I have records from both MoFi and AP and, while they’re both good, I’ve come to prefer the AP UHQR recordings. To my ear, they sound richer, fuller, and with more depth. And Acoustic Sounds customer service is excellent.
What I’ve “almost” totally stopped buying are records from any number of the other producers. I’ve had several that the quality wasn’t even bad — it was horrible. Case in point was “Natalie Cole - Unforgettable 30th Anniversary Edition from Craft/Concord Records. More skips and pops than a popcorn popper. I’ll be sticking to the better quality production plants going forward.
If anyone is interested in exploring a completely different track, check out Supersense from Vienna, Austria. They’re outrageously expensive (especially with the shipping charge) but I’ve heard a couple of their recordings and I have to admit — they were like nothing I’ve ever heard before or since. I finally broke down and bought one — BUT THAT”S THE LAST ONE! Anymore of those get delivered to the house and the WF is going to erupt!
|
I think a lot of people fail to realize or just ignore, the vast majority of recordings made since the 80s go through a digital processor of one type or another (limiers, compressors, reverb, etc). So regardless of the master multi track being analog or digital, it has at least one step in the digital domain anyway. So, for those who say "but it’s not analog anymore" it never was in the first place.
@roadwhorerecords
purchasing any of these one step expensive pressings, whether with a digital step or not, are 100% pre-1980’s. so there is always an all analog alternative to any of them. which is the main issue.
digitally sourced post-1980 pressings don’t have that alternative, it’s simply a matter of preference for the Lp or file/disc version according to taste. there is never an all analog alternative. so you just follow your ear to the way you prefer your music. and don’t worry about it.
so you cannot really compare the choices, they are fundamentally different. the only question is whether you like the music enough to acquire it.
|
I think a lot of people fail to realize or just ignore, the vast majority of recordings made since the 80s go through a digital processor of one type or another (limiers, compressors, reverb, etc). So regardless of the master multi track being analog or digital, it has at least one step in the digital domain anyway. So, for those who say "but it's not analog anymore" it never was in the first place.
|
+1, @mikelavigne
I am with Mike on MoFi One Step releases. Even though these records sounds incredibly good, they are not better than their digital counterparts. You’re paying for tactile experience and fancy packaging. They may appreciate in value over time due to their limited run.
If your digital rig is good, you can pretty much defer the temptation of picking every new vinyl release :-)
|
I went in a different direction about 20 years ago-- I’m pretty much good on classic rock and where I wanted a better pressing due to mastering, I sought it out, but I rarely spend money on new audiophile reissues of the same old. To me, an incrementally "better" sounding copy of a record (that may be a subject of dispute) is less interesting than "new to me" music. That isn’t to say I don’t spend on records, but the stuff I chased was more obscure, typically not reissued by the usual suspects (though, on occasion, you’ll find something- for example, Bernie G did a recut of bobby Hamilton’s dream queen, a lounge slo-fi sexy late night record that was easily over a grand). The reissue is 30 bucks. Tone Poet did Katanga!-- killer and I think it is back in stock.
I get the "OMG the sonics" thing, but at a certain point, I’m more interested in music I have not experienced. Recently, Pure Pleasure, who is cagey about sources, did a live Cecil McBee record that is worth checking out. But, my taste these days leans towards spare post-bop jazz. A lot of the heavy rock I collected back in the day was reissued from questionable sources, and I doubt it will ever be done properly, so I bought the OGs.
My punchline: Don’t limit yourself to audiophile warhorses and the usual suspects. Explore more. You may find things that tickle your fancy. Given the inflation in LP pricing and corresponding decline in accurate grading, it’s a jungle out there, but there are so many records that aren’t reissued, let alone by these two houses.
PS: I was a Chad customer when he was selling old shaded dogs and Living Presence LPs from his mom’s place. That was a different era.
|
I have several of the MoFi releases variety with 'Original Master Recording' at the top of the jacket. I find these are around 70/30 or maybe a bit better in their favor to be good releases. Several of mine where I have a good copy of the original release I find that sounds better. Often the MoFi has less gain which messes with my brain and also I have found several to have a somewhat thin presentation. I haven't ever collected anything in my life and find a lot of joy in having special releases that often appreciate in value....and sound fantastic! I have no plans of selling my records but it is comforting to know I could. All the Analog Productions albums I have are fantastic. I have not been disappointed in a single release from the $60 variety and definitely not on the few UHQR that I own. They have a new sticker on their releases showing 100% analog! : )
|
A high-res file is going through a DAC; a vinyl LP is going through a cartridge, a turntable, and a phono preamp. I don't know how those are going to sound the same.
@larsman
sure, you can add on the colorations of the vinyl playback to the digital file and you might prefer it, but if you have a good dac the digital tape transfer will be on the same level and maybe better.
my point being that if you are starting out with a native analog recording, and you are contemplating spending over $100 on a digital step pressing, you are much better off (1) finding even a decent earlier all analog pressing of that recording, or (2) finding the best high rez tape transfer.....instead of the spendy digital step pressing. both (1) & (2) will be much cheaper and sound better. of course, some don't have high quality digital at all, so that is a different case.
the only justification of the digital step pressing is the packaging which is nice, and the convenience of it. and people are free to spend their money as they choose.
|
The reputation of the MFSL LPs took a big hit when it was discovered that they were making a digital copy of the tapes they weren’t allowed to remove from the record company’s vaults, which is about all of them now. MFSL says that making a digital copy sounded better to them than making a tape copy. Prior to the scandal, Michael Fremer had some of the MFSL LPs with the digital step on his 100 best LPs list. They have since been removed.
Mike Levigne has a 7 figure system. He can easily tell the difference. You might try one or two to see if you can, if you trust your own ears.
|
A high-res file is going through a DAC; a vinyl LP is going through a cartridge, a turntable, and a phono preamp. I don't know how those are going to sound the same.
|
i think AP UHQR or Impex One Step are all analog, whereas MFSL Ultra Disc One Step has a digital step. which is a distinction with a REAL DIFFERENCE.
you don’t know if you are screwed with the first two, 40-60 year old tapes don't always = sublime. it’s one of those random things about vinyl, but you are absolutely sure you are screwed with the MFSL.
YMMV.
why spend mega bucks for a digital step, just buy the high rez file cuz that is all you are actually getting.
|
I just checked and these records are going for $150 each at Acoustic Sounds. Every one is entitled to spend their resources on whatever they wish, but …
|
I recently bit the bullet and decided to replace some of my cherished, and often played, original vinyl. I went through a similar process, purchasing a 45 rpm Mofi, 45 rpm Uhqr, and a double disc 33 rpm anniversary reissue by a record company, just to get a sense of what was available. Prices are crazy high for most of these products considering prices for standard reissue vinyl (2 to 4 times more!).
Conclusion: The jury is still out, but I think the double disk 33 rpm anniversary reissue was excellent, dead quite and quite dynamic, most reasonable purchase of the bunch and the lowest cost of these special releases. I find that both high end 45 rpm releases from the two companies were very good, (if you don't mind getting up to flip the album more often, I personally find this an issue, lazy I guess), and considering the quality of the original recordings available. Both the one's I chose to purchase, I would consider as my favorite recordings.
I have also purchased a number of regular priced vinyl reissue's recently, and most are very good, good enough for me to conclude that I will limit my purchases of these 45 rpm special reissues.
Just as a footnote, I should add that this simple review was made using a Clearaudio Concept Turntable with Satisfy Arm, Hana ML cartridge and Icon Audio PS1 MkII Phono Preamp. Your conclusions may vary depending on your gear.
|
