The Beatles Stereo Vinyl Box Set: advice

The US-produced slip cover of the box had the FBI seal on the back, but I think it's possible they are now filling the boxes with Optimal-pressed copies. So the best way is to look at the records' labels: if they say "MADE IN EU", they are Optimal's.

 

They don’t say Made In EU on the labels

 

Then they're probably Rainbo's. On my EU set it says MADE IN EU in all the labels, below the outer rim of text.

 

Okay..thanks for helping me....

 

I have played Hard Days Night, With The Beatles and Past Masters.
No issue with these pressings whatsoever...

 

With a moderate cart, arm and table, properly set up, provided there are no pressing issues, these indeed sound great, better than the DMM digital vinyl releases leading up to them, between the BC-13 era and these releases. FWIW, the 2014 AAA Mono releases are going to be the closest and best representations to what is still on the tapes.

Other than Rubber Soul a well as Help, which I learned from researching and reading here, these 2 are sourced from George Martin's mid-later '80's 16 bit 44.1 cd files, out of deference to his mastering choices. All in all, IIRC reading here, all the masters had been transferred to 192khz/24bit flat transfers by the time the Stereo Vinyl Box was released. The decision to release the Stereo vinyl using down-sampled 24 bit 44.1 files (aside from Help and Rubber Soul) is perplexing as well as short sighted. Perhaps the decision was made so that the Stereo set can be re-released on Digital as well as vinyl in 192/24 format, forcing those on the fence, as well as those of us who want the increased resolution, willing to shell out again for the entire catalog.

Again FWIW, all of these stereo releases all sound better than all 3 of Giles Martin 50th anniversary remasters ( SPLHCB, TWA, & AR), which I am very unhappy with sonically. Too much bass, lack of warmth, and tipped up highs, like Mobile Fidelity Sound Labs releases, but with more limiting and compression to my ears.

All these audible opinions are based on listeing to the above releases through a VPI Avenger Plus, 12" JMW 3d tonearm, Sumiko Blackbird cart with Ruby cantilever and upgraded stylus profile, Nordost Valhalla tonearm wiring, Custom low capacitance specially shielded/grounded phono cables made my Steven Leung at VAS, (who also redid the Blackbird at the same time.

Preamp is a Mc C2500, with Tributaries interconnects, connected to MC501 power amps pushing rebuilt Mc XRT-20 line array loudspeakers, which are wall mounted and dialed in closely for the room.
An improved stylus profile goes a long way to reducing or all but eliminating surface noise and other sonic detractions in the vinyl, if the vinyl is moderately well pressed. The periphery ring is unneeded, all LP's were 180 gram flat, (other than those mentioned DMM releases, which exhibit small percentage of runout or warping), a platter mat is also unused, but the heavy VPI HR/X spindle weight was used to couple the vinyl to the bare platter.

The better the vinyl front end, and ancillary equipment albeit properly set up, the better a quality LP will sound... garbage in, garbage out!

Everything I've read says based on Sean McGee's (SP?) notes and quotes, these are sourced from 24 bit non-limited files, unlike the CD's which are downsampled further to 16 bit 44.1 with limiting and compression added. The bit depth between 16 bit and 24 bit makes all the difference in the world, sound wise, as does the reduction of overall limiting as well as compression.

A trashy LP as well as a poorly mastered one will if anything sound far WORSE on a more accurate and revealing system, nothing to cover up the shortcomings and poor choices in engineering decisions.

 

I agree on 16 v 24, which is why I asked my question. I recall someone writing that in the chain of gear there was a downsample/upsample step, so that the 24 bit end result was limited by 16 bit quality. I wish I could find that post. No clue how accurate it was, though.

 

Ah, someone else who likes line arrays! Are yours open dipole? I've always really loved the sound of tall arrays! I'll throw a picture of mine on here if you wanna take a look. The rest of the system though compared to yours is pretty crude. But yes, the Beatles set for the most part sound lovely.

https://photos.app.goo.gl/9ja3UKob7tppW4Y38

 

NOT true...

 

Well, I don't know the answer to your question, no one has ever asked me that, as embarrassing as this is, I'm not exactly sure what an open dipole configuration is......but I'm willing to learn !!

