How appropriate - this original purchaser posted right above you way back when! DCC Archive - Abbey Road-UHQR test pressing CDR itch » There's also a real good chance that Pink Floyd and you know who were more expensive than the other releases.
Can you imagine if these releases were of the Beatles stereo albums? Sure, the mono was done right on vinyl, but not the latest stereo vinyl pressings. Or Pink Floyd's The Wall. Or Genesis "Seconds Out." I would buy them ONLY if the reviews were positive.
I did speak to a rep that said this will be a numbered 2000 piece release and they had recently listened to a test pressing and everyone was stunned by the exceptional sound.
Not everyone will buy this ( understatement ) but I'm all for variety and having the opportunity to buy something if it's an item that I want.
I bet some will. Some folks will feel the need to choose between pricey hardware or pricey LPs, and will choose, for now, the pricey "finite batched" LPs.
Did the description of these specifically say real time cutting or just didn't mention half speed? Thanks.
How many times, and how many ways can they keep re-marketing the same stuff....and at $100 a pop, no less.
With the $ conversion and shipping these titles would run me $170-$175 Canuck bucks. I want to both cry and laugh hysterically.
For that price, it better come with a hit of acid. I want to be tripping out like Carlos when I meet the Ink Squid. Pass.
Exactly. Many that grew up in the 80s have been under-served for the 80s rock/New Wave titles (Intervention Records to the rescue, fingers crossed).
We get it. It's a good, basic analogy. Just not sure you could really justify calling someone a knuckle-dragger for not paying for the $17 cheeseburger.
Real time would definitely get my attention, but it would take a very special title to get me to drop $100. Also, in my limited experience with 1 step LPs, the difference was not earth shattering.
I will admit that the process intrigues me. Maybe if it were a favorite title, the curiosity would get the better of me. I wouldn't be disappointed if there was no discernible difference.
There are at least two posts you have made insinuating that some of us are poor because we don't care to spend $100 on a new release. Why make that assumption? I spend A LOT of money on vinyl, doesn't mean I need to spend it foolishly. I spent $240 last week on 4 used albums. No biggie for me, but I'm still not spending $100 on a new release.
Since these seem to be the latest in the line of price envelope priced audiophile records, it's interesting to consider again the UHQR releases. 1) More of the UHQR releases were purchased and tucked away as collectables than most other MFSL releases. This is reflected by the fact that sealed UHQR boxes are generally more plentiful than sealed copies of the standard MFSL releases. 2) The specific title matters. The Beatles and Pink Floyd UHQRs are worth considerably more than the Supertramp, which is worth more than the Cat Stevens and Alan Parsons, which are worth more than others. So if you are looking at these new releases as investments (not suggesting that's a good idea, but...) then think carefully about the title. Someone, earlier, referenced the Led Zeppelin vinyl box and how that suggests these things appreciate. Well, Led Zeppelin is Led Zeppelin, and Santana ain't no Led Zeppelin in terms of collectability. 3) Everyone's always looking for a marketing hook. "Half speed mastered". "Gold disc". "45rpm". "200g". "Limited edition." And so it goes. These new records. Some of these marketing hooks coincide with true improvements. Some look cool. Some improvements are substantial. Some are nominal. Hard to say here until the final product is heard. The placebo effect will be in full force--it always is. So you'll need to wait for the rare golden eared review tempered by clear-headed pragmatism.
