I admit that I never doubted MoFi releases but also knew I was never fully satisfied. I loved the packaging and it just feels good owning a limited release of a special album. Since the uncovering of their digital step I have bought a few UHQR albums and really feel they are superior. I had not owned one prior to the controversy. What are other vinyl lovers doing? Are you still ordering the UD1S releases?
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.
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 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.
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.
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.
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.
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! : )
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 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 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.
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.
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 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!
Very well said! I agree with you that the focus should be on finding those gems and new music to enjoy. It takes more effort too...it's much easier to replace an album you have or simply buy the latest audiophile of an album you don't have on vinyl but already know. I do both and definitely enjoy both!
You made me remember my success with Rhino records' audiophile releases. If I recall correctly, they are only $40 and are excellent quality and sound. I recently bought a Devo Van Morrison and Black Sabbath and they were all great pressings, flat, quiet, great sonics and packaging.
I've owned perhaps 75 different MFSL LPs over the past 35 years. Regardless of whether they were from back in the day (mastered by Stan Ricker and pressed on JVC Super vinyl, with the smiley EQ curve), or modern releases within the past five years or so, I now own ZERO MFSL pressings. The last through the door, the 45 RPM 'Making Movies' from Dire Straits was indeed dire, and screamed its digital-ness; it was a lifeless, soulless abomination. I've probably profited more than I've lost over the years with the liquidation of those LPs.
I've had nothing but joy from Analogue Productions' efforts over the years. Not everything is (or can be) perfect, but there are some real gems that Chad and company have released, and that I'm happy to own. The recent Atlantic 75 series is a case in point - some amazing sonics on several of them that easily better the original releases. Can't say that ever occurred with a MFSL release (disclaimer: I've never heard the Santana Abraxas 1-step, some people say it's special). Just my 2¢.
For those wanting to access the quality of MoFi vs. Analogue Productions versions of the same album, compare the pressings of Kind Of Blue by Miles Davis. AP offers the album in both 1-LP/33-1/3 RPM and 2-LP 45 RPM versions.
Lumping all MoFi LP's together is to over-simplify the situation. There are quite a few MoFI LP's that were mastered in pure analogue fashion, including three Ry Cooder albums, all of which sound excellent. By the way, for those wanting to boycott Mobile Fidelity for their outright deceitful lying when claiming all their LP's were made free of a digital conversion step (even when asked point blank), the German company Speakers Corner also offers some of Ry's albums made in pure analogue fashion.
The best way to buy LP reissues is to look at who is cutting the lacquer. Kevin Gray does all his mastering through a custom-made, all-tube, pure analogue system, and is amongst the best engineers now working. Other names to look for are Bernie Grundman, Ryan Smith, Chris Bellman, Steve Hoffman, Robert Ludwig, and Doug Sax.
As for pressings, QRP (Quality Record Pressing, a division of Acoustic Sounds, along with AP all owned and managed by Chad Kassem in Salina, KS.) is making the best LP's the world has ever seen. Single Analogue Productions LP's sell for about $40, doubles $60. You don't have to buy a MoFi 1-Step or Analogue Productions UHQR to get a great sounding reissue.
The are another couple dozen or so smaller companies doing great LP reissues, including Intervention Records, Rhino Hi-Fi ($40 for a 1-LP pressing), Light In The Attic, Music Matters, Blue Note Records, IMPEX, and Vinyl Me Please.
There are also new albums being released on LP in numbers not seen since the mid-to-late 80's. Some of them were recorded digitally, some purely analogue (I've been in studios lately that contained both a 2" multi-track analogue recorder and a full digital work station). YouTube is full of videos in which new and reissue LP's are reviewed, many commenting on sound quality (of new releases), even comparisons of different pressings (of reissues).
If you want good sounding LP's, you have to do your homework, just like you did to assemble your hi-fi.
I should have mentioned that original pressings of 60’s, 70’s, and 80’s LP’s are plentiful, and often available at low cost if you live in a city/town with a good used record store. Just yesterday I found a NM copy of the original pressing of the debut Wings album for five bucks at Music Millennium, just one of the many (a couple dozen) Portland Oregon shops stocked with thousands of used LP’s (even more new releases).
I prefer to buy used LP's in person when possible, as my grading standards are higher than those of sellers on ebay and even Discogs.
