It doesn't sound bad at all. If anything had to be commercially more available, the DE isn't a bad choice especially considering the bonuses are worth it. But for me (like a lot of you) it must have been my 25th purchase of the title. I should have resisted getting the gold MCA. Tsk Tsk.
How could I not? Have to admit, I loved the studio banter on the single-disc (now stock) MCA. There was ideas in the Who camp years ago for a series of Limited Edition Cds called "Who Put The Boot Out", and they were going to release the best gigs they did. That would have been, IMHO, one of those shows. I don't like the Numbers reissue. I love the bonus material from the Swansea gig.
I'm trying to think what that studio banter is? Is it from the Record Plant stuff? if so all of that (in less edited form) in on the deluxe. Do you mean that pre-take BBE clowning around that is on the box?
That was one of the first CDs I bought when I got my first player (a Technics SL-PJ1) back in 1985. With that player, I got the London/MFSL Stones discs and a copy of Innervisions. I traded in the disc back in the 1990s (kick kick kick ) when the new remaster came out which I found out was partially remixed, I heard the DE was remixed as well if a multitrack tape was avalable. I still have my long box as a reminder, it's 23 years old and still in the plastic This is intersesting. A conparison of all the vinyl and CD version of Who's Next. Guess which one took the prize http://www.*****/WhosNext2.htm
Chris sent me some clips of these. Thanks. First, the easy one. "MCA1" is digitally identical to my US JVC pressing (#3 in my list). No surprise there. However, "MCA2" (RCA edition) is a strange surprise. First off, it does *not* sync with my BMG copy. It *does* sync with the Japanese original (1 from my list) though. However, they aren't identical, nor do they null out. It looks like the RCA is almost exactly 1 dB lower in level. Adjust the levels and then they null... It's sure strange whatever was going on at RCA/BMG. I've got other RCA/BMG CDs that are just the stock copies rebranded (from PDO, JVC, etc), but both of these are unique pressings. And both are uniquely different! One that syncs with the original pressing but is lower in level, and another than doesn't stay in sync but is at the same level.
Updates/clarification: 1) original MCA: pretty loud (all tracks peak at 0dB), lots of clipped peaks. Mastered by Steve Hoffman. Made in both Japan ("MCAD-37217 1A1 6X" or similar) and USA by DADC ("DIDX-152 21A2" or similar). 1a) CRC/Columbia Record Club: seems to be identical to 1), except the entire CD is about 3.4 dB lower in level (including the clipped peaks). Based on some posts here, it seems like this version may have also been released as a non-record club version, but this isn't clear. Made in USA (my copy is from WEA/Specialty). 1b) BMG: nearly identical to 1), but runs at a *slightly* different speed, as if it was somehow digitally resampled. Same peaks as 1) however. Made in USA. 1c) Canadian: totally different transfer. No clipped peaks, whole thing is at a lower level. Hiss abruptly cuts off between some tracks. Small glitch in WGFA. Apparently mastered from an analog copy made during the mastering of 1). 1d) RCA: nearly identical to 1), but as with the CRC pressing, lower in level (1 dB lower in this case). Made in USA. 2) Polydor: a lot more hiss than 1), some tracks fade up. German and Japanese issues have different catalog numbers but are digitally identical. 3) alternate MCA: presumably done after 1). More hiss than 1), channels narrowed slightly, and running time shorter (43:15 vs 43:26). Made in both Japan ("MCAD-37217 S4E1" or similar) and USA ("MCAD-37217 3S MFD BY JVC" or similar). 4) MCA gold: lots of noise reduction, very harsh sounding. 5) 1995 remix/remaster: some tracks remixed (Baba O'Riley, Love Ain't For Keepin', My Wife, Goin' Mobile and Behind Blue Eyes), others subjected to some pretty grainy sounding noise reduction. 5a) MFSL: basically the same as the 1995 CD with slightly different EQ. 6) Deluxe Edition: similar sound to 1), but with some of the harshness EQ'd out. Noise reduction on fades and some quiet sections. Of course, this isn't necessarily all-inclusive.
Just because one person reported that the Polydor German and Japanese CDs are digitally identical does not mean they sound the same - trust your ears, not waveforms.
Mmm...do you mean that the one forum member who said that is wrong, or that even if they are digitally identical they could sound different?
