The JPN. AP series are all very nice. The AR is very, very good. AR is just one of those records that you just can't have too many copies of. Even my orig. CDN. offers something.
The Japanese pressings you're referring to were all mastered (cut) in Japan from copies of the master tapes. They are definitely not pressed from UK plates.
That first pressing, both red and black have the UK matrices in the dead wax, I thought that meant it was using UK plates. Looking at the red wax version now, it says "YEX-749 1S" on side one and "YEX-750 1S" on side two. So it did not use the UK plates?
If only it were that simple! YEX (for stereo) 749 or YEX 750 is the matrix number assigned to the compiled master tape reel. Many countries used the same basic matrix in the dead wax because their mastering is from a copy of the UK tape labelled with those numbers. It doesn't necessarily follow that if the dead wax stamping matches then it means it was pressed from UK plates, it may or may not have been. The Australian -2/-1 version for instance is one that was pressed from UK plates. So looking at your Japanese copy you'll notice that the dead wax does not match the EMI Hayes format for a start. The UK Abbey Road first pressing is YEX 749-2 / YEX 750-1, the -1 cut for side 1 was never released. However, your copy shows as a first cut on side 1, meaning that's a first cut Japanese mastering.
Well there ya go! I stupidly never looked at the matix numbers properly. Guess I will keep looking for a near mint Oz copy. Being 1969, the vinyl should still be nice and thick and sound fantastic.
I am curious about the late 70's -3/-2 pressing in Australia. Didn't the UK pressings go from -2/-1 to -4/-3? I read on discogs that a 1980 pressing with -3/-3 was an Australian pressing not made with UK plates. Is this -3/-2 another Au made release? There is only a couple of Abbey Roads listed on discogs for Australia. It goes from 1969 to 1979, nothing inbetween. So it is hard to know if we got the '76 pressing.
I bought the 2012 remaster a couple of years after it came out and did a shootout with my old Japanese AP-8815. I'm not a treble freak, but there is an energy in the top and mid on the AP-8815 that I don't hear on the new "remastered from the original analogue tapes" version.
I find the digital 2012 version horrible. It was the first copy I bought. I cannot listen to it. Especially I Want You, it just turns into a distorted mush at the end. I agree with your comparison with the AP-8815. I only have one copy, a first press red wax. Seller claimed it to be "excellent" condition but it is far from. Not only is it covered in scratches, it has noticable groove wear, but low noise considering its condition. Another nod to superior Jp vinyl. Groove wear is more so on side one. Even with all that, it smokes the 2012! That is why all I want for the 50th is a new AAA release. No remix, it does NOT need it! It is what The Beatles wanted it to be and should not be touched. I know a new AAA is never going to sound as good as a UK or Aus 1969 pressing, or even UK 70's, because the master is far from fresh these days. Unlike the pristine mono masters.
The Australian -3/-2 was cut locally, so it's the earlier UK stampers which were used for a long time that you'll want to chase. Details here
Thank you, that was perfect! I will try for a -2/-1 first and perhaps try some of the locally cut later. Great info on that page. Far better than discogs. I am shocked to discover that A Hard Day's Night, Beatles For Sale and HELP! were not UK parts, but cut locally from UK supplied tapes. I always had it in my head that they were all UK parts. It seems they are the only ones.
Discogs is not very reliable I'm afraid. As I said before, the matrix numbers even if they follow the EMI UK format don't guarantee that the cut originated there, it's a fairly common misconception. Nearly always the UK cuts beat our local mastering hands down.
Yeah, that's what I figured which is why I wanted to make sure they are UK plates. I would be curious about the DB cuts though, seeing as that audiophile version of Pepper he did in 83 is said to be the best ever. Although, that was from the master tapes. Who knows what generation of tapes they wete using for Abbey Road? I wanted to avoid DMM "digital remastered" versions, but would be curious to hear an 88 mono. I always thought those pressings were stereo! Not sure WHY I would like to hear them seeing as I have the 2014 monos as well as the Jp '82 red monos. I just wish I had my mum's first press mono Pepper, Beatles For Sale and With The Beatles still. But all our records were stolen in 2000. Then I had it happen to me again just last year.
I was gifted a YEX 749-2 / YEX 750-1...thanks Doug! It sounds great! I have a few other copies including a purple Capitol that's no slouch. Possibly cut by Wally. I know he cut a bunch of Beatles reissues for Capitol in the mid to late seventies. I have most of them...they all sound quite good.