Nice..I got a few nice records at my favorite shop in Memphis Saturday after me and my audio buddy met for a BBQ sandwich at Payne's on Lamar. One of those hole in the wall joints with a couple that do it all and turn out some of the best in Memphis. Then we hit up Goner Records. Last night I was having some scotch watching what I think is Michael Fremer's latest tour of his room/system. Never seen him go through each component like that before. He ended it with a few recommendations so I got 3 shipping in from Discogs as well.
In hindsight, the title should have been UD1S v/s UHQR but it has been apparent that we all get it. Seems pretty unanimous that Analog Productions is the king.
I was speaking of the MoFi UHQRs, of which only eight were made, not the regular line. Waiting For Columbus, and Chain Reaction were in the standard line, Crime of the Century was available as a standard release and as a UHQR.
Chain reaction from the Crusaders is pretty good too. However these were very early releases in late seventies, Crime #5, Columbus #13 and Crusaders #10. It mainly went downhill as years went by imo.
Regarding Cat Stevens’ Tea For The Tillerman (the recorded sound quality of which is stunning):
For years the go-to version was the original "pink label" Island Records pressing. When Chad Kassem acquired the rights to reissue it on his Analogue Productions label, he hired Bernie Grundman to cut the lacquer and do the remastering. Grundman got the master tape from Island, and upon examining the notes included in the tape boxes, along with listening to the tapes, he discovered an amazing fact: the tapes were made without employing Dolby noise reduction. In spite of that fact, all precious issues of the album (on both LP and CD) had been made assuming Dolby WAS employed. So in playback, all previous mastering had been done with the Dolby system engaged, with it’s mid-to-high frequency slope reducing those frequencies.
I always wondered why the sound of the drumset cymbals and bass drum (which was missing it's high frequency overtones, which provide that drum's "snap") didn’t sound right to me. Fremer talks about how the sound of the Ovation acoustic guitar (which is known for it’s unique sound owing to it’s plastic body) is missing it’s signature high frequency-emphasized sound. Now we know. The Analogue Productions Tea For The Tillerman was made sans Dolby, so it sounds most like the master tape, with high frequencies fully intact.
Grundman is also credited with discovering the fact that all versions of Kind Of Blue had been made with one side of the album mastered with the tape running at the wrong speed. He discovered that fact while doing the reissue for Classic Records in the late-90’s. Chad Kassem bought Classic Records, and used Grundman’s "metal works" (which are manufactured from the lacquer he cut for Classic) for the AP reissue of Kind Of Blue, restoring the full album to it’s correct running speed and musical pitch.
++++1 bdp24 - totally agree that you HAVE to look at who did the mastering. For re-mastered versions of whatever on whatever label, I always look. My personal fav is Stan Ricker. - he did Gino Vanelli; Miles Davis and many, many others - Discogs has a full listing. Some of my fav and best sounding albums are stuff he did in the 70's, 80's.... And some labels are better/more consistent than others, IMHO AP is the best, MoFI a close second. Pure Pleasure is also good and a couple of other labels our of UK, Germany, France, Italy. But you have to do your homework and use your own ears, as YMMV for sure depending on your system.
That’s interesting. I listen primarily to classical but Tea for the Tillerman was one of my favorite pop albums in my teens. I always wondered at people who thought that Digital sounded awful (in Classical, imo, digital blows away analog about 99% of the time), but when I heard the CD version of Tea then I understood. I wondered if there many pop albums similarly afflicted. Bro 24 explanation is revealing
Grundman got the master tape from Island ... he discovered an amazing fact: the tapes were made without employing Dolby noise reduction. In spite of that fact, all precious issues of the album (on both LP and CD) had been made assuming Dolby WAS employed.
That sounds far-fetched. How would Grundman even know how previous versions from the masters were made? Do you have any reference for this claim, @bdp24??
Sorry, but it seems that the train has gone off the tracks...
First, gross generalizations about SQ are entirely inappropriate and misleading. The SQ of both of these companies' LPs are highly variable, and for logical reasons. Neither company participated in the original recordings (microphone selection, placement, cables, amps, boards, studio modifications, distances, etc.)
Furthermore, over time the personnel and equipment used to remaster recordings changed - especially for MoFi, which has been in business longer (1977) than AP (1992).
