Rob, I believe also the clue is in the deadwax re alternate Eyesight The UK 1972 Tommy Part One LP, I have, with the A//1 stamper is the 1969 Blind version. The UK 1973 Tommy 2LP set I have with the A//1 stamper on side one is the same. But my other 1972 UK Tommy Part One, with an A//3 stamper on side 1, is the alternate version. I am really glad to have both versions actually. Here is one more example in a short thread of posts of the A//1 stamper on the '72 or '73 side one being the OG version. Who's Tommy Track Records 2nd press Also, in your post in another thread, I believe, you mention you have a few Track copies from '69 and '73 and one copy with A//1 is the OG version but the other copy with A5 stamper is the alternate version. Doing some more reading here and the alt version seems to be in A//2, A//3, and A//5 stampers. I read here also if I read it right that someone wrote their Track LP 'alternate version' is a different 'alternate version' to the MFSL CD? I haven't compared all? of the alternate versions? I am very happy with the sound of the UK Track 1972 Part One and Two releases, and the UK Track 1973 2LP release as well, that I have.
Sorry, there's so much to quote and try to sparse out (in my mind)... devotional... If they did a cut at IBC before Kit went to the US, it seems a bit strange that he would bring the four unmastered master reels, and not an EQ'd cutting master to Sterling. If that was the case, one would think that they would make copies of the cutting master in IBC's copy room, and send those out to the various other countries. If, on the other hand, the main mastering, and not just the cutting, was to be done in the US, Kit would have a good reason to be there and "supervise" it. And perhaps that's why Kit left the four master reels behind in the US too - because they were unmastered after all. All speculation, of course. What would be the result of such a happening. A set of reels mastered separately at I.B.C. in 1969 and the same reels at Sterling in 1969? Or later at Sterling, for the first time, but with the sterling stamps, and cut in say, 1972 or 73? Those are the only pressings that have the sterling stamps in the wax. There's only 1 series of pressings of Tommy that has the sterling stamps afaik. Or is it something else?
When we get to 1969, Denis Blackham joins IBC, is trained by Brian, and eventually take over from him in the disc cutting department. But Denis has never talked about working on any Who-material until cutting acetates for Pete’s Lifehouse-demos. And Brian definitely cut Live at Leeds, sharing the following story in 2017: Is that odd a little in that both bilbo and db appear etched in the wax on Leeds though, and possibly dated from 1970, or perhaps a little later I suppose. Were the PT Lifehouse acetates he refers to done in '70 or '71?
Well, that is fascinating. As much as I can understand it. I think it answers a few of the questions in my posts above.
Devotional, I asked a few questions just upthread. Last one. What significance would this statement have on future Who vinyl releases? But Denis writes on his page that by 1971 IBC would often receive “fully equalised cutting tapes from Sterling Sound in New York." From what you've gathered, Tommy could well have been an early example of that. Does that refer to just the Tommy album alone? Thanks.
If anyone is looking for the Kevin Gray Geffen, it is currently in stock at Acoustic Sounds … ordered one last week and it arrived today Vinyl Records, SACDs, DVD Audio, Audiophile Equipment|Acoustic Sounds
Even when Kevin cuts from digital, it's likely still a better bet. Let us know how it sounds and what you are comparing it to.
I liked the KG Tommy and found it to be quite dynamic but the pressing has a few too many pops and clicks. Hopefully, these will abate with repeated plays. I have the Classic which is plagued with non-fill on the first disc but may still have the edge over the KG.
Funny you say that, I also have the tube cut Classic. It's got a little noise but nothing really distracting. I made a conscious decision to keep it as it really sounds fantastic and is the best version I own.
Update on the Abbey 1/2 speed. I played side 1 two nights ago (I mean I started side 1 and couldn't get past Overture) and my dislike for it remains unchanged. Here's what that take was last October: The other copies of Tommy I have (the '90s MOFI CD and a UK Track from the mid-70s) are both far more satisfying listens IMO. I used to have a US Decca years ago and it was good as well for SQ as I recall (though it wasn't in the best condition so I got rid of it at some point). In any case, the 1/2 speed is going in the 'to sell' box. I'm done with it. I do wonder about the KG remaster though -- whether it would better what I already own.
I find the half speed natural sounding. It doesn’t have the frequency extremes of the KG, but it is very balanced and smooth. I’m keeping both versions.
