Linda's favorite digital versions of all Black Sabbath albums

I can answer this: both. The 'tremolo effect' is in fact a quick serious of drop-outs. There other drop-outs that occure later during the song. Japanese and American tapes don't have of them. See my post above:

 

Both, actually, because the tremolo effect are actually dropouts and part of the same type of dropouts heard at later points in the song in the right channel. The amount of tremolo effect is tied directly to the severity in which the other dropouts can be heard. The ‘86 CDs are all very obvious but then the others you really have to listen for them and maybe still won’t hear them but those dropouts can still be seen on graphs in the exact spots. Except the Japanese unique masterings which have no trace of the dropouts or tremolo effect (which is really a series of dropouts).

 

You should. Especially because the CS Wicked World, with or without pre-emphasis applied (we all know that CD doesn't have pre-emphasis), is clearly inferior to the 2014, 2016 and The Ultimate Edition versions of WW.

This surprises me - coming from you, whose preference for darker masterings is usually more pronounced than mine. Have you listened to the HDtracks?

In several cases, the SACDs turned out to be so far ahead any other version in my shootout that in order to properly rank the redbook versions, I would actually have to carry out another shootout without including the SACD. In such cases, I cannot really recommend any redbook CD. (Oh, or were you, when you said "SHM people", actually referring to the companies responsable for the SACD releases, rather than to those of us who prefer the SACDs?)
Btw, it always confuses me when you write "SHM" instead of "SACD". "SHM" is really just the material, and there are many Sabbath SHM-CDs, but only few Sabbath SHM-SACDs.

I never really listened to those, I keep forgetting to include the SBS Intercord in my shootouts.

Have you ever had the chance to listen to the SACDs? There aren't many Castle CDs that I would really recommend at this point.

Great work and reasoning, thank you very much! And I agree this is by far the most plausible theory yet: the resemblance of the UK 1996/2009 channel imbalance vs the Japan channel imbalance is coincidental.[/QUOTE]

 

Thanks, guys. Sounds like some there's some headphone-time in my near future.

 

I carried out two more series of Sabbath Bloody Sabbath shootouts.


1st series: this time I exclude the SHM-SACD, in order to determine which is my favorite redbook CD of this album. This is also the first time that I shoot out the SBS Intercord CD.

Completed shootouts: 18

Individual test results from among 4 possible files:

"A" chosen: 3 times (16.67%) (file: D:\Musik (lokal)\+ Samples OK\Killing Yourself to Live (1973 Sabbath Bloody Sabbath_1986 West Germany_INT_830.112_Intercord) - TRACK GAIN APPLIED.wav)
"B" chosen: 3 times (16.67%) (file: D:\Musik (lokal)\+ Samples OK\Killing Yourself to Live (1973 Sabbath Bloody Sabbath_2016 USA_RR2 2695_Warner-Rhino) - TRACK GAIN APPLIED.wav)
"C" chosen: 4 times (22.22%) (file: D:\Musik (lokal)\+ Samples OK\Killing Yourself to Live (1973 Sabbath Bloody Sabbath_2009 Germany_2716846_Sanctuary) - TRACK GAIN APPLIED.wav)
"D" chosen: 8 times (44.44%) (file: D:\Musik (lokal)\+ Samples OK\Killing Yourself to Live (1973 Sabbath Bloody Sabbath_1986 France for UK_CLACD 201_Castle_de-emphasized w SoX) - TRACK GAIN APPLIED.wav)

No scoring results recorded.

Interesting: now that the SACD isn't included, the Castle is far ahead of the others. It is only towards the end of this shootout series that I consciously notice that one of these CDs has its stereo channels swapped. So I stop and check - it is the 2009 CD of course, now I remember the swapped channels have often been mentioned on the forum. I correct them before doing the 2nd series.


2nd series: SACD vs. 1986 Castle vs. 2009 (with the channels corrected)

Completed shootouts: 15

Individual test results from among 3 possible files:

"A" chosen: 4 times (26.67%) (file: D:\Musik (lokal)\+ Samples OK\Killing Yourself to Live (1973 Sabbath Bloody Sabbath_1986 France for UK_CLACD 201_Castle_de-emphasized w SoX) - TRACK GAIN APPLIED.wav)
"B" chosen: 8 times (53.33%) (file: D:\Musik (lokal)\+ Samples OK\Killing Yourself to Live (1973 Sabbath Bloody Sabbath_2012 Japan_SHM-SACD_UIGY-9087_DSD64 ISO2DFF to 16-44.) - TRACK GAIN APPLIED.wav)
"C" chosen: 3 times (20.00%) (file: D:\Musik (lokal)\+ Samples OK\Killing Yourself to Live (1973 Sabbath Bloody Sabbath_2009 Germany_2716846_Sanctuary) - TRACK GAIN APPLIED + STEREO CHANNELS SWAPPED.wav)

No scoring results recorded.

