MOFIs that I miss on the UK pressings, don`t get me wrong they`re on the Uk presses but you just don`t notice them so clearly - the sqeaky chair on the run out groove of SGT Pepper on the MOFI for example. George Martin mentions the UHQR in his SGT Pepper book saying you can even hear the Abbey road air conditioning wurring at the end of day in the life as they pushed the faders fully up ( and the chair squeak). On my near mint UK Stereo 1st press its just not so clear. I didn`t notice either of these things till I got the UHQR ( then I read Georges book ). A small point I know but the sort of thing that eats me up .
Randy, would you mind giving us the lacquer # for each side of your copy of this? I'm not much for "colored" vinyl (sorry ), and I'd like to eventually try to find this cutting on "regular" vinyl. I remember Steve liked the sound of the UK white vinyl issue also, and others here too.
Yes, of course. Usually a master number assigned to an album side or individual song stays with that song for all history. So, even though the same "side numbers" follow the Beatles around, only the British cutting system can be judged as to the early cuttings having vacuum tubes on them. An Italian or German cutting would have been done with a different system. Sometimes a LATER cutting will sound much better than an earlier one. Varies from country to country.
Paul does seem to me to care about sound, recording, etc., but as far as mastering goes, I think he's (at the very least) a little "misguided" with some things (sorry if that sounds arrogant ). That "they can take the hiss off" comment he made sadly doesn't make me hopeful for "proper" new issues of The Beatles catalog in the future.
MMM, there are no individual (- 1) laquer numbers (or any other number) after the YEX 709 number etc. on the UK white vinyl that I have. The UK top loading stereo original I compared it to has a -1 or -2 laquer number. Fraser, I agree.
Interesting, thanks Randy. Steve, is your UK white vinyl "White Album" the same way - no lacquer #'s given?
Probably, I'm too lazy to go up there and look. I remember hearing that the White Vinyl version was a unique cutting. Certainly mine sounds fantabulous!
Steve, don't you think they would eventually have used those parts for some black copies also? I've always understood EMI to be a company that was not one to waste anything. Or was the white vinyl a different vinyl "formulation" compared to the black, and they specifically cut the lacquers for it to sound right with the "different" vinyl? Would you say your white vinyl version is the *best* overall sounding copy, compared to any other you own, UK or German?
So Steve, Any insight from you on this Macca question? I would think you would know better than any of us.... And if he really made this "hiss" comment, don't these guys know better? He is one of the Beatles for goodness sake...not a member of Foghat..... Curious....
I came across a Y/B Parlophone With the Beatles LP in stereo, but it is NOT a flip back cover. Does anyone know when that might have been issued? Thanks Bob
Someone had asked earlier about the N at the end of a WTB lacquer number. I saw a website which said it was a pressing done by Decca (UK) when EMI had trouble meeting demand at their own plants, and farmed it out to Decca. If you have an "N" copy, that is a Decca pressing-don't know if that was a part of THEIR regular lacquer numbers, though, or was EMI's idea to differentiate the pressings.
Hmmmm...interesting. Had it been a mono, I'd say it's an '82 reissue. The Y/B label was discontinued late 1969; it was replaced by the 'one EMI box' label. But the flipback sleeves carried on well into the 1970s. My guess is it's a very late '69 pressing that's found its way into the wrong sleeve...perhaps???
I've not heard that the 'N' suffix in the matrix number denotes a Decca presing before now...well, not to my memory anyway! In that case my 60s mono pressings of the first 4 LPs (PPM, WTB, AHDN, BFS) are all Decca-pressed. I thought there was something else that differentiated the Decca pressings and I don't remember what it is...been so long since I looked this stuff up! I'm sure I have some reference material on it from reliable sources and I will try and look this up at some point. Perhaps someone else here is able to clarify 100%? Cheers
Kipper, you know how they did those y/b mono reissues...did they do y/b stereo reissues as well??? Maybe that is what I am referring to??? Any idea???
I think Decca pressings have a sort of inner circle in the label. Not printed but a sort of a bump under the label. Not very well explained but I did see one pictured on Ebay a while back. Might of course be talking rubbish ! Cheers John
No. They didn't reissue the stereo LPs on the black & yellow label. The last known pressings date from late 1969. All subsequent stereo pressings were variations of the black & silver label. I guess it's possible that you have a 1969 pressing in a 70s sleeve...is the sleeve laminated?
Someone just put an old record in a newer sleeve. The old one was probably banged to crap and they found a new sleeve. OR, there is a 1970's record floating around in an old sleeve because someone mixed them up. Wait for the real deal.
This is very helpful guys...thanks... I actually bought it already on ebay....by mistake... I bought several Beatles lp's the last few days and forgot that this was not a flip back...I am getting it for the sound...so maybe I will still end up with what I want...sonically... I also picked up a hor zu stereo PPM based on your raves, Steve...looking forward to getting it....
Beatles German white vinyl DMM ? I post almost every day at Audiogon. I made a post on a thread where A guy was asking Beatles pressings Questions. Someone listed this Site as a good source for information,WOW!! My jaw is on the floor. What a great job Steve, great Site. I really like the personal touch. I loved that article/interview in stereophile about you. I must have read it 10 times and made other people read it as well. I also have some DCC Vinyl and love them. My dream is for you Steve, to remaster the Vertigo swirl catalog on Vinyl. Now that would be a slice of heaven. I must complement all the posters in this Thread. This is some great info here, everyone is doing a great Job. Now on with my question; The white album, the UK white vinyl is best? How does the Beatles German white vinyl DMM compare? I collect the EAS series Beatles I think it is the best bang for the buck. I have learned and heard some distressing things about my eas stuff. Next question The Japanese AP series is supposed to be better, and how about the original red wax pressings? How do you guys rate them? I have "A hard days night" on one of those Japanese MONO red-wax reissues, eas7000 as well as the eas 8000 series one, in stereo of course. I like the eas 8000 version better more detail. Yes it is brighter, but so much more detail, not so veiled as the Mono one. The Mono has A heavier bottom to it but it is not clear, seams bloated to me. This is a matter of taste of course. I must say that I used to have all the 80's UK Parlophone reissues and liked them. I have never heard a UK mono first press. I am using a Shelter 501MKII with a TWL HI FI modded Origin Live Tonearm and a Origin Live Aurora Table. Just in case you needed to know, I guess one of these days I need to list my system. Thanks Guys, a lot to read here on this site. This is but my first day and first post. Cheers and peace Ron
I was happy to see Ron's comment about liking the 80's UK Parlophone vinyl reissues. I recently picked up Sgt. Pepper for very little, and I really like it! Welcome to the forum, Ron!