It is helpful to compare individual releases, even compares eras, but to discount the entire company's product-line is absurd.
I own MoFi LPs that are superior to some AP releases, and vice-versa. Not convinced? Remember when the MoFi release of Abraxas was touted as the BEST REMASTERED LP EVER! Later - many of the same folks, upon learning it included a digital clean-up step, declared it unworthy (Micky...?). Either the digital-step was an improvement (or at least did-no-harm), or many self-proclaimed Audiophiles have selective memory-loss.
On the other side of the coin, the AP release of The Wonderful Sounds of Female Vocals was a dog - until AP fixed the production issues and replaced the bad records with better ones (upon request). I have a good copy.
IMO, the SQ on many AP releases are 'good, but not great': The same can be said for MoFi, Speakers Corner, TACET, Sheffield Labs, Impex, King, RR, etc...
On the MoFi side, many great LPs, including 1-Step, and many dogs as well. Still, Stan Ricker and Bernie Grundman did some great work, but the portfolio varies.
Bottom line - it would be wise to provide specific comments and criticisms - generalizations about the SQ of audiophile LPs lack creditability.
@cleeds: The information regarding the Dolby issue came from Bernie Grundman, Chad Kassem, and Michael Fremer. Fremer posted a video on his Analog Corner website telling the story, which was subsequently further discussed with Grundman in another video.
A number of years back Fremer got a call from Grundman, informing him of the situation. The Tea For The Tillerman tape boxes were marked indicating that Dolby noise reduction had NOT been used in the recording of the album, so Bernie mastered the LP for release by Chad Kassem on his Analogue Productions record label without the Dolby playback circuit engaged. He told Fremer that when so mastered, the resulting sound was very bright, far brighter than the Island copy of the LP Fremer had supplied him with for a reference (comparing a new remaster with the original is very common in high end mastering).
Grundman sent Fremer a test pressing, asking him if he thought the remaster should be made with the high frequencies decreased somewhat, as he didn’t think audiophiles would like the sound of the LP mastered "flat". Fremer said no, to cut the lacquer flat, brightness and all. Hearing that first lacquer is when Fremer realized the characteristic sound of the Ovation guitar used on the album was muted, lacking it’s inherent "bite". As I said above, I heard the high frequency sheen of the drumset cymbals missing, along with the overtones of the snare drum, toms, and bass drum.
The first pressing "pink label" Island LP had been on Harry Pearson’s Super Disc list for years, and I assumed the problem I heard with my copy of the LP was a result of it being a later "sunray" Island label pressing. Nope, the Island LP (as well as the U.S.A. pressing) had been incorrectly mastered with the Dolby noise reduction circuit engaged, reducing the frequency response with a declining slope as frequency rose.
The Analogue Productions pressing of Tea For The Tillerman album is THE Version to own. By the way, it was also Grundman who discovered the mistake made in the mastering of the Kind Of Blue album, for it’s entire history! That topic was also discussed by Grundman, Fremer, and Kassem in a long YouTube video.
bdp24 - QRP (Quality Record Pressing, ... is making the best LP's the world has ever seen...
That simply nonsense...
Perhaps, in some, more limited LP collections AP is best, but not in mine. I own, or have owned, LPs from most of the common labels, (~4,000 titles) and AP/QRP LPs are NOT the best in my collection (though many are excellent). To say so would be a lie.
Three/four labels that are almost always BETTER than AP: Harmonia Mundi, ERC (rare and expensive), Windham Hill (Stan Ricker, 1/2 speed mastered), as well as some Mofi, Impex and Sheffield Labs recordings. Many LPs from 'boutique' European labels are nearly as good. Even some of my original pressings have better SQ than some of my AP pressings (EMI, Mercury, some Columbia and even one very special Philips release).
dhite71 - with so many contributions giving specific examples of, in their opinion, other labels being preferrable to AP - your 'its unanimous' comment seems to deny reality.
Sorry for calling-out these issues, but such hyperbole should be addressed.
The information regarding the Dolby issue came from Bernie Grundman, Chad Kassem, and Michael Fremer. Fremer posted a video on his Analog Corner website telling the story, which was subsequently further discussed with Grundman in another video.