So, here is a photo of the speakers down front, maybe it'll answer the question I can't.

https://doc-04-ao-docs.googleuserco.../1ydsZBi4QRX9x7TCBoOEFHi7mQ39sZnWr?authuser=0


The Marantz 1200 integrated sitting there not is not connected (on top of the PS-112 sub. It's going back into its box in storage while since I don't use it..

FYI, I don't use or need the sub in 2 channel analog. 4 12" woofers are plenty. There are 24 tweeters in each column, 2- 8" midrange drivers isolated, in each credenza, 2- 12" woofers in each credenza. Totaling 48- 1" tweeters, 2- 8" midrange drivers 4- 12" woofers. The ceilings are 9' high, the long ends of the room (left to right) measures 18', while the width measures 13'.

I sure hope the photo helps answer your question. took me a minute to figure out how to host a photo to post a photo, since I couldn't figure out how to do it directly for some reason...

And yes, I do love my line arrays. I've had them over 2 decades now, and they are my end game speaker, no regrets, no needs, they are everything in every way I would ever need or desire!

OK now the link won't work, I'll try it again tomorrow when I'm not so sleepyyy..

 

Heh, that's okay Bro, I did look up pictures online and that is how I knew they were tall arrays

I've ALWAYS been a fan of multiple drivers, usually running at full rage with the exception of one capacitor as a crossover for the lone tweeter on each channel. Even in my car system, I have a set of four of these same drivers wired series/parallel on each side for the front channel.

Open Di-pole just means that there are no cabinets or enclosures of any kind. Like you see with mine in the pictures above, the drivers including the woofers are mounted on flat baffles, so the sound projects both forwards and backwards. It has a very open and spacious, dimensional sound.

 

Of course it is true. A good stylus is not selective - we want it to pick up every detail with which it comes in contact. Some of that detail will be surface noise and the good stylus will send it to the amp for us to hear nice and clear.

 

Nope.

 

I think what our dear and snarky friend here is saying, and I believe he is correct if I have this right (Uh huh... damn good chance of that... ) is that if you have a cartridge that reaches deeper into the groove, you then have a better chance of capturing more of the actual sound than closer to the surface of the groove walls where it is more likely that damage resides. So, conversely, if your stylus say is elliptical and somewhat 'rounded' at the tip, it is less likely to go deeper into the groove as say a line contact or Shibata tip would.

 

I appreciate your attempt to speak for arony. I think it is more the case that he is speaking from the emotional attachment many of us have with vinyl but with the mistaken belief that vinyl can do no wrong. Noise is all over the groove as the top of the groove is made of the same vinyl as the bottom of the groove. If anything, gravity may pull more debris to the bottom of the groove and if that is where a given high end needle is going (and not all high end needle are cut for that result), then it could potentially pick up more noise. In addition, the better needles are often designed to contact with more area of the groove which increases the propencity to find more noise.

 

FWIW, the stylus profile on the Blackbird, reduces surface noise, significantly. Detail, separation, balance all excellent , as is imaging. This profile is excellent for used vinyl or imperfect vinyl, digging down past the point where many times the groove is undamaged or unworn.
So the whole better cartridge reveals more noise and groove damage, doesn't necessarily hold water. It all depends on the cart, the way it's set up, a whole host of other factors.

Anyone in the area is invited (call ahead please) to stop by and take a listen first hand. I have what I consider to be a very competitive sounding vinyl/analog front end, all of which I've spent a lot of time setting up in my room. Garbage in garbage out, but I've had LP's that sound poor on other tables because, the table wasn't able to handle the energy in the grooves, not because the mastering was bad or the pressing was garbage. Of course there is plenty of garbage pressings out there, in which case they will be nice sounding garbage, but garbage nonetheless.

The newest (2012) stereo pressings I have played are nice, flat quiet, well pressed. Forgetting for a moment the mastering choices, resolution of (digital) files, etc., listening strictly with the ears open and mind open as well.. these are hard to beat. Tracking down decent flat quiet pressings is a chore in and of itself. Decent pressings, even harder with the other variables mixed. For the modest price, versus the return on investment, taking into account the above factors I've listed, the 2012's simply can't be beat.