Not to me, on my system and in my room- that's what makes this hobby interesting. Not saying anybody is wrong - it's all pretty subjective, although the difference to me between the Polydor German and Japanese is not subtle.
I know I said the 2 original Polydors were digitally identical earlier, and they are. Nothing more and nothing less.
What mastering of DSOTM is best is subjective. Stating the identical discs aren't identical is not. This isn't the thread to discuss it so I'll stop there.
Huh. And I almost didn't send you the RCA club sample! That's just totally nuts. I had come to think that that CD was "Steve's mastering" (whatever that means now), then this thread had me thinking that it was something different, or at least a fairly corrupted flavor of it. Now I just don't know. I think the Canadian mastering is probably the most reliable way to hear Steve's mastering; I am going to try to get that one now, just as a reference point. (It appears to still be available from Amazon.ca, although the shipping charge is nearly as much as the otherwise-attractive price of the disc. Does anyone know a retailer with more reasonable shipping?) I'm still chagrined by my preference (for now) for the other mastering. It's very difficult to listen objectively to these versions! I think I'll have to give it a rest and revisit in a week or two. Thanks a lot, Luke, for the research!
My new fave Who's Next is a BMG issue, USA cd, see earlier post. It sounds amazing to me, really cool echo in the synth sections... and crisp, clean sound... matrix number: hard to read but maybe: L (or 1)70350D and 4/94 2DCL (or 1) is this a 1994 Record Club issue, mastering by? no upc... cheers, mrbill
All I know is this: Initially I bought into the "Perfect Sound Forever" propaganda. Their arguments were convincing at the time. And even after some of my first CDs didn't sound (anywhere close) to as good as I had remembered the LPs sounding, I thought the vinyl diehards were refusing to change their ways and face the truth regarding digital superiority. But due to my large vinyl collection, I waited awhile before I bought many discs (sadly, as it turns out, missing out on getting any targets, etc.). Then I visited my cousin and her husband, who had the best stereo system I had -- and still have -- ever heard. We a/b'ed many LPs vs. CDs over a weekend, with eyes closed. I became a born-again analog guy! Shortly thereafter, I bought a Who's Next CD (details follow), because, like Sckott above, my six or so different vinyl pressings of this album -- one of my all-time fav's -- just weren't enough! Of course now I have even more variations! When I put the Who's Next CD on, I thought, "Wow, this sounds really good. Maybe not all of these CDs are that bad." Years later, here, I find out mine is a Hoffman: CRC pressing Timing (on my Denon) = 43:28 Inner ring (along with some other letters/numbers) = 37217-2 SRC+02
BS squeeker speaking. My West German Polydor is 43.25, so funnily enough it's the same length as the good ones(!) even though Baba is sharp and almost 2.5 seconds shorter. Maybe Baba is the only sharp/short track and the rest have earlier music fades but longer gaps between tracks to bring it back to....43.25. Maybe I'm obsessing about Baba!
The point of my observations in this thread is to gather objective evidence. Saying the Polydor CDs have more hiss and fade-ups is a fact. Saying the German and Japanese variants are digitally identical is a fact. Saying they sound different isn't, at least universally. Some systems may play them back differently for some reason, but some will correctly play them in the same way. By the same token, it's possible that the original MCA and BMG CDs *sound* the same, even on megabucks systems. Even if they do, it's easy to show that they aren't digitally the same. And thus, IMO, worth noting. I guess from my perspective, if the audio is otherwise identical but simply changed in level, I'm calling it the same basic mastering. That's why I have those discs listed as 1a-1d, rather than 2-5 or something - they all seem to be derived from the same source, but with some tweaking. I'd guess it is the same as my BMG copy, but I couldn't say for sure without having a clip to compare. It doesn't seem likely, but it's possible there's yet another RCA/BMG variation.
That's reasonable to me. (Maybe not for some purists, but a good approach for a reference thread like this.) I mentioned the Canadian CD only because of all the versions discussed here, it's one of two (I think; that and your v1 Japan-for-US) that Steve has actually said are his mastering. (Well, in the case of the Canadian, virtually so at least.) If I want a reference to compare others against, I think I'll want one of those two. That said, I will be expecting one of those two to sound nearly the same as my club copy.
That's funny. I need to upgrade my CD player , and you still need to gather evidence that they are digitally identical . Either way, I doubt either of these steps would change our minds about how the Polydors sound. We'll just have to agree to disagree on this one. Enjoy the music!