Unsurprisingly, the SACD wins again. This time the Castle is only slightly ahead of the 2009.

I do a little more (non-blind) listening and comparing in order to learn what the Intercord CD sounds like. Hm. Well, not horrible, but a bit thin and unnatural, especially compared to the SACD, Castle and 2009 CD.

 

I was going to post last time and ask if you'd corrected the '09 channels but forgot.

Your results here reflect my preferences exactly. I find the '86 and '09 (with corrected channels) both quite good but the SACD beats them both.

 

I love what you are doing with all this comparison of various masterings. I am very interested. I rarely compare different masterings myself. Why not? Use your own ears and decide for yourself folks would say. When I do compare different mastering, it is usually listening on crappy little computer speakers. What is the value in that? Furthermore, I am not technically endowed enough to use software that equals out volume of different mastering or allow for blind file comparison, both of which are critical for useful results IMHO.

All this being said, I did try and compare several masterings on my main system tonight. I loaded several masterings of both the Self Titled album and Paranoid on a USB flash drive to play on my Oppo 205. There was no volume leveling and no blind comparison. Sadly, I did not include the '86 Castles because of the pre-emphasis issue. What were my results you ask? Totally freakin' undecided. I liked them all. Sure there were differences but I had an extremely difficult time determining preferences. Perhaps this is because I only compared masterings that are generally considered favorable (including vinyl rips) based on what I have read. Perhaps I am generally indecisive by nature but I liked and wish to keep all of the masterings that I compared.

I am fascinated reading others opinions of various mastering despite the fact that I cannot make up my own mind.

Love this thread Linda!

 

Is the channel switch issue just an assault against what one is used to but otherwise arbitrary or a real problem with how the album should sound. I am curious about folks opinion on this topic.

 

The left and right channels are swapped vs how it was originally produced and intended. I consider it a real problem because when it's mixed, there are decisions made as to what is heard in the left channel and what is heard in the right. Every other release that I've heard, including the 1st press UK LP and flat transfer SACD, have the channels opposite the '09 so the '09 is clearly in error. If someone is not used to the channels being the correct way or it doesn't bother them or they don't notice a problem, then it may not cause some listeners an issue. But I want to hear it with the intended channel orientation.

 

I finally compared the SBS Intercord last night, see my previous post.

To me, the SACD, the 1986 Castle and the 2009 Sanctuary all sound more natural than the Intercord. If anything, the Intercord is the one sounding a little "synthetic". Anyway, of course, what we consider to to be "natural" vs. "synthetic" will partly depend on what we're used to. And I don't find the Intercord bad at all. The differences I hear are certainly not huge. But they aren't negligible either. Very much unlike the Paranoid Intercord, which keeps winning, like, 94% of the Paranoid shootouts and comparisons that I do, the SBS Intercord isn't a winner for me.

 

Okay. I think I successfully swapped the stereo channels on the SBS 2009 wav image file from my CD rip via Audacity. I exported the edited file as wav labelled SBS corrected channels. Comparing the first several seconds of both files, I am not sure I hear a difference. What exactly should I listen for to identify correct and incorrect channel orientation? Do I need headphones to tell?

 

You'll probably need more than just a few seconds. And yes, headphones will likely be helpful. Try to find a spot in the recording where you can really hear that it is stereo - e.g. a part where a certain instrument or melody is mainly coming from one stereo channel, rather than from the center. One part where I found it notable starts at ~0:30 of Killing Yourself to Live.

 

I have noted down on my list of things to do, to get the HDtrx for Dehumanizer sometime and compare. Sounds like I would like it!

Yes, do another run of the good sounding SHM SACDs, but include CDs to this time.

 

For SBS, see my post above. For MOR (Into the Void), I mentioned in the original post that the 2009 Pearce Sanctuary is the 2nd best option. In this case, the 2009 is not very far behind the SACD. The 1986 Castle is deeply flawed, as rnranimal has thoroughly analyzed; and the 2012 Pearce was way behind the SACD and the 2009 Sanctuary in my shootout. For the s/t (the track Black Sabbath), the 1986 Castle, 2009 Sanctuary and 2012 Pearce all got the same (low) score; the SACD is so far ahead of them that IMO there's no point in recommending any redbook CD (except for Wicked World and Evil Woman, which I already discussed extensively. Anyone here who doesn't own the SACDs or SACD-rips is welcome to send me a PM.