Is there always a lot of distortion on I Want You or is it just the 2012 version? Although to me it more mush than distortion.
FWIW--I've done a shoot-out with my old UK -2/-1, and recently acquired Pro-Use and much-maligned Japanese '79 blue box (EAS 50042, which, as far as I understand is NOT the same mastering as the individual EAS '70 lps). Blue box definitely beats the Pro-use (which is certainly good, too), and even comes close to sounding fuller and sweeter in places to the UK (and needless to say, quieter). Only one drawback--tape tension issues, giving some extra vibrato to a few notes on side 2, BUT only in about three fleeting instances, so if you can ignore that, the EAS is a cheaper and wholly satisfying alternative to a mint -2/-1, and you can probably find it somewhere separately from the whole box. (and p.s. the 2012 vinyl is fifth-rate compared to just about any other version--well, maybe except the Capitol cuts, which are really pathetic).
Both the earlier AP and the EAS pressings beat the Pro-use in my opinion - there's nothing wrong with the pro-use, only it's not as vibrant as the other two standard pressings. The AP, EAS, plus the UK 4/3 and 2/1 are pretty much the best ones to go for so if you find the Japan pressings much cheaper than the UK's, none of these will disappoint.
I see a fair number of references to "the MFSL" or "the MoFi" when it comes to Abbey Road. But isn't it true that there were in fact TWO MFSL/MoFi Abbey Road releases, one a 1979/1980 stand alone (MFSL 1-023) not part of any box set, then another for the Beatles Collection Box set with different mastering (and in particular much more high end boost ordered by an MFSL exec with damaged hearing after some accident)? It has been my understanding that the non-box 1979/1980 MFSL Abbey Road sounds much better than the box version MFSL Abbey Road. If that is true, could people be more specific which one they are referring to please?
I had the stand alone MFSL 1-023 and it was just ok. I wouldn't say it was overly bright, so if they issued a brighter sounding version in the box set that probably would have been worse. The stand alone release was balanced enough in the top and bottom end but was lacking in the mid-range, i.e. it sounded very 'thin' to me. Now, there was a trend for "smiley" EQ back then which is fine for low to mid budget hi-fi systems, but ironically, a more neutral presentation would have suited those more with mid-range and higher hi-fi systems. I sold mine for about £90 quite a few years ago and never regretted it - a Japanese AR or EAS pressing will beat it, as will any analogue UK - original or re-issue.
I've nothing to compare it to as I don't think I'd ever actually listened to the album in its entirety before (!) but I looked for the -4/-3 HTM largely on the basis of this thread and it really does sound great in itself. I drove myself half mad trying to identify different versions online though, having to ask for matrix numbers etc. In the end I kind of gave up and just ordered one merely described as 'late 70s' for £20 and hit the jackpot, NM condition too! It helped make up for all the other overgraded used records I generally get online Decent album too. Ones to keep an eye on, these Beatles lads.
I thought I was crazy - because I have two MFSL AR's - one has the MFSL number on the side in white font. The other - none. Are these different cuts?
I'm not sure about anything. Well, if there was a UHQR and a regular MFSL pressing of "Pepper", that would be two right there, with a later box set version of same making three. But UHQR is a different animal anyway. If my understanding is correct, that would then mean three MFSL pressings of Pepper's, right (regular non-box, regular box and UHQR)? However, I have seen other long threads (other threads about "Abbey Road" on this forum? Gee, Ya think?) where a distinction was drawn between the non-box and box MFSL releases. Not counting possible UHQR releases of same. My understanding has been that one of the execs at MoFi had some sort of accident that damaged his hearing in the high frequencies, and for the box set ordered Stan Ricker to add amounts of high end boost so ridiculous that even Stan himself protested. It's the guy who writes the paychecks I guess. But then why do that with only one title in the box set, and not the others? MoFi was really on to something forty plus years ago when they started. It's such a shame that they then fell all over themselves ruining their own reputation for decades due to some stupid marketing decisions ("make them HEAR the difference"), only to cap it off by one brainless exec's insistence on assuming all purchasers to have had the same damage to hearing from the same accident that he did. Illustrating once again that these clowns in suits should be permanently BARRED from even entering the same building where the mastering suite is located, and denied even telephone or email access to same.
