Linda's favorite digital versions of all Black Sabbath albums

That castle cd is damn smooth sounding though!!!!
To me the Sacd of Paranoid and possibly the 2016 sound closer to the First German Vertigo
Pressing which is bass heavy and to me sounds great!!!!
And yes I know the midrange on the Sacd for Paranoid is recessed a bit

 

Crazy that none of them seem to be the same
I am assuming you still like the TUC the best though?

 

The UK Porky is slightly compressed and is beefier sounding than most other vinyl pressings
If that is the original intent of the album then seek out cd's that sound closest to that one
I actually like the 2016 WB cd somewhat for that reason!!!
Although it has the midrange recessed a bit

 

Yes

 

If this is supposed to mean that the Vol4 2016 CD sounds similar to the original UK LP, than, I strongly disagree: IMO that is not the case at all. The Vol4 2016 CD is deservedly disliked by many forum members because it sounds extremely bright and far removed from any early LP pressing.

 

As usual that is your opinion
Stop reading between the lines that is my opinion and I am entitled to it
I said I liked the 2016 somewhat and that the midrange is recessed but it has a lot of bass
Have you heard the Porky?

 

Inspired by your recommendation for Technical Ecstasy towards the original WB and judgement of the Hi-Res (my fave up until now), I felt I wanted to check this by myself and compared three different masterings: the Hi-Res, the WB 2969-2 and the Vertigo 838 224-2.

What surprised me was how much the listening experience differed from my Sennheiser DT880 headphones to my speaker setup (PreSonus E 4.5)!
On the speakers, I found the WB quite muddy and the Vertigo really smooth - the Hi-Res was somewhere in between, but with more aggressive mids (compression?).
Then on the headphones, the Vertigo had more low end (I mean the lower lows, not the lower mids) and still more heights than the WB while the Hi-Res stayed true to the impression I already had while listening with the speakers.

It also mattered to which song I was listening - "All Moving Parts Stand Still", "You Won't Change Me" or "Dirty Women" had quite obvious differences in sound while "Rock'n'Roll Doctor", "She's Gone" or "It's Alright" sounded rather samey...

My (rather unsatisfactory) conclusion:
Vertigo 838 224-2: sounds smiley-EQued for making a nice overall listening experience, resulting in the possibly most removed sound from the original tapes - even though you mentioned its sound would be closest to UK and US vinyl pressings!
WB 2969-2: sometimes good, sometimes with a tendency to the muddy. I'm still confused how much better it sounded on the headphones, but this varies depending on the song - maybe an indication of less EQuing during mastering?
Hi-Res: I can't agree with it being too bright. While it is bright indeed, I think it's the sound they had in mind, especially regarding the even further "removed from traditional" follow-up NSD, and I could well imagine a sound more in the direction of "Master Of Reality" would have been felt as a step back by the boys.
Besides that eventualities, the Hi-Res mastering has definitely more mids than the original Vertigo and WB, that's for sure - I guess that's why you call it bright. In that way, it is indeed harsher then the other two, but far from bad:
The heights are not cutting-through or hurting, they're simply well defined. As it also manages to preserve the bass and has quite intact dynamics, I don't really feel like needing to remove it from my top spot here.

I'm not crazy about "Technical Ecstasy", but I'd still like to have an adequate mastering. Meanwhile, I'm afraid it's a rather messy and chaotic production like Vol 4.
What do you think? I mean, if you want to, because I know TE is not an album too many do reach for, and there are still enough other albums waiting for treatment.
To be honest, I wonder why I dug so deep here - must be because I mostly totally agree with your POVs.

 

Thanks, very interesting! I probably won't have time to revisit this any time soon, but I surely will at some point. I am pretty sure though that when I said this album was too bright, I was referring to what I consider to be a boosted high end, not mids. Maybe my system is brighter-sounding than yours, or maybe my hearing is more liable to be irritated by brightness; I do remember I found the original vinyl too bright, and the 2016 CD brighter yet than the vinyl.