 

TYR comparison and shootouts

I have checked the following releases:

• 1990 Japan VICP-67 Victor
• 1990 Netherlands 24 1070 2_LC 7283 I.R.S.
• 1990 UK EIRSACD 1038 I.R.S.
• 1990 USA X2 13049 I.R.S.
• 1999 EU 07243 5 21298 2 9 EMI
• 2001 USA 72435-30415-2-6 I.R.S.

The 1990 Japan, 1990 Dutch and 1990 UK CDs have 100% identical DR (DR12 on average), peak and RMS values, and the 2 tracks I compared with Foobar2000 Binary Comparator turned out to be digitally identical after correcting for offset.

The 1990 US CD has identical DR as the 3 aforementioned CDs , but slightly different peak and RMS values for most tracks. Accordingly, the2 tracks I compared with Foobar2000 Binary Comparator turned out to be digitally different even after correcting for offset.

The 1999 EU CD has identical DR and mostly identical peak and RMS values to the aforementioned 3 CDs. Nonetheless, two tracks I compared with Foobar2000 Binary Comparator turned out to be digitally different even after correcting for offset.

The 2001 US CD is compressed (DR9) and also has different peak and RMS values for all tracks.

Since the 1990 Japan, 1990 Dutch and 1990 UK CDs obviously share the same mastering, I will only include the following 4 CDs in my shootout:

• 1990 UK EIRSACD 1038 I.R.S.
• 1990 USA X2 13049 I.R.S.
• 1999 EU 07243 5 21298 2 9 EMI
• 2001 USA 72435-30415-2-6 I.R.S.

I tested with headphones. As usual, I aligned the volume levels before testing.

Completed shootouts: 39

Individual test results from among 4 possible files:

"A" chosen: 13 times (33.33%) (file: D:\Musik (lokal)\+ Samples OK\Anno Mundi (The Vision) (1990 TYR_1999 EU_07243 5 21298 2 9_EMI) - TRACK GAIN APPLIED.wav)
"B" chosen: 12 times (30.77%) (file: D:\Musik (lokal)\+ Samples OK\Anno Mundi (The Vision) (1990 TYR_2001 USA_72435-30415-2-6_IRS) - TRACK GAIN APPLIED.wav)
"C" chosen: 9 times (23.08%) (file: D:\Musik (lokal)\+ Samples OK\Anno Mundi (The Vision) (1990 TYR_1990 USA_X2 13049_IRS) - TRACK GAIN APPLIED.wav)
"D" chosen: 5 times (12.82%) (file: D:\Musik (lokal)\+ Samples OK\Anno Mundi (The Vision) (1990 TYR_1990 TYR_1990 UK_EIRSACD 1038_IRS) - TRACK GAIN APPLIED.wav)

No scoring results recorded.

Looks like my ears quite clearly prefer both the 1999 EU and (surprisingly) the compressed 2001 US CD over the 1990 US and, further behind yet, the 1990 UK CD. Since I don't want unnecessary compression on my CDs, I'll go with the 1999 EU release.

There's not much bonus material available from the TYR era. An "edit" version of Feels Good to Me was released on the Feels Good to Me CD single, along with two live tracks from 1989-11-25 Moscow:
Black Sabbath - Feels Good To Me
Black Sabbath - Feels Good To Me

 

Thank you for that Tyr comparison.

What was it that made you prefer those over the 1990 editions? How did they sound to you?

 

I like the INTERCORD cd mastering for SBS and Paranoid very very much

 

Very good question! Looks like I forgot to mention what might be considered the most important thing: how does the sound of these releases differ anyway, apart from my preferring some over others? Now, I guess the reason why I forgot is that, frankly, I don't know. This is one of the cases where during the shootouts I am not even sure if I hear any difference whatsoever. In this cases, the results suggest that I was somehow able to tell them apart at least at some point; but consciously, I really don't know how. I just had a non-blind listen, and the only version that I can truly say sounds bit different is the compressed one. (When listening with headphones, I prefer moderate volume because I don't want to ruin my ears - which might explain why even the difference I perceive between the compressed version and the others is not huge.) All in all, the comparison for this album is a bit mysterious to me. It puzzles me that I cannot even hear a difference between the original UK CD and the 1999 EU CD that 'won' my shootout. Is anyone here good at probability calculation? I would be interested in the probability of coincidentally picking one version 13 out of 39 times and another, actually identical mastering only 5 out of 39 times (with 4 versions altogether, see may above shootout report for further details).

May I ask which other versions you compared?

 

SBS, I've heard the UK Castle, USA Warner Bros 80s cd and 2012 remaster.

Paranoid, I've heard 80s Warner Bros cd, Japan Castle cd, 2012 remaster

 

Very nicely done @blacksabbathrainbow !

I am a big fan of the SHM-SACDs for all of them except Paranoid.