Thank you to Jon H. and the others on this thread who recommended the 1971 US reissue mastered by Gilbert Kong. I bought a VG+ (honestly maybe VG, but actually pretty good) copy for $16 plus shipping on Discogs. It is perhaps slightly hot to my ears but exciting and involving. Never heard Tommy rock quite like this before. A bargain of a purchase, up there with best I ever had. Can’t imagine I’d be happier with the half-speed. I even enjoyed Eyesight to the Blind.
I'm guessing it sounds balanced and smooth to you, and not to me, by dint of your tube amplification, which surely can take some nasties out less-than-stellar re-masterings. I find little to nothing natural sounding in this reissue. I loathe what this reissue did to John Entwistle's french horn in Overture, somehow sucking out the power and bloom it had in other versions I've had and owned the pressing it up flat against the rest of the instrumentation. Can't imagine anyone growing up with the album as I have liking that, but that's just me. I tried, on three separate occasions, but my copy goes into the 'to sell' box. No point in keeping something I'll never play again and that is essentially worthless to me.
Amazon UK are selling a generic copy of Tommy for just under 22 quid alongside the half speed remaster for 34 quid. I ordered one because the picture shows the Geffen pressing but alas no such luck so back it goes. HOWEVER - the vinyl is actually the half speed master cut by Miles. It also contains the booklet. So long story short, you can get the half speed and all the packaging by going for the cheaper option.
Slow day at the home office. Played side 2 and 4 of the following versions of Tommy: 1st: Original 1969 Decca CDN auto-coupled Compo pressing. 2) 7 1176 12 (stamped) (4) etched 4) 7 11979 3 (stamped) (2) etched The cleanest of my originals. Same parts/matrices as the original US Decca's which were allegedly all cut from generational tape copies or eq'd dubs. It's what I grew up with and I always thought it sounded good. 2nd: Classic Records tube cut 140 gram reissue from 2006. Chris Bellman cut at Bernie Grundman Mastering. 2) 613 013 -B CB 4) 613 013 -D CB On it's own merits, the original is a nice listen. An almost straight ahead focus, highlighted by the vocals, not unlike a mono presentation. But the panning and drum fills reminds you otherwise. When I drop the needle on the Classic, it's a whole other experience. The dynamics, the detail retrieved, sweet yet forceful and never brash. The air and the low frequency extension. If you want to be a contrarian and have only heard original US/CDN Deccas, you might accuse it of being too hi-fi. I am not of that opinion. The original is what I grew up with and those Decca labels are like visiting an old friend. But the Classic is lively, visceral and exciting by comparison.
Did you buy from this link: Amazon.co.uk ? Did you receive half speed remaster? The attached pictures suggest that one can expect 2013 USA edition (so probably Kevin Gray cut), and it has the same ASIN code as USA edition on Amazon.com. But what does Amazon actually send when you buy using this link? 2013/2014 Europe edition? 2013/2014 USA edition (KG cut)? Half-speed remaster?
Yes, i specifically bought from that Amazon UK listing because they specifically show the Geffen KG cut. But what I received was cut by Miles at Abbey Road. Nothing wrong with it but I was specifically wanting the KG cut.
You have to be careful because Ron McMaster cut a version of Tommy in 2012. I think it has replaced the KG cut. Not totally sure. The 2013 may not be the KG version.
I only have three vinyl copies..a Decca original, the Classic and the half speed; after a few months of comparisons since I got the half speed, I have to agree that the Classic wins between these three.
I have a UK first press with numbered booklet, and a later Track with the alternate Eyesight. The first press sounds much better. I can best describe it as, the repress sounds more distant, less immediate, less dynamic - despite being in better physical condition. Tim
Saw the half speed for a reasonable price on Amazon. Playing back this actually sounds great, though obviously there is a bit of loss in analogue goodness. Certain details pop out that I can't recall noticing. I think vocals can be rather hard/bright at higher volumes. I have the classic as well as a mid 70s pressing. Always torn between the two but the Classic is ultimately better but maybe not as enjoyable a listen to as the 70s press. Without comparing I can't say where the new one stands but it does some things better and other's worse. I think there is a little of that digital dryness to the sound, but it is big on detail. Also a very clean pressing. Also bought A Quick One (reduced to £19) and think this is a must have if you want a stereo copy of this album. None of the issues complained about elsewhere bothered me. I've got another EU stereo from 20 years a ago which has the benefit of having an uncredited Happy Jack tagged on the end.
Slightly off-topic: Did the MCAs from the '70s use the same cut as the original '69 US Decca? I'm checking the runout on my '73 black/rainbow MCA and it looks the same as my '69 Decca, apart from mother/stamper numbers.
