Rapidly listening through headphones (Senn HD600 in a modified Xonar Essence STX soundcard), after using ReplayGain to normalise each file, I prefered samples 4 and 7 (Bad Sneakers #4 and Doctor Wu #3), but also liked #1, might actually be my favourite. Although thinner (especially #4) and not as warm/conforting as the others, it seems to me that these were the ones with the most separation, air and impact. Maybe I would find them too much on monitors, I don't know. Every sample sounds phasey and splashy in a way, or too woolly or too thin... EDIT: the more I listen, the more I find they are all flawed and I'm not really loving any of them. But I seem to go for clarity. What was the equipment used?
I've had a listen but only on my phone through £30 Sennheiser CX300II earphones. Bad Sneakers: 1. Pretty good, bass is a little harder to follow than the others. 2. Maybe slightly better than 1, although a lot more surface noise which distracts a bit and makes it harder to judge. 3. Nice. No complaints. 4. A lot brighter than the others - I'm guessing this is the MFSL? The only one which sounds radically different to the others to me. Doctor Wu: 5. Very good. 6. Pretty good, maybe a bit more harsh than 5? 7. The brightness makes me think this is the MFSL again. 8. A bit flat, doesn't seem to have much life to it. As someone who owns the MFSL and has defended it several times on this forum, I'm hoping this doesn't result in egg and my face in alignment........
"Phasey" and "splashy" are good adjectives to describe the overall negative quality of this recording, although it's been suggested by some that that might have been just the type of sound they were striving for and so the effect was intentional. I don't buy that for a second. Regarding the gear, I recently swapped out the Audio-Technica AT20SS on my Dual 510 for my original Pickering XSV/3000 with a new LP Gear ViVid Line D3000 replacement stylus. TT is connected to the phono stage of a Sony "ES" (STR-DA5ES) receiver, through an ART USB sound card into my laptop at 16/44.1.
I'm a kind of audiophile to, but i let it never get it in the way of enjoying the music. Are you enjoying bad music that sounds great?
IMO, the anecdotal and logical evidence points more to a multi-track pre-mix issue than a mix down to stereo master issue.
Interesting. The original vinyl never sounded as good to me as other Steely Dan recordings. I thought I just had a bad pressing.
My favourite versions of this album at this point were the Kendun LP and the Steve Hoffman CD. I also liked the Greatest Hits mastered by RL, but I remember it sounded quite hyped on the needledrop I heard.
It is subjective, in part. But while a great system can reveal more flaws, it can also reveal MUCH more of the musical qualities. When orchestral music swells, it gets both louder and bigger in volume. It gets MUCH more dramatic. Inferior systems can only get so loud before they flatten out or even overload the system and distort, and they don't allow the volume of the sound to get bigger and go beyond the speakers the way a really good system do. A better system can reveal much greater subtleties in the music, such as the way a player might touch the head of a drum, or the way a pianist might feather the key. A better system will allow the music to start from a much quieter place, a blacker background. And music that happens in that quietest of places is lost on an inferior system. And an inferior system will shorten the trail of a note, the decay might be longer than what you're hearing. A better system will allow you to hear in and around the instruments more. And will even reveal the space in which it is recorded, allowing for a greater sense of realism. But you takes the bad with the good. For those with better systems, great sonic recordings with great music can be a magical experience. Having had a variety of levels of equipment in my home, I can tell you that the better ones make for a more engrossing experience. And furthermore, better cartridges with better tonearms track the inner grooves of records far better than inferior ones, give a better sense of largess and grace to the music on the inner grooves. Jeff
To me, the sound problem is most apparent with the piano. Is this the one where they bought a new $20,000 piano (thanks ABC!)? Especially on Dr Wu, it sounds like a great piano recording one generation down. One might compare it to "Here At the Western World" (similar instrumentation) (A Royal Scam outtake) and decide which soundss better
I've also seen it posted in these forums that the Hoffman mastering is "the best" of the CD versions, but since, after all, these are his forums, I always take such statements with a grain of salt unless I've actually heard the product and happen to find myself in agreement. In this case I'm not sure I've ever heard it so, unless someone wants to post or send me samples, I'll have to refrain from commenting on Steve's work and focus on other CD and vinyl releases.
That's funny, but $20,000, even back then, got you only a good upright piano. A great 6' grand would set you back about $50,000.
This is tougher than I thought Bad Sneakers...I ended up picking number 2 the best...although 3 was warmer. Also number 3 OOP'S differently than the other 3..again it's the low end which must be applied more to one channel than another. I voted NO to number 4....Fagen's vocal doesn't have the lower end and sounds thin. Doctor Wu......This was tough...I went with number 2.....although 1 I liked. Vote NO to 3...thin vocal again. I thought 4 sounded flat...this one OOP's differently than the other 3. Downloaded flac files foobar>sonarworks EQ for headphones>SPL Phonitor 2>Sennheiser HD800. Bern
What does OOP stand for? I only know it as an abbreviation for "out of print" but that doesn't make sense in this context.
Sorry...I should have explained it. Out Of Phase Stereo. One channel is inverted and when they are mono'd...the end result being the stereo signal only. For example if you have a guitar panned hard left...piano hard right and the vocal in the center...when you "OOPS" it....you are left only with the guitar and piano. My amp has the ability to do it. Bern
Thanks for the explanation. I thought of "out of phase" too but it still didn't make sense to me as I didn't know it could be used as a verb! Now I know!
Ditto. So I tried a whack of different pressings. They all sound similar, no top-end, cloudy, veiled, etc. A buddy of mine has the MFSL, but it didn't really do it for me. So I just settled on a Canuck pressing with silent dynaflex vinyl, engage my tone controls & jack a few db's of treble into it. Problem solved, beer cold, Steely Dan cranked... Steely Dan - Katy Lied
Great article titled "Katy and The Gremlin" by Denny Dias, who worked on the album production. He talks about all of the imaginable problem associated to this album including the master tapes and the many problems with the production. Great article, highly recommended. Click on the link. Katy and The Gremlin
I saw that a long time ago, in the thread about the SH mastering. Good to read it again. In my opinion, the Hoffman mastered cd is the way to go, and just skip the vinyl.