The Best WHO's "Tommy" CD?

My friend Rich has always said the best version you can get is a Decca original - pre MCA.

 

Luke,

Thanks for the info, I'll see if they still have it & pick it up.

Joe

 

I have three vinyl pressings: Decca WLP, Decca stock original, and MCA reissue. I owned the MCA reissue first, and thought it sounded "okay", but never really thought about it when I bought it new all those years ago.

Later, I sought out the original Decca just from a collectable standpoint, not necessarily to get a better sounding LP. Anyway, I'm real anal about condition and it took me years to find a Decca original where both the record and sleeve were in good enough shape for my tastes (this set is notorious for showing pronounced jacket ring-wear). Of course, this was in the years BE (before eBay) and you can probably find a dozen suitable copies there at any given time... or perhaps not.

In any event, I was quite thrilled to find a good clean Decca original, and as an added bonus, it sounded WAY better than the MCA reissue. Not long after I stumbled upon a Decca WLP in immaculate condition and it sounds superb, beating the pants off the stock copy. I know there is some dispute about WLP's in general, so I'm guessing I just got lucky and have one very early in the stamper's life.

Long story short, it's certainly worth seeking out a Decca original!

 

Vex,

Thanks, I hope I still can get this pup. I saw it about a week ago. Vex, does an original Decca have "stereophonic" printed across the top of the Decca label? I also forgot how thick and heavy the cover is.

Joe

 

OK...... in that case, many people feel (myself included) that there is also a difference between the Japan CDs and the USA CDs, so we should also list the Japan versions of the original 2 CD set, the 1CD remaster, and the remix. That's three more versions. Maybe we should also include the Polydor CD versions?

 

Hi Joe,

I can't recall what the specifics of the label are. I'm afraid my stock copy is inaccessible at the moment. I only keep the "best" copies of my collection immediately accessible for listening, with the rest being packed away. Good luck on grabbing that LP!

Vex

 

I generally can't hear a difference between the original CD and the CD-R burn, but when I do (think) I hear a (VERY) slight difference, the CD-R is the one that sounds better. Anyone else experience this?

 

Steve,

"crisper" - yeah, if I had to describe it, that word is pretty close!

How audible is 1/2 db? Do you need "golden ears"? I thought that 1 db was supposedly the threshold of human hearing - or does that just refer to overall volume differences (which one is louder)?

How would a burner add this 1/2 db boost? If this is some sort of data corruption? If so, how can it work in such a specific way? It would be much appreciated if any explanations were phrased in "layman's" terms.

 

Is it possible that this 10k boost is added upon PLAYBACK, in the analog realm?

The reason I ask is that such an alteration to the data stream seems impossible. Perhaps this is an incorrect analogy, but I think of the data stream (zeroes and ones) on a cd as being similar to the data stream (letters and spaces) in a book. If the data stream of a book is corrupted, we would expect to find typos, misspellings and such, not actual word/sentence substitution - especially not in a way that would read as proper english.

Perhaps the D/A converters in a CD player are reading the CD-R data in a different manner than a regular CD, and making a less accurate conversion, which results in the 10k boost.

 

Computer burners?

If I rip audio from one CD, then burn that to a CD-R, then rip that audio, the audio from the original CD will EXACTLY match that of the CD-R.

Nothing is being changed...

 

News to me. If it's a 1/2 db boost, it should definitely show up in measurements of the original vs. copy. Has it?

And if so, which burners were in use? I want to make sure to avoid them.

 

I have the Simply Vinyl, the pre-MCA Decca (make sure when you look for a Decca that it does not have the "MCA" logo on it -- in addition to the Decca logo), and a mid-1970's vintage "Track Records" import from Great Britain.

Frankly, the "Track Records" import comes in first place by a wide margin in terms of soundspace and the presence of actual high-frequencies. If you can find one, get the "Track Records" pressing, even a late one.

Second place is the Simply Vinyl. It's very smooth and liquid sounding. I believe though that it's mastered from the digital master tape that produced the first single CD version of "Tommy" in the early 1990's. For some reason, the vinyl is less abrasive than the CD. The packaging sucks though since they didn't bother to reproduce the libretto or the tri-gatefold sleeve of the original Track or Decca.

Last place goes to my U.S. Decca. This is simply due to the horrid vinyl that it was pressed on. It lacks any semblence of high-frequency.

 

Hmm, my copy sounds quite nice, and my buddy Rich swears by those Decca originals... To quote him:

 

I have the US DECCA Tommy original set...nothing special.

I'm going to quote my self again....

And I will add....better than any LP version I've heard.


BC

 

After seeing Steve's Post I should modify to "My DECCA copy is nothing special"
BC

 

Lukpac commented about his Decca pressing:

Hmm, my copy sounds quite nice, and my buddy Rich swears by those Decca originals... To quote him:


I reply:

I noticed that your buddy Rich's comment shows that he never sampled a U.K. "Track" original or Simply Vinyl. My comment on the mediocre quality of my Decca pressing was based on my comparison to my "Track" mid-70's pressing and the Simply Vinyl pressing, so maybe our "comparative listening" tests are skewed.

 

I'd sure like to get my hands on a clean U.K. Track original and give it a spin. I don't doubt that it would beat out the U.S. Decca original!

 

Actually, according to Rich, Track = Polydor - they are the same, and when he says "Polydor original" he actually means "Track original".

 

I don't mean to beat a horse to death...(please forgive me If I keep repeating my self), but in order to save two more similar threads I will say that the same goes for "Live at Leeds" and "Who's Next".

Tommy, Live at Leeds, and Who's Next original UK Track LPs are superior in sound to any LPs (US DECCAs) or CDs I've heard.

IMHO feinstein got it right.

BC

 

Have you heard Steve's CD of Who's Next?

Keep in mind Who's Next was mastered in the US...