A question..do you believe that there are audiophile reissues that have come to market that actually have poor SQ simply due to the fact that the original master tape was nothing special SQ wise to begin with?
A question for those who know more about this sorts of thing than I do: at what level of system do you begin to seriously notice the difference between a "standard" audiophile pressing (say, an Analogue Productions release) and the more expensive pressings like the UD1S releases and the new AP UHQR vinyl? I am trying to decide, as someone who listens actively and appreciates the clarity and nuance of a good pressing, if these releases would be worth it on my system, which is a Pro-Ject X1 with a Sumiko Ranier MM cartridge, going into a NAD C316BEE v2 integrated amp, and a pair of Triangle Borea BR03 speakers. I've been very pleased with the results I've gotten from this "entry-level" system but don't want to drop $125 on a pressing where I won't hear a substantial improvement in the sound.
IME, perhaps the answer to your question has to do with the expectation that you have of the SQ you are going to receive for the money spent. There are a few standard albums out there that can beat the pants off some of the expensive reissues in SQ. The problem I think we are seeing on these threads is that folk want to hear the best sound they can from an album with music that they like ( and probably remember from their child hood).... and MoFi and others are trying to cater to that. Where the issue arises is that these very same consumers are expecting an 'audiophile' sounding record, and that is not happening. This is due, as I have noted above, because the original master tape of the reissue in question just didn't have great SQ to begin with. The system you are using will play back the album only as well as the mastering allows. If your system is more resolving, it will play back the album with either greater SQ, or worse SQ..depending on what is on the master tape to begin with.Equating a value to a system that will be able to play back a 'standard' ( whatever that is?) audiophile pressing is probably not the right question to ask. A better question, at least IMHO, would be to inquire as to what one should be looking for in the sound of the master tape...do we want accuracy of timbre, superior lifelike dynamics, a frequency spectrum that is extended and accurate--basically a recording that we can say is close to the sound of what we hear from a real live instrument in a live un-amplified space. ( which is what HP came up with his idea of 'The Absolute Sound'). So, whether we find this on the 'One Step' release of a sub-par master tape, or from a run of the mill release of a superb master recording is a more important question, again IMHO.
Jeff, for the love of God…. If you play, say…. 50-100 records over a long weekend and they sound really good, you don’t overhaul your system to try and save the one record you felt sounded a bit subpar. This approach makes no sense because now you very likely will screw up how great the other 99 records sounded in order to accommodate this oulier. Sonically this is illogical and makes about zero sense. You don’t build a system around the one bad sounding record you hear. You build it around the majority of the records you hear on that system sounding good to you, and then get on with your listening enjoyment.
Thank you for your response. What you are saying about the quality of the master tape and the nature of the original recording itself makes good sense to me. Just to clarify, when I said "standard" audiophile pressing, I was referring to pressings a notch above a mass-market release, perhaps cut at 45 RPM/pressed at a plant with better quality control/AAA if applicable. Considering that a lot of mass-market releases are of a sub-par quality these days, I have found it rewarding to invest in these slightly more expensive, and usually significantly better-sounding, releases. My main question was whether the additional effort that goes into, say, an UD1S release (i.e., the one-step process and, I suppose, the SuperVinyl material?) has a markedly better result on a system like mine to warrant the price. But your point is well-taken; it makes sense that even the best sort of pressing can't make up for a bad master tape.
Ok, so this question is a personal one. I recently bought the now pricey MoFi release of T-Rex Electric Warrior. I knew in advance that the SQ was not going to be impressive, simply as the master tape was p---ss poor to begin with. I also knew that the pressing i was going to get would be a) quiet in the groove, b) probably as good as the MoFi can get from this pig...and c) broken up into a couple of records as it is on a 45rpm release...meaning the musical flow is badly interrupted. I bought this release as it was an album from my youth, which I had not heard for decades, and it was music that i didn't totally dislike. Looking back on the purchase, I could have been more than satisfied with the SACD release of the same record at a considerably lower price. BUT it is also nice to have the record in my collection, as I kind of like the fact that I can play it occasionally and say to myself..well this is as good as it gets. The question I sometimes wonder is whether other folk are buying these albums with the same expectations as I do, or since MoFi is a 'audiophile' label--have the expectation of receiving a top notch reissue from a SQ perspective. ( and whether MoFi is somewhat inadvertently ( or not?) misleading folk into believing this due to their reputation- and the price asked?)
