Quadrophenia - Original Mix

Discussion in 'Music Corner' started by lukpac, Jul 30, 2002.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. lukpac

    lukpac Senior Member Thread Starter

    Location:
    Milwaukee, WI
    It has often been said that:

    - the MCA version of this sucks
    - the MoFi version of this sucks
    - the Polydor is great and the one to get

    Well, after having the MCA for a long time, I finally found a Polydor (German) copy. 831 074-2. I listened to it and thought "hmmm, this doesn't sound all that much better." I did some more checking, and found out that my MCA and Polydor copies use the SAME digital master - i.e., they are identical.

    Well, not long ago I received copies of the MoFi (both Ultradisc and Ultradisc II). Once again, I didn't think it sounded that different from the other issues. Upon comparing them, it seems that while the same digital master was *not* used, the sound is almost identical to my MCA and Polydor copies. There seems to be a (very small) hint more treble on the MoFi version than the others, but all in all they are essentially the same. Not "flat" at all.

    I was also able to listen to a Japanese Polydor pressing. Same thing. An exact clone of the German version.

    What's the real deal here? Supposedly the MoFi "sucks", but comparison to the Polydor shows very little difference. Did Polydor upgrade their discs somewhere along the line? FWIW, the inner rings on my discs read:

    381 075-2 02 +
    831 076-2 01 *

    Either there's a mystery Polydor version out there that sounds a lot better, or the MoFi is fine after all.
     
  2. Ken_McAlinden

    Ken_McAlinden MichiGort Staff

    Location:
    Livonia, MI
    I have the MoFi and a Polydor Vinyl that I picked up in Europe circa 1985. The MoFi is comparable to that vinyl, IMHO, but it has been a while since I A/B'd them, so my memory may be shakey. The MoFi Quadrophenia has pretty wide dynamics compared to other Who recordings. Sometimes I wonder if the relatively low average level has thrown some reviewers off.

    Anyway, warts and all, it sounds pretty much like the vinyl version that got me through high school.

    Regards,
     
  3. wes

    wes Senior Member

    The MOFI is the only version of Quad that I have.......Just as I got rabbidly into The Who, I bought this version mainly because I was so impressed with mofi's Yellow Brick Road and Tea For The Tillerman.......and I was happy with the mofi Quadrophenia......


    -Wes
     
  4. Sckott

    Sckott Hand Tighten Only.

    Location:
    South Plymouth, Ma
    If anyone says the MFSL of Quad sucks, tell them to hush and sell you the copy cheap.

    I personally don't think it sucks. It sounds quite amazing. However, it does have the MFSL low-frequency flavor that people sometimes groan about. The higher frequencies sound fine. However, if the boomy MFSL sound
    creates a headache, get the MCA disc before it got remastered. There ARE differences in the mix. The remaster doesn't suck either, but it's a different animal.

    The MFSL sounds more like the Track/MCA vinyl original. The acoustic strongs in "Quadrophenia" (the song) actually feel realistic. Just a tad more so than in previous versions.

    Sometimes I *CAN* stand the remaster. Sometimes I can't.
     
  5. KLM

    KLM Senior Member

    So has anyone tried the new Universal 180 gram German pressing on Polydor. I actually just returned my copy. I didn't get a chance to compare it to the MCA or German Polydor lp (from the Who Phases boxset), but thought overall it had good sound. I returned it because one lp was warped and the other had some annoying pops as well as sizzle in quiet passages. I am hoping this was only a bad copy and not indictitive of all the new pressings.

    Does anyone have any opinions on this one. I believe its a copy of the original album and not the remixed version.
     
  6. Rspaight

    Rspaight New Member

    Location:
    Kentucky
    I replaced the original mix MCA with the German Polydor many years ago, mainly for the complete photo book. I thought the sound was a hair better, but not enough to get worked up about. I replaced that with the MoFi, which I was a bit disappointed in. It really wasn't the big improvement I was expecting (and the quality of the booklet was atrocious compared to the Polydor).

    I've since had the US MCA remix, and now the Japanese Polydor remix. The Japanese remix is the best *sounding* of any of them, though as pointed out it's certainly a different animal. My early issue MCA vinyl (w/ booklet, picked up at a yard sale for $1) does nicely when I need to hear the original mix.