Self titled is an interesting one, the original UK Vertigo 1y1, 2y1 first matrix LP is bright. I personally think this is a poor decision as it detracts from the doom metal feel of the album that Paranoid really cemented- the UK Vertigo first matrix for that is so damn good with its dark, impending doom sound. So I can understand why the SHM-SACD sounds bright as it is just flat transferred from the UK master tape and matches the tonality of the UK Vertigo first matrix LP. I would ideally like to find something that is mastered to sound more like Paranoid's darker doom metal sound. I seem to recall (again my memory might be wrong here) the 33PD having a darker sound but the album is of course incomplete

I am going from memory here but I believe I liked the 1986 Castle for Sabotage as well. Tape damage doesn't bother me as much as some people... of course it depends on the damage, I mean things like split second drop outs that freak people out don't matter to me if it's the only good sounding mastering (dynamic range, good EQ, no noise reduction).

Paranoid- I seem to recall there was a large amount track to track variability on the 33PD. I think my conclusion is I would have to find one source from a lower generation tape and just EQ it myself. Sadly none of the versions on digital sound as good as the UK first matrix Vertigo LP. If I could have any album (quite literally, I love this album) flat transferred from the UK masters to SHM-SACD it would be Paranoid.

 

Thanks for the kind words, as well as for your thoughts on the s/t, Paranoid and Sabotage!

Are you familiar with the sound of the Paranoid Intercord CD?

The tape damage on Megalomania and SOTU is not just a few drop-outs. It is the sound of both entire songs seriously impaired. So for me it is either a hybrid (which we've already discussed in several posts above in this thread) or a different release (original WB or Sanctuary Deluxe).

There are darker versions of the s/t than the SACD (IIRC), but the overall sound of the SACD is simply superior over all others (except for Evil Woman, and Wicked World is missing, of course, as discussed in my original post above).

 

I have never heard the Intercord CD, unfortunately I'm not able to see any easy way to sample it. I think the versions I have compared are 33PD, HDTracks and one of the Pearce remasters. It's a bit hard keeping all this straight in my head without writing anything down I am going to give the SHM-SACD another listen when I'm in the mood to hear this album to see if I was being overly critical of it, given the other four were done at such a high level I might have dismissed this too quickly.

Thanks for the info on Sabotage, it would have been a very long time since I heard it on digital. The last one I played regularly was the UK first pressing vinyl on NEMS which was cut at Sterling Sound and sounded great start to finish. I will carefully re-read what you've written to piece together a good version.

 

The Paranoid SACD isn't as good as the other 4 Ozzy-era SACDs. The reason might be because Paranoid and HaH SACDs are from Japanese copy tapes, while the other 4 are from UK master tapes; however, since the Japan 33PD sounds better than the SACD, I feel it is more likely that the transfer - or possible remastering - of the Paranoid SACD is to blame.

I am not finished with Sabotage myself. Possibly I will end up with a hybrid of tracks from 3 CDs like ricks, see his posts above.

 

I found my post from three years ago on comparing self titled SHM-SACD to the UK Vertigo first matrix LP, copied below in italics.

The unfortunate part is he has several cartridges with varying tonality and I can't remember which cartridge we used. The reference cartridge is usually a Dynavector XV-1s which is pretty neutral. If that is the cartridge we used that would lead me to believe the SHM-SACD isn't as bright as the UK first pressing LP. Unfortunately I did sell that Vertigo LP, one of my most expensive records.

Black Sabbath self titled. Did a comparison with some friends, we only played two versions- UK original Vertigo LP and the SHM-SACD. To us the differences weren't huge, the Vertigo is just a touch brighter. SHM-SACD has just slightly more resolution as well, for instance focus on the opening part of Warning to see what I mean.

My friend's turntable tends to favor the bass a bit more since it's an idler drive. When I do the comparisons on my belt drive TT the bass on the two versions are similar.

Overall my personal opinion on the SHM-SACD was elevated quite a bit after being able to compare it to the fine sounding Vertigo LP. I could see how some would like a little treble taken off on both versions. For me the SHM-SACD is perfect, finito looking for another digital version. My Vertigo LP going up on the classifieds soon

 

I've just compared several songs on the SACD to 3 different vinyl-rips of the 1st UK LP. I am once again surprised how close the SACD and the vinyl-rips sound. Which one sounds brighter seems to vary depending on which song it is played, but on average I feel that the SACD has roughly the same level of brightness (or darkness) as the LP-rips. Also, IMO the SACD sounds better overall, especially (but not exclusively) on N.I.B. and Warning, which isn't surprising at all since those are the songs that use the inner grooves of the vinyl disc.

With the exception of Evil Woman (which doesn't sound so good) and Wicked World (which is missing), the SACD is the definitive digital version for me too.