 

I think I know what you mean...I’ll exclude the Vertigo from this discussion section since I haven’t heard it. With regard to the WB CD, despite the fact that most people here like it, I’ve always found it to be a bit flat, dull and lifeless. It’s a very quiet mastering overall, and to be fair, it does sound better once you turn it up a bit. I’d originally thought that this would be my mastering of choice, especially since I’m drawn to a bit of a darker sound for Sabbath in general. Not in this case, though! I can honestly say that Technical Ecstasy is the one 2016 which I really like. Yes, it is bright - but it also retains a certain warmth which I quite enjoy. Also, I’m prepared to make an exception to my usual preferences since I feel a lighter, brighter sound was what they were going for here, as you aptly stated. The addition of keyboards, standard tuning etc. lend themselves to more of a bright mastering anyway, imo. I’m actually quite pleased with the way the 2016 sounds.

 

Every time I see this thread I think it's going to be about a list that Linda McCartney did in the 90s.

 

Lol!

 

Nice thread, and a good compliment to Roland's picks. Here's what I've (currently) got:

Black Sabbath - Creative Sounds 6006 (Made in Holland)
I don't see this particular CD discussed here or in other threads, but to my ears it sounds better than the 6006-2 I used to have. Its peak levels are:
71.4%-58.4%-67.4%-74.5%-65.4%

Paranoid - Vertigo 33PD-353 (Made in Japan)
Pretty good overall, plus it has "Evil Woman" (which is not on my copy of the debut), though it sounds a bit dull on my system.

Master of Reality - Sanctuary (Deluxe Edition)
This also sounds a bit dull to me, but I really like that 2nd disc, so will probably keep it.

Vol. 4 - Castle Communications (CLACD 199)
Has some bizarre level shifts throughout, but is actually quite listenable (and crank-able!) overall.

Sabbath Bloody Sabbath - Castle Communications (CLACD 201)
Very good, and I recall reading somewhere in this forum that these '86 discs just have that "spook" about 'em. No need to look elsewhere.

Sabotage - Warner Bros. (2822-2)
Doesn't have "Blow On A Jug" (which I heard on the inferior "Black Box" edition), though that track isn't really necessary to me.

Heaven and Hell - Sanctuary (Deluxe Edition)
Much better than the U.S. Warner Bros. CD I used to have, though there appears to be some debate over this title.

Live At Last - Castle Communications (NELCD 001)
Well, this truly is a muddy/sludgy/(grungy?) mess however you slice it, but there's a kind of authenticity here that I like.

Mob Rules - Warner Bros. (3605-2)
While that 2nd disc of the Deluxe Edition looks pretty tasty, I'll probably stick with this very fine sounding CD.

I still would like to eventually pick up Born Again, but there doesn't appear to be any good digital version of that one, which (like Live At Last) probably speaks to the recording itself. Am hesitant about going down the vinyl route/rabbit hole regarding Black Sabbath, as I may not return!

 

It's alright - I'm happy being able to contribute here!
As for my music system, it's more towards a studio- than hifi-environment because of my music-making ambitions in face of a small wallet - can't afford both!
So, while my equipment tries to sound more pure then nice, I wouldn't say that my ears are always able to interpret the nuances the right way, and that's why I appreciate any reactions.
As for the boosted high end you speak of, I think I understood your writing the way you meant it - it's just that I was looking for a reason of your opinion as it differed so much from mine.

 

I heavily recommend the 2009 version of this album. Really beefy sounding without much compression at all, and it has Blow on a Jug!

 

The deluxe for Born Again is very good easy choice

 

I agree, the Born Again Deluxe 2xCD is very nice and includes "The Fallen". IMO there is no problem with digital versions of the album as such. There are two very good ones, as I mentioned in my original post. Sure, the mix is far from perfect, but of course any vinyl version uses the exact same mix.

 

Truth be told, I’m torn between this one and the original WB... At times I feel the low end on the 2009 is a bit too overpowering.