    Wow. I have spent *way* too much money on Quadrophenia. Should I even mention the Japanese 2-CD version of the soundtrack?

    Ryan
     
  7. kipper15

    kipper15 Forum Resident

    Location:
    United Kingdom

    I have the new Universal 180g but it's still in the shrink-wrapping. I have been so busy lately haven't had a chance to play it yet (along with loads of other LP's and CD's!). I'll post my views on it when I've had a chance to listen and compare to my MoFi (UDII) and the '96 MCA remastered version. Sorry to hear you had problems with the Universal LP. Hopefully my copy is OK.
     
  8. kipper15

    kipper15 Forum Resident

    Location:
    United Kingdom
    Have to say I disagree about the MoFi, it cetainly does not suck to my ears and it's a whole lot better than the '96 MCA remaster. I haven't heard the 80s Polydor CD so can't really comment on that.
     
  9. Vivaldinization

    Vivaldinization Active Member

    Luke,


    You are not convincing me that my Japanese Polydor is anything but special. TO ATTEMPT TO DO SO WOULD BE DANNNGEROUUS.

    Or not. Heck, dumb purchase or not, it only cost me $20, which isn't that terribly bad. And it's probably just as hard to find the MCA nowadays (someone will definately prove me wrong).

    OT: FWIW, I picked up 2 copies of Lost and Found DCC today. So much for THAT thing's rarity value (and the 6th Avenue FYE--a store I normally hate--had two Everlys DCCs and a Jackson Browne DCC. Odd).

    -D
     
  10. Dob

    Dob New Member

    Location:
    Detroit
    Hmmm...I recall that my impressions of the Polydor vs the MFSL were opposite - i.e., that the MFSL was thicker and warmer, while the Polydor had more air and detail (more treble).

    I will go back to listen again and post my impressions. By the way, I'm assuming there was no discernable difference between the UD1 and the UD2?
     
  11. lukpac

    lukpac Senior Member Thread Starter

    Location:
    Milwaukee, WI
    Re: Re: Quadrophenia - Original Mix

    Well, IMO, differences are subtle at best. I've got a ProTools session set up to automatically switch back and forth between the two, and if I didn't know it was doing that, I'm not sure I'd even hear a difference.

    I haven't really listened to the UD2 much yet, but I have a feeling that there won't be. Not much, anyway.
     
  12. Steve Hoffman

    Steve Hoffman Your host Your Host

    I don't mean to butt in here but the MoFi "Quad" sounds pretty much dead on with the flat USA tape copy that I heard years ago.

    In other words, the MoFi sounds like the original mix.

    Good or bad, I dunno. I haven't played Quad since Pete told us he purposely put Roger's voice way down in the mix. Talk about shooting one's self in the foot!
     
    SinnerSaint likes this.
  13. lukpac

    lukpac Senior Member Thread Starter

    Location:
    Milwaukee, WI
    Er...it should - it is...:p

    At any rate, I have to wonder if the Polydor and MCA CDs are simply another flat transfer, since they sound so close to the MoFi.

    Yeah, the original mix of Quad wasn't that great. I think it did end up having a bit of a "flat" sound to it, especially compared to Who's Next.
     
  14. Ken_McAlinden

    Ken_McAlinden MichiGort Staff

    Location:
    Livonia, MI
    I may be wrong, but I thought that Quadrophenia was only released by MoFi as a UD I. Is it possible that someone confused the UDCD 2-XXX designation for a double disc with the UD II notation for their gain-mapping wacky-eq whatever it was series?

    Regards,
     
  15. lukpac

    lukpac Senior Member Thread Starter

    Location:
    Milwaukee, WI
    Wacky-eq?

    I guess I don't know about other CDs, but the EQ on the UD and UDII copies of Tommy matches. The only difference is some almost inaudible white noise.
     
  16. Sckott

    Sckott Hand Tighten Only.

    Location:
    South Plymouth, Ma
    Mine is a UD II but I bought mine very early in the game. Although, the back J card of the CD says "Ultradisc" Not II.
     

