More Elton John Madness!!! (DJM vs. MCA vs. Polydor)

Splitting hairs... a mastering that does not sound like the original source mastering is still a "different" mastering even though the source is the same. Even though a mastering engineer prior to pressing did not change anything it is still a different mastering otherwise there would be no differences at all between pressing plants CD's and the way their pressings sound, equipment or otherwise.

Make any sense to anyone else?

 

So.... we're saying that my EJ does have noise reduction or no....?

 

No, it isn't Dave.

Mastering is not the same thing as pressing. The two can be separated. Pressings that sound different on one player can sound the same on another player. The same is not true if the masterings are different.

Rip a UD and a UDII to your PC and they will sound the same. Rip a UD and a stock copy to your PC and they won't.

 

Played back through what, my crappy computer speakers? Of course they "may" sound the same, through my highly inferior system. This means nothing in the big picture.

Seriously though, now we're getting into the equipment and there are huge differences. For me, it's like talking about the speed and grace of a Ferrari to someone who's never even seen one before, never mind actually riding in or driving one. You honestly can't appreciate the differences until you've been there and driven it.

 

"Computer speakers" can be any quality you want them to be. My "computer speakers" are the loudspeakers of my stereo system. If yours are "crappy", you should consider upgrading your equipment.

 

Why, I don't listen to music through it except on-line just like I don't watch TV on it? I do understand there's a heck of a lot better computer speakers out there, I just can't justify buying them for me is all.

 

No, Dave, you don't understand.

On some systems there are no differences. Not "you can't hear them because the system isn't good enough".

Why did you refuse to believe Mal when he said after upgrading his system the differences between different pressings of the same mastering went away?

And no, not on your "crappy computer speakers". Hook your PC up to your stereo.

 

I'm not at Mal's so I can't pretend to hear his system. I have agreed a lot of the time with him, but there are cases where I simply do not agree with him based on my own experiences. I know nothing of the squeeze-box he now uses instead of or along with CD's, but compressing any signal, like the squeeze-box does, does not reveal identical to the original playback from what I've heard.

We're really broad sweeping here Luke. In a nutshell from my listening experiences there are some as you say that are identical masterings like the P2 matrix MCA's from both the USA and Canada. I've heard these and compared them against the original MCA's to draw this conclusion. The originals, between the DJM, Polydors and MCA's all sound different from one another to me.

Until I find another word to describe the audible differences in pressings without using the "M" word I will continue to say they're different masterings even though their source is in fact the same.

Hooking up my PC to my system is not at all practical where I live. Besides, I have serious doubts that a PC transport, even though it's a Plextor, will compete on the same playing field with my SCD-1 transport.

 

How will you know unless you've tried?

 

FWIW, I agree with Dave.

EAC or whatever waveforms are helpful but not the final answer - you need to listen with your own ears (hopefully on a high resolution system). In my my opinion (and these three words are critical, as well as an acceptance that "I could be wrong", what a concept), why does the SH mastered Made in Japan Katy Lied CD sound 'right' and the SH mastered USA CD sound less than right, when both have identical waveforms?

 

I guess I'll have to wait until I move one day.

 

As far as them being no different, wouldn't just uploading a track from each into your computer, playing them back and comparing if the kbps number is the same be at least some kind of indication? If they both have the VERY SAME number I think that would be somewhat indicative that they are the same, no? I might come off like a hayseed for that, as that number probably has nothing to do with EQ, but if they both read out identical then there's a good chance they're the same remaster.

 

Yes, it would indicate that one or more computer programs perceive them to be the same. Like every program they do have limitations.

No, read above.

Sean, different eq. is well detected by wave analysis computer programs.

 

The point is, again, it depends on the equipment.

Play the two CDs back. Will they sound different on your player? Apparently.

Copy them both to Barry's computer (or whatever it is he uses). Will they sound the same? Yes.

The physical properties of the disc *can* be separated from the mastering. It's just for some reason some (most?) equipment doesn't.

 

If EAC says the files are identical, the mastering is the same. End of story.

What EAC will *not* tell you about are the physical properties of the disc that affect the sound on *some* players. For one thing, EAC ignores those properties (as every player *should*), and it isn't even clear what those properties are.

 

After reading this thread, I think what you have here is that some listeners are hearing the audible artifacts of digital, and or digital-analog-digital cloning.

 

What is "digital-analog-digital cloning"?

 

Dave is lumping manufacturing in with mastering as a "mastering variance".

I think that in the end Luke and Dave agree that the same digital file pressed in 2 cd's from different plants sound different on playback.

You guys are at it over semantics. If you were side-by-side listening to these discs on a single rig you'd be nodding your heads together.

- - - -

Boys, I'd sure like to hear Elton John s/t without the crazy eq on my
Polydor cd and without the smiley-face eq on the Rocket.

 

You'll probably like the first-press *German or Japanese* (i.e. not the UK) DJM CD then. It's the closest to the tonality of the original vinyl that you're likely to find.

Plus, you get the alt. mix of SYO.

 

What I'm saying, is that it may be possible that U-Matics/PCM F1 etc. were played back through a D/A converter, to another machine using it's analog inputs hence, Digital-Analog-Digital. I doubt it's likely, but it can happen.

Could explain why some identical masterings are a "little lower" in volume.

 

The only problem with that scenario is that...*any* additional analog stage will alter the bit structure -- even if ever so slight -- and they won't be *bit identical* anymore. That is, it's absolutely impossible to do anything in the analog domain without altering the waveform, even if it's at a miniscule level.

While they might be close, they won't be "identical" anymore.

 

What DRM said.

 

If that's the case, then somewhere between the prepared digital master, the created glass master, and the final product, *something* is happening. What could it possibly be?

 

Not quite. I agree they *can* sound different. I don't agree they *have* to sound different, nor that they *should* sound different.

Make sense?

 

Yes. But WHY is the question here.