 

I am not "reading between the lines". You clearly suggested that the 2016 CD sounds close to the Porky by saying:

the main difference being, according to your post, that the 2016 CD

Even with that qualification, your overall claim suggests much more similarity between the 2016 CD and the Porky vinyl than exists. Granted, it is an opinion, but not on a purely subjective matter. Similarities and differences in terms of EQ are objectively measurable (as exemplified by Kevin's great graphs). It is a fact, not just an opinion, that the 2016 CD is extremely bright compared to the Porky, and more generally speaking MUCH farther removed from it EQ-wise than several other digital releases are, especially the SACD. Whether you like the 2016 or not, is of course an entirely different matter. I am not disputing the fact that you like it. I am disputing the accuracy of your description of its sound as compared to the Porky. And I will keep doing that, especially in my thread, because it is intended to provide people with helpful information, rather than false claims.

Are you reading my posts at all? I have already answered this question many times on this forum, including today in this thread.

Very good example. I have experienced pretty much the same thing. Which setup is used for playing and digitizing the vinyl obviously makes a huge difference.

 

I am puzzled too. Again, I will definitely revisit this one at some point.

Now I am even more puzzled. Usually you seem to be leaning towards darker masterings even significantly more than I do (given that you prefer the 2009 CDs over the SACDs for both the debut and Vol4, and the 1986 Castle over the SACD for MOR); or, putting it the other way around, I seem to be a little more tolerant regarding brightness. Strangely, however, I prefer a dark mastering for TE and you prefer one that is even significantly brighter than the already bright-sounding original vinyl. (It is fine that you do, obviously - just trying to process what's happening here.)

I get what you both are saying about TE going into a different direction musically and thus requiring a different sound than e.g. MOR (I wouldn't want to sound it like MOR); and I actually agree that the original WB sounds a bit dull. Still, in this case I would rather stick with a needledrop or the original WB CD than accept what Pearce did to this album in 2012. Anyway, it's been a while since I listened to this album, we'll see if I change my mind next time. ;-)

Btw, Music_dude, about the MOR 1986 Castle: doesn't the obvious sonic difference between tracks 1-4 and 5-8 bother you? Something clearly went wrong there, as rnranimal pointed out:
Black Sabbath - The 70’s Era CD Picks
I think in this case, nostalgia is really counterproductive. ;-) The Castle is seriously flawed, while the SACD is one of the very best, if not THE best-sounding digital Sabbath release of all time.

 

agreed though not exactly an option while driving

 

Yes, you’re absolutely right, however in the case of TE, the 2016 simply sounds nicer on my system. There are two caveats here, though - The TE 2016 disc is the lone exception to my preference of dark masterings. Secondly, one’s system will also have a substantial impact on sound. Now, for MOR I completely agree that the SACD is the definitive version of this album on CD. If I’m in the mood to listen objectively, this is now my ‘go to’ disc. However, if I’m in a nostalgic mood and pining for the 80’s, I’ll throw on the 86’ Castle which instantly takes me back in time to when I first discovered Black Sabbath.

 

No false claims once again I said as far as the bass is concerned and I already said the midrange was recessed!!!!
So you have no argument!!!
It's an option let people decided for themselves and yes you are intitled not to like it!!!
Some people like the 2009 discs some don't, some like the 2016 cds some don't
In no way,shape or form did I say it matches the Porky exactly!!!!

 

The demos for "Born Again" actually in my opinion sound better than the finished album

 

I know that's how some people feel about those demos. However, the demos in circulation are from cassette tape, and IMO it shows. To my ears, the Deluxe 2xCD and the Japan PHCR-2054 CD are better in terms of fidelity and overall.

I already explained that what I was worried about was not your preference but the descriptive content of your comments. It now looks like you were trying to say the bass on the Vol4 2016 CD somehow reminds you of the Porky LP, while the mids on the 2016 are weaker and the highs are boosted. I'll leave it to others to decide for themselves if that claim (a) makes sense to them or not and (b) if it is true or not.

I fully agree with Tim1954 on this issue:

 

Ok Good
The fidelity might be better on a official release but the overall mix and sound is much better in my opinion on the demos