“Both albums [Jakon and Tillerman] were recorded onto 3M or Studer machines on 16-track two-inch tape at 15 inches per second,” Samwell-Smith explained in the liner notes to the 2008 2CD “Deluxe” edition of Tillerman, “with Dolby noise reduction and mixed onto quarter-inch tape at 15 IPS with Dolby [noise reduction]. “ According to Sound on Sound’s Joe Matera, Samwell-Smith “played with the Dolby system during mastering to add compression and treble to the entire mix.” (Exactly how he did this isn’t clear, though producer/engineer André Perry has speculated that Samwell-Smith didn’t decode the Dolby noise reduction in order to create “a very present, dynamic, bright sound.”)
I also found this:
“The tapes are in still excellent condition, the Dolby A encoded BASF tape used has held up very well compared with other formulations used in the mid 70’s and later. The tapes sound excellent. I’ve done no limiting or compression on these files at all. Playback was done on an Ampex ATR100, and the A/D converter was a prototype MSB unit that David Chesky was good enough to loan us.” — Ted Jensen, Sterling Sound
@cleeds: It wouldn’t surprise me if Fremer also covered the Tea For The Tillerman subject in his Stereophile column. This would have been quite a few years back now, but may be available in the mag’s archives.
I have a lot of Harmonia Mundi LP’s (my favorite Classical label), and just about all the original Sheffield’s (I’m a big fan of direct-2-disk LP’s). Only a few Windham Hill’s (I don’t care for Stan Rickter’s mastering. He applied the "smile" equalization to his MoFi records), a lot of RCA Living Stereo and Mercury Living Presence LP’s, but no ERC’s (silly pricing, variable quality). Another great label is Bear Family Records, a German company.
When I speak of the quality of an LP pressing, that is not the same as the sound quality of any given title.
@bdp24 I’m definitely enjoying the Tillerman discussion, especially your interesting anecdotes.
Over the years, I’ve accumulated far too many LP versions of this album -- including the pink label Island and the 45RPM AP (the two best-sounding IMHO, despite being very different-sounding), but I’ve found the source material itself to be problematic. I’ve never been a fan of plastic guitars, and this album is the best example of why: the Ovation just *sounds* plastic-y (or at least strummed too close to the bridge) and the better the SQ, the more that’s true. (And, yes, Ornette fans, I do understand that "plastic" doesn’t always mean "inferior.")
But even worse, the exaggerated phase-shifty vocal sibilance on tunes like "I Might Die Tonight" also drives me nuts -- to the point that I rarely play my vinyl copies of this album any more -- I prefer Tidal FLAC, and those who know how strongly I prefer vinyl understand why that’s such a strong statement. Jeez, I never could convince a cartridge to could even track those transients cleanly until I bought into WAM Engineering’s WallyTools alignment procedures.
But I digress. I agree with those here who believe that you can’t generalize about the sound quality of a label’s reissues. MoFi’s 1-Step digitization "scandal" simply doesn’t seem to be as big an issue as some make it out to be. Analog is not only about signal-processing -- playback mechanisms are, IMO, at least as important. As is, obviously, the quality of an analog source -- I hear greater differences between MoFi 1-Step releases than I do, in aggregate, between MoFi’s 1-Steps and those released by other labels.
Anyway, to reply to the OP’s original question, the best, absoutely most realistic remastering I’ve ever heard was the UHQR box of "Kind of Blue." Incredible 3-dimensional soundstage, profound physical presence of each player. No other AP or MoFi release -- not even any other UHQR or vintage London, Mercury, etc. recordings -- can match its "you are there"-ness, at least on my system in my room. Every time I play it, I’m knocked out.
@cundare2: I have another "problem" with Tea For The Tillerman: I just don't like Cat Stevens that much .
Do you have the 2-LP/45RPM version of the Analogue Productions UHQR Kind Of Blue, or the single LP/33-1/3 version? I went with the single disc version; while the 45RPM version reportedly sounds better, I'm willing to forfeit that difference to get the original musical format and flow.
I had both Mobile Fidelity versions of Carole King's Tapestry album, and kept the 1-Step version, returning the other for a refund. Though both were made using the same digital file as source material, the 1-Step is considerably better sounding than the standard MoFi. While the sq isn't great, the original on Ode is really, really bad. While Lou Adler may have been a good producer in musical terms, in terms of sq he was not so hot.
I had both Mobile Fidelity versions of Carole King's Tapestry album ... While the sq isn't great, the original on Ode is really, really bad.
That is so true. I was actually stunned when I first heard the MoFi pressing because there was no hint of that sound and dynamic range on the Ode original. The MoFi is still no sonic spectacular, though, as you note.
We are very fortunate that there are several companies making high level audiophile records these days from $38 for Blue Note Tone Poet series to AP UHQRs at $150. Comparisons between MOFI (I assume you are referring to the One Steps from Music Direct) and UHQR (now AP, previous MOFI in the early 80s) is moot because there are NO titles where they compete directly.
The closest one is Kind of Blue, but MOFI's is NOT a One Step, it is a "regular" MOFI on 45, which by the way is excellent, it's just the the 45 of the UHQR is tied for the best sounding record I own, and surpasses the MOFI by a noticeable amount. It is tied with Aja which is phenomenal. I do wish they offered the records in the regular 45 packaging and save $50-$75. I am counting a little extra for the better vinyl they use.
I have been very happy with the One Steps I have, all are tremendous, especially Hotel California, Still Crazy and Somethin' Else. I don't care if they are similar to a HiRez download since I only listen to vinyl. Also wish the packaging was made like their 45's and cut the cost.
The older MOFIs typically play at a lower volume so you have to turn them up a bit, but if you have a very good amp, that should not be an issue and many are excellent. The old MOFI UHQRs are fantastic, especially Sgt Pepper (which is a good step up from the one in the Beatles Collection). Dark Side, Finger Paintings Crime of the Century and I Robot are all in my top 10 best sounding records. Sgt Pepper is the only record I will ever keep 2 copies of since I would never break up the Collection. I wonder how much better the old UHQRs would sound if they were made in the 45 format. In all cases, a 45 will improve the sound, and I can use the exercise getting up twice as often to flip the record.
I would be surprised if there are many people like Mike Lavigne who go all out on analogue and digital, I would think most have a preference. I have to think the analogue would sound different, even if the had a digital step in there. Maybe not if both formats are super high end. I'm not there even in my analogue set up. BUT, I can appreciate the different mastering and pressing qualities of all the different options.
Lets avoid generalizations in comparisons....tubes/solid state, belt drive/direct, gimbal/unipivot (although I hate the unipivot bounciness) analogue/digital, it depends on the specific options you are looking at. The only one that I think is universally accepted is that Moving Coil is better than Moving Magnet, although I bet the best MM is better than the worst MC, so forget that one too.
@sokogear - I've got a Clearaudio Charisma II MM cartridge; it's a $2K cart and it sounds awesome; my guess is it sounds better than a lot of MC carts, not just the 'worst' ones.
I have both. and generally prefer the AP releases. Each recording varies on performance. Being a jazz man I recently acquired a Mofi 45 rpm limited pressing of an Aretha Franklin Gold pressing that sells for $200, and up from many sellers, for $85. At that price the purchase was a no brainer and the recording was very impressive for an album from the early 60’s. I then acquired a limited Mofi Whitney Houston 180 gram lp for $140. That’s as high as I go for a single lp, but both recordings were worth the price. One has to have a bit of soul in their life!
@lalitktoo much scotch and late night record spinning occurred and yes, I have both; I have the Riverside collection as well and both UHQR are superior; You definitely get a greater feel of being there...there are subtle sounds throughout all 4 records that I did not notice on the collection records; I get those from Elusive Disc as there is no shipping nor tax
Thank you for letting me know. I wasn’t sure about double dipping since I own the Riverside collection as well and they sound pretty darn good! I am going to place an order now.
@larsman- that's why I said forget that generalization too. @bdp24- sorry for not mentioning moving iron - don't know much about them other than they are mainly sold by Soundsmith and are a small niche, so of course any model can be compared to any other cartridge. My personal choice - VDH MC One Special with a Sutherland Insight. The VDH has a great long lasting stylus and sounds excellent. The Insight with the LPS is another great value out there (and Ron Sutherland is a great guy).
@lalitk I thought elusive disc charges sales tax if the state you live in collects it (that's what they told me). For the cost of shipping alone, you will get a lower pressing number direct from AS and the peace of mind and quicker availability is worth it to me.
Lalitk I bought the Sunday at Village Vanguard UHQR