Guys, I am sorry that I fanned the flames here about the Vanilla Fudge 45. Jeff is certainly entitled to his opinion, and I am glad he enjoys the record. It's too bad that he chose to turn it into an equipment issue, while several of the other posters here seemed to better understand my original point (which began with my earlier posting on the Still Crazy One Step): I am happy to spend $50-$125 on records that are likely to benefit from premium treatment. Those certainly exist, including many from MFSL. However, choosing titles that have lower upside with respect to sound quality, just because you think they will sell, is not doing either the consumer or the company any favors in the long run. I am going to listen to the VF 45 again right after I post this, but I promise not to write another word about it.
I played the Vanilla Fudge record a few weeks ago. I didn't think it sounded that good. Maybe decent in some parts. Guess I'll have to pop for that $45K phono stage I was thinking about.
Here is an interesting thing. These One Step records are advertised by Mofi as 180g... Well, guess what? It ain’t necessarily so. I felt my Paul Simon One Step discs were kind of light, so I weighed them… And they seem to clock in at more like 160gr. I know it (apparently) doesn’t matter SQ wise, but if you’re not going to do 180gr, then you shouldn’t claim that you are… Right?
I think the Vanilla Fudge sounds quite good for what it is. It is a dense, 50+ year old, mono recording. Better equipment likely renders the density of the music better than lesser equipment, but it’s not going to turn it into an audiophile spectacular. If you like the music, it’s a great buy IMO, but if you are a sound quality first, music second kind of listener then, yeah, this wouldn’t be my first recommendation. I enjoy the release quite a bit myself.
While I understand what you’re saying, I fully disagree that upgrading a phono stage will make the other records sound worse. Assuming you make a well researched decision and get a piece that matches your other equipment, it will raise performance across the board. I’ve upgraded my phono a few times and each of those were some of the biggest incremental improvements I have heard in my system. The phono stage is hugely important IMO
You consider Still Crazy as a “lower upside” recording? Or am I misunderstanding? Still Crazy UD1S sounds fantastic. Do I have better sounding records in my collection? Yes, but the list is pretty short. And my collection is built heavily on audiophile reissues and original pressings that are highly regarded. While I am certainly music first with my purchases, I try to get the best sounding version (or the best I can afford) each time I add an album to the collection.
Here's the thing, will a better system sound better? yes Can it make a record sound better? yes Can a specific record sound better than another same title? yes Look at the system and media as two separate parts and I say this all the time, The record is the other half of the systems sound quality, it starts where the stylus meets the groove. So knowing both the system and records play a part in SQ we hear coming out our systems, your question is where is the record more beneficial. I would say having the better of both one can get is the best of both worlds. However and this is what started the debate over the last page. If you system is static and doesn't change, and you put two different copies of a same title on, they can and will sound different. How much different will be dependent on the records in question, they may not be all that far from each other. A better system might be able to resolve finer nuances in both records, but a basic good quality system should tell you all you need to know comparing the two. The thing is we all work with what we have as a system within our budgets, records are made by others and are out of our control as to how they sound. Buying the best records and having them doesn't mean our systems will never change and we can have better SQ playing that record. Conversely, if our system is entry level and could use to be elevated, or wanting better, and our budget is holding us back in doing so, one has to think where they are putting their extra funds. Whats better for you in your specific system if you have a limited amount of funds to work with. Buying a Sumiko EVO III for $500 to replace your Sumiko Ranier? Or buying 3 One Step titles? I would say spending the money on a cartridge swap will make every record you own sound better. Where as buying a better reissue record will maybe only sound better than another same title copy you might have. I do know some people feel or think basically all playback equipment is the same or pretty close. They can also feel the record and the mastering out weighs the system and is a quick route to sound quality. That's not the case at all and one should look at everything as a whole. Perspective is in order, and if buying record is holding one back at moving the system to the level of the record one wants to buy, a decision will need to be made.