Most people would be thrilled with the quality, only the more snobby audiophiles are going to balk at these, and in many cases only based on what they are made of, not how they sound.

I've said this before, just because something isn't all AAA sourced, or the resolution isn't maxed out, doesn't mean a particular LP will necessarily sound bad. Many times, if people didn't know better, or didn't know to ask, most cases they'd be hard pressed to tell the difference on a decent, properly set up system. This applies to Beatle records and every other band's records as well. If you want to play the pressing game, roll the dice online and pay for LP's sight unseen based on their provenance and someone else's grading system, knock yourself out. But you are not going to beat what you could buy these sets for when new, around 350$ for the entire catalog. Maybe, you'll get a used BC-13 box, but again, at the mercy of someone else's scruples and grading system. I'm going to pick up a BC-13 set for daily drivers as well as to compare to these 2012 releases, just to assuage my curiosity.

Anyone have an unsealed earlier BC-13 box they want to part with>>>>....????..

 

Exactly.

It does not hold water, because it is NOT true...

 

Yep... that's pretty much what I was a'try'n to say...

 

For what it's worth, the claims you give sound anecdotal. I appreciate your generous invited listener offer, but it would not constitute a scientific A/B blindfold test. While I'm sure I'd be thrilled by the quality, we would want to compare the Blackbird with a lesser stylus of reasonable quality (e.g. Grado costing under a couple hundred clams) playing the same portion of music in quick secession on the same turntable. That could be done through high resolution digital recording of the two setups. I realize that is moving the analog to the digital world but if the focus is strictly on surface noise and whether the one stylus reveals more than the other, I believe any difference could be perceived on the hi-rez recording - if not, the difference is not significant enough. I also realize I am particularly anal about these claims and there exists a difference in philosophies of how to determine of what is better in audio gear. The discussion usually results in one side dismissing the other as beyond help.

 

Noooooo...

YOU...?

Anal...???

C'MONNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNN...

 

Do ya think?!

 

Bring your Grado or whatever you please. I'm sure I can accommodate any reasonable requests I wouldn't want my information to be anecdotal...

FWIW, A/B tests are only as good as the ears listening to them. .. .mine yours anybody. But then again if it's CD quality quiet you are looking for, I know where one can buy some 16 bit compact discs, with all the background quiet one could want to fill their hearts desire...

 

One more thing, the stylus profile the Blackbird uses, exactly the profile I chose to re-tip it with is proven to produce less surface noise. If you have any questions regarding this, Steven @ VAS audio would be able to answer the tech side better than I. He builds cartridges for a living, to specs if you like, and has for a long time. I believe he told me Shibata or Line Contact are the least forgiving of surface noise, which backs up what I know based on my own experience with all 3 types including Elliptical , plus Conical as well.

Listen to enough systems with different stylus profiles and types, you will learn which are quieter and which make more noise, but all this is getting beyond the scope and content of the thread. What I can say is there is ZERO doubt that the current iteration Blackbird is the most quiet I've ever heard surface noise from my records in the over 40 years I've been listening to many them. You can get to inky black, but you are going to pay for it and it takes work, plus scrupulously clean records with minimal groove/surface damage.

 

I've been listening to systems for better than 50 years and have found my original opinions to be proven wrong in good A/B comparisons. That's why I am so focused on that method. I am convinced that the Blackbird and higher end needles that capture more of the surface of the groove will, as a result, have the potential to capture more surface noise - certainly not less. However, if you know of a peer-reviewed article from a respected journal - as opposed to an audiophile magazine beholden to advertisers or opinion from a representative at a profit making institution - discussing the subject of the phono stylus and surface noise, I would be interested. On the ears doing the A/B comparison, that is something that can be controlled. You claim you know of a reduction of surface noise. You would prove that to me through blindfold exposure of several samples in the controlled A/B test. My 50+ years listening years are probably not as good as your 40+ listening ears. Hence, I would just be listening to determine to my own satisfaction whether I hear the difference claimed.