Unfortunately, that is a "later" run, as indicated by the "shiny" black Track label (as opposed to the "matte" black Track label). The shiny ones (i.e., the later ones) came in a thin vinyl, which I guess is not as important. The first Track pressings came in a thick vinyl, similar to Jimi Hendrix's original UK Track pressings. For my money, I would rather track down a US Decca West Coast W1 or W2 pressing than a "later" Track copy. Just my humble opinion.
I have the Phases boxset as well and 2 of the LPs have the original mastering... Who By Numbers was mastered at The Mastering Lab, it has TML in the dead wax Who Are You was mastered at Sterling Sound, it has STERLING in the deadwax. All the others have the '320' in the deadwax which were probably mastered by Willem Makkee or by someone at the same facility. Does yours have TML and Sterling on the LPs indicated? JG Does yours?
I just checked and my Phases Who By Numbers is TML-S and my Who Are You are Sterling. Who's Next is 3 20.
To clear up any potential confusion here, I emailed the dealer again and asked him to look more carefully and he did see the stamper #'s for a 1st pressing that Sung talks about.
Same here, though my Leeds only has 3 20 on side two. The Phases Who's Next isn't worth listening to but my MCA Heavy vinyl is good. Is the Classic that much better than the Heavy vinyl edition? Sorry for kicking the dead horse But if the Classic is that good I want to get it even though I'm broke.
Hi Dale, If I were in your position, I would rather track down a US Decca original with the dead wax matrices ending W1, W1 or W2, W2 (or some variations of those letter/numbers). I just saw one go for $2 on eBay and the highest price I have seen for this LP recently was $15. For $2, you will get much better sound than a $30 reissue. I guess I am not helping out the "vinyl revival" cause here but while some of the reissues are simply excellent (even for the high price of admission), some are just on par with its price tag, and some are not worth a $1 IMHO. I think for this record, if you can't stand background noise of older records, I would recommend the Classic reissue but if it does not and I am on a budget, I would recommend a US Decca original. Good luck to you!
Thanks Sung, I was just wondering if the classic was that much better than the heavy vinyl, cheeper to get it before it goes out of print. But if the deca is actually better sounding I'll look for a mint copy. Who's Next is such an awesome album that I want the best sound I can get. Thanks for all the work you've done on this. dale
Well, it wouldn't have been done from the original tapes. Although Denis Blackham (Bilbo) at Tape One has a great reputation. Any stuff that he originally mastered sounds great to these ears! So to anwer your question, it's not that the 'Bilbo' version is bad, it's just that an original US Decca is so good! JG
My humble opinion on the three pressings that you mention is as follows: MCA 90's "Heavy Vinyl" series: wonderful mastering on audiophile vinyl but it sounds like it was sourced from a dub of the original tapes; I remember thinking that life had been sucked out of it. Classic's recent reissue: excellent mastering on audiophile vinyl, apparently sourced from the original master tapes (apparently the same ones previously discovered by our fearless leader), but it sounds like the original tapes have degenerated in sound quality, especially at the top and bottom end of the frequency. Or in the alternative, Classic's mastering chain (i.e., equipment) or EQ'ing made it sound like it does. Please note that the top and bottom ends are ALL THERE (in fact, they made it more pronounced) but, unfortunately, they do not sound as "real" as they do on the US original Decca (or even more so, on the UK first Track pressing, which has everything just right). The Classic is, however, much closer to the US and UK originals than the MCA Heavy Vinyl. US Decca original W1 or W2 pressing: I think this is probably the best bargain in record collecting today. For $2, you can get as close to The Who in their prime as possible (with the exception of the UK first Track pressing), as if they were performing in your living room. Before the price of this one goes crazy on eBay, I would suggest you pick up a copy. When you get a copy, just listen to the "real" vocals and the drums. On this and the first UK Track, you can "see" the skin and cymbals of the drums and the rawness and power of Daltrey's vocals. On the other pressings, you have to "imagine" them based on the shadow of information on those pressings. Good luck!
Any way to find a copy that is quiet and not beat up? And doesn't distort on Song is Over? I don't know...I'm still not sure a W1 is the bee's knees. Part of me likes that sound, but part of me thinks it is even more wonky and mushy than ever.
Then you need a UK Track first pressing (with "MG 12888" hand-etched and the dead wax matrix ending A//1 on Side 1 and no hand-etched markings and the dead wax matrix ending B//2 on Side 2; on a "matte" black Track label; and on a thick vinyl). Minimal distortion on Song Is Over and not wonky or mushy.
Ben's: Side 1: machine pressed: "2408102 A//1-12 27" hand carved: "MG 12888". Side 2: machine pressed: "2408102 B//2 V420 12 1 4".
Ok, so I just gave my heavy vinyl a spin and I agree that there is something lacking on this pressing. The attack is not there on the acoustic guitar like it is on the Decca Tommy that I'm spinning right now. I find on the best pressings of records that I can hear the pick hitting the strings, on the Tommy it's there but on the Who's Next not so much. The heavy vinyl Who's next is worth hearing but it sounds kind of flat (not much depth) and the transients and attack are not as realistic as on the Decca Tommy. So I take it that the Decca Who's next sounds more like the Decca Tommy. If so then I'll have to find one some day. dale
That's the one. I think my copy is something like A//1 11 2, B//2 "triangle symbol" 420 11 2, but basically Ben's copy is just like mine and should sound the same.
Hi Dale, Although not a W1, W1 pressing, I will have in a couple of weeks a duplicate W2, W2 copy. If you are interested, I will put it up for sale at my cost ($3.50 plus shipping) when I receive that copy. Just PM me if you are interested.
I got rid of my MCA heavy vinyl many years ago. It sounded okay, but not great, and there was a strange tone that appeared during the synth solo towards the end of "Won't Get Fooled Again." Maybe I had a bum copy? Sung, have you heard the Track export version pressed in the US for UK sale? I got a copy several months ago and find the sound to be top-notch, open and smooth and spacious and real-sounding, if perhaps a little "reserved" compared to my W4 Decca US original.
I know it's apples and oranges, but I was just trying to get at the point that the Who's Next Decca must have the attack, transient detail, depth, realism etc. that I'm not hearing on my MCA.
I would REALLY be interested in ALL of the dead wax info on both sides of your unique copy. I figured that the US pressed some export copies for the UK market (as indicated by the export covers), but your copy is the best evidence yet. PLEASE PLEASE do post the dead wax info. Thanks!
Now just checking My W2 has these numbers in the dead wax. Is this the one you're talking about Sung? It sounds good, but now I'm a little confused with all these numbers everyone's talking about (Help!) US Decca Side 1 MG7.12888-W2 X Side 2 MG7.12889-W2