When I was younger, I bought two MOFI UHQR records - The Beatles' Sgt. Pepper and Cat Stevens' Tea for the Tillerman. They cost me $50 plus tax, an exorbitant amount at the time. At the time, I had never seen such an over the top presentation. An entire box for ONE record, two pieces of foam, technical specifications and a numbered certificate. I didn't have the equipment to do them justice, then, for nearly 15 years, I didn't have any equipment at all, so they sat on my shelf, nicely protected in plastic sleeve. I read the technical insert, and never really understood it, but I assumed SQ would be over the top as well. I finally got a high-end system, took them out, and I thought they sounded very good. Perfectly flat, and the vinyl was dead quiet. But, I prefer the mono Pepper, and there are many versions of Tea for Tillerman that sounds as good, or maybe better. I don't play them at all. On the other hand, they both sell for hundreds of dollars today. So, I guess the conclusion is . . . . . . hell, I don't know, but I can tell you one thing, I wish that I had bought Dark Side of the Moon.
Really, why waste time caring what others think about your system? Enjoy the music on the hardware you have and drop out of this endless debate.
The Vanilla Fudge isn't particularly well recorded. It's loud, fuzzy, crunchy, and has a sound indicative of most mid-late '60s rock records. Still very enjoyable and probably better than an original. Seems to be undying loyalty to labels that prevent them from seeing any wrong in them. I see a plethora of '80s MFSL albums touted on social media when by and large, they were considered crap for years.
I think you missed my point, @Tim1954. He posted a broad statement that the record, the MoFi 45rpm reissue of Vanilla Fudge was a waste, and that MoFi and the like should concentrate on records worthy of an audiophile level reissue. Many here, including myself, think that not only is it a top-notch reissue, but that it was one of the best ones of the year it came out. He has a personal right to not like it. That's not the point. But if you have a Maserati and you say to a group of car enthusiasts, "Y'know, I'm disappointed in this car. It's okay, but it doesn't drive over 60mph.", someone from that car enthusiast group might wonder if there is something wrong with either your particular Maserati, or something else. You would be entitled to not like the car, but you might be curious, since all of the others in the blog rave about that same model, if there might be something else going on with that car. He might be perfectly happy with what he hears with most of his records, but the MoFi might be challenging his system in such a way that it's possibly illuminating a limitation. Capiche? Whether he wants to explore it is up to him. I was trying to be helpful because, looking at this system, that's the one part of it that could be significantly limiting. Another possible is the moving magnet cartridge. MM carts are not known for deciphering small level details, and the complex intricacies of the playing may not be being conveyed. Moving Magnets are good at color and big, broad statements, with lots of meat on its bones. While the 2M Bronze is a really nice, musical cartridge, it is a moving magnet cartridge, with its relative limitations. I tried an Ortofon 2M Mono SE, essentially the equivalent of a 2M Black, and I sold it. It just didn't convey pretty much any the subtle detail of my Benz wood M2. So lower sound level complex information was almost not even there. And I knew that it existed because I heard it through the Benz. I'm only trying to be of help. Again, he can do with my suggestions as he wishes. Just a thought. And I appreciate another poster offering to have him bring over the album so he can hear it on another system. I hope he takes accepts that offer. It just might give him another perspective. And I hope we're all open to other perspectives here.
I see what you mean and that makes sense. I guess my bigger, more general point is that it is somewhat illogical (and potentially a big mistake) to start worrying about “upgrading” when the vast majority of your music listening leaves you wanting for nothing. There is no system at any price where there won’t be records that don’t quite measure up for you when somebody else hears it differently. Personally, I would always chalk this up to different taste first.
All is relative. And if you upgrade in the future, you'll have the LP. But you can test it out, just use two vintage LP's of the same title with different mastering and see if you can tell the difference.
Now this makes sense. You are comparing a prior recording to the new MoFi and you are impressed with the increase in SQ. While that is an important aspect of the reissue, it does NOT address the fact that the original was quite poor sounding ..and the new release, while superior, is NOT a pressing that one would hold out as a great example of what the recording art can accomplish. The 'One Step Sunday' you mentioned is a much better example of what MoFi should be releasing on their 'premium' priced 'One Step' series. Simply because the mastering was very good to begin with and the 'One Step' release has the ability to bring this to a very high level, not just from the music stand point, BUT from the SQ as well. This is the difference and I believe it is where Bruce is coming from. I know I am. One release is adding beauty to an already great album, the other ( in the case of VF and frankly- EW) is putting lipstick on a pig. Nothing wrong with either approach, so long as the consumer realizes this is exactly what they are getting in both instances and acquires the product with that knowledge. Are MoFi, or their vendors, making that clear?