    Attached Files:

  17. Jason Smith

    Jason Smith Senior Member

    Location:
    Chicago
    To me, Quadrophenia sounds like it was mixed on headphones instead of loudspeakers. With headphones, it sounds great. You can hear the vocals better, the instrument balance is good. When you listen on speaker, it falls apart depending on where you're sitting, relative to the speakers.

    I always listen to that album with headphones anyway.

    Is it true that the 8-track had extended versions of some songs? I seem to remember "The Rock" being longer.
     
  18. Ken_McAlinden

    Ken_McAlinden MichiGort Staff

    Location:
    Livonia, MI
    Okay, I get it now. The Qudarophenia UDII was released, at least initially, with the UD I exterior packaging. That is, in fact, what I have. My smarmy eq comment related to a tendency for many UDIIs to have a tipped up top end (and sometimes a tipped down bottom end - would this be called "smiley-frown" eq :))compared to their predecessors. I sometimes got the impression that the folks working the boards for these masterings must have had things way too loud when they made their equalization decisions.

    This is a "many", not an "all" situation, but sometimes frustration leads to generalization.

    Regards,
     
  19. Dob

    Dob New Member

    Location:
    Detroit
    Are you saying that loud levels tend to make one want to turn the treble up? I almost always myself turning the treble down.
     
  20. Sckott

    Sckott Hand Tighten Only.

    Location:
    South Plymouth, Ma
    It "feels" like a slight bit of a smilie-face EQ. The treble doesn't sound as boosted as the bass. However, it may be that the master was boomy to begin with.
     
  21. Dave

    Dave Esoteric Audio Research Specialistâ„¢

    Location:
    B.C.
    Luke,

    If you're still talking to me....:confused: Weren't you one of the people that attempted to shoot me down about a year ago for saying that "Quadrophenia doesn't suck, in fact it sounds great, along with most of the Who MFSL releases", or was that someone else?

    Still hangin' onto my Who UD1's;) and I don't think I'll be selling my SH Who's Next for the MFSL version anytime soon.
     
  22. Ken_McAlinden

    Ken_McAlinden MichiGort Staff

    Location:
    Livonia, MI
    I'm saying that loud levels tend to make you turn the bass down a lot and/or the treble up a little. The bass tends to dominate everything when all of the hairs in your ear have been flattened. If the high-end was already unnaturally boosted however, apply gauze to your ears to help the blood clot. :)

    For the record, I do not think the UD II of Quadrophenia constitutes an example of this. That's one of the reasons I mistakenly thought I had an UD I.

    Regards,
     
  23. lukpac

    lukpac Senior Member Thread Starter

    Location:
    Milwaukee, WI
    The only post I can find is from May:

    I should have mentioned at the time that I hadn't heard the MoFi, as I did in this post from March:

    So...
     
  24. lukpac

    lukpac Senior Member Thread Starter

    Location:
    Milwaukee, WI
    UDI vs. UDII

    FWIW, as I did with Tommy, I loaded up the UDI and UDII versions of Quadrophenia into ProTools. I lined them up, then inverted one. Doing this lets us easily determine what, if any differences exist between the two. Things that are the same drop out, as they are out of phase. Things that are different stick around for us to hear.

    The Tommy comparison revealed a very small amount of white noise - almost inaudible at normal listening levels, but perhaps still perceived by some people. Amplifying it quite a bit make it audible at normal levels. No music could be heard, just white noise (if MoFi had done a level or EQ change you'd be able to hear it).

    With Quad, there seems to be a *hint* of white noise, which has a maximum peak of -76.3 dB. Audible? I'd tend to say no.

    So, don't worry about it if you have a UDII and not a UDI...
     
    SinnerSaint likes this.
  25. Ken_McAlinden

    Ken_McAlinden MichiGort Staff

    Location:
    Livonia, MI
    Re: UDI vs. UDII

    ...and I suppose not being able to tell whether a sealed copy is UD I or UD II becomes less of an issue as well. :D

    I can't imagine that WaY would vary much either. It seemed like the UD I was out for about 3-1/2 minutes before the UDIIs starting showing up. Of course, my assumptions have been wrong before...

    Regards,
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page

molar-endocrine