Why did MFSL always choose the wrong album to do?

Did you ever notice that for just about any artist, they picked JUST the wrong album? such as Duran Duran - Seven and the Ragged Tiger (ok at best) vs. RIO (pure masterpiece), or Nirvana - In Utero vs. Nevermind (all time), or ... Why? Were they just smoking too much?

 

mofi remastered both in utero and nevermind.
stick with the originals though unless you like the mofi eq.

 

But Nevermind was the first album they mastered. Just a comment.

 

Re: Re: Why did MFSL always choose the wrong album to do?

Actually, I prefer the MoFi Nirvana CD's to the original CD releases and to the Classic Records LP's. There really isn't, IMO, too much difference between the sound of the original release CD's and the MoFi CD's though.

 

Re: Re: Re: Why did MFSL always choose the wrong album to do?

the difference is the mofi smiley face eq.
i didn't really see the point in remastering those titles except for $.

 

...or doing Heart's '85 s/t release instead of going over to CBS and talking them into letting MoFi do Dog & Butterfly.

Joel

 

Re: Re: Why did MFSL always choose the wrong album to do?

To set the record straight, no smiley EQ exists on the mofi Anadisq LP. Compared to the mfsl CD, the LP is a clear winner (much less bright on the top end), and it's a far cry better than the original CD.

 

Since Mofi's relaunch, they haven't released a lot of crap...

 

What's really interesting is that Capitol owned both Dreamboat Annie and Heart in 1994. Yet they sent Dreamboat Annie to Steve over at DCC and they sent Heart to MoFi all within that same year.

And Sony, who bought out CBS by then, chose not to release any of their Heart material on their own MasterSound CD series - even though Little Queen (another good candidate) had been issued on CBS's MasterSound Half-Speed Mastered LP in '81.

Joel

 

Re: Re: Re: Why did MFSL always choose the wrong album to do?

i agree,
there is a point in cutting nevermind and in utero from analogue to lp.
however for cd, it's another story.
did mofi cut from analogue for their anadisq lps?
i have a few titles and they don't do much for me.

 

Re: Re: Re: Re: Why did MFSL always choose the wrong album to do?

Yes, they did. All analog. Whoever mastered this one got it right, and at 1/2 speed no less. I'm not usually a fan of the process, but IMO it sounds great here. I don't think they used tubes in their mastering though.

FYI, In Utero never made it to Anadisq unfortunately.

Some titles are phenomenal, some probably not so. I haven't listened in a long while, but MJQ at Music Inn vol 2 is great on LP. It's recorded on tube equipment, so that probably lends some warmth perhaps lacking in other more modern recordings.

 

I don't agree that they always chose the wrong title, but I can think of some other examples where they did:

Flying Burrito Brothers: I was befuddled that they chose to do the self-titled third album, the one without Gram Parsons, rather than either of the far-superior first two albums with Parsons. That's like selecting "Other Voices" as the one Doors album to do (okay, maybe not quite that extreme, but it's still a weird choice).

Elvis: Why did they pick "That's the Way it Is"? It's a good album, but certainly "Elvis is Back" or "From Elvis in Memphis" would be a much better choice to start with. TTWII isn't even the best Elvis album of 1970 (that would be "Elvis Country").

 

I always suspected that the major label wanted to try to push the sales of a weaker title, and not have competition for the better.

Niel Young Old Ways?
Joni Mitchell Wild Things Run Fast?
James Taylor Dad Loves His Work?

It makes me want to cry.

 

It's all a matter of opinion. I think they were on target almost all the time.

BTW, they did both "In Utero" and "Nevermind".

 

Re: Re: Re: Why did MFSL always choose the wrong album to do?

I read somewhere a few years ago that producer/engineer Steve Albini was furious with the way the regular commercial CD of "In Utero" was mastered too bright, with the bass reduced, and how MoFi nailed the sound of the master tape, or feelings to that effect.

Disclaimer: I READ this in a major audiophile magazine years ago. Don't ask me to back it up, as I wouldn't know where to find it now, years later! I know what I read. But I can't be the only one who remembers this, about what Albini stated.

 

Re: Re: Why did MFSL always choose the wrong album to do?

It certainly is a matter of opinion. For example, I'd say that any album by Duran Duran would be the wrong recording for MFSL to do.

 

Re: Re: Re: Why did MFSL always choose the wrong album to do?

I'd love to hear Rio in audiophile format myself.

 

There seems to be a lot of misinformation in this thread. Mobile Fidelity did release Rio. It was only on the cassette format. I own it
Aaron

 

Aceman...I was aware of the cassette only release but don't even have a cassette player. How does it sound?

 

I've probably only listened to it a few times. It sounds fine. I've never really compared it to any other version. I'm trying to find the Toshiiba EMI Japan Cd from the early eighties to compare it.
Best,
Aaron

 

My MFSL cd of Nirvana's In Utero sounds much better than the standard cd. The MFSL cd of Nevermind sounds pretty much the same as the standard cd.

Also, I and many other Nirvana fans feel In Utero is a much superior LP than Nevermind.

Joe Lee

 

I agree In Utereo sound really better than the CD, but Nevermind also sounds better, although the differences are so subtle.

 

Re: Re: Re: Re: Why did MFSL always choose the wrong album to do?

Close Here's what Albini said about the regular mastering in Goldmine. I don't know what he said about the Mofi. (if anything)

"The mastering session that was done took several days, at a studio where the mastering engineer is famous for being very manipulative of the material," he says. "A normal album mastering session is a couple of hours. So obviously they thought that they should butcher it in some way to try to satisfy these people and try to satisfy their own expectations. The dynamic range was narrowed, the stereo width was narrowed, there was a lot of mid-range boost EQ added, and the overall sound quality was softened. And the bass response was compromised to make it sound more consistent on radio and home speakers. But the way I would describe it in non-technical terms is that they f*cked it up. The end result, the record in the stores doesn’t sound all that much like the record that was made. Though it’s still them singing and playing their songs, and the musical quality of it still comes across."

More info on the Albini / Nirvana controversy here:

http://www.nirvanaclub.com/interviews/goldmine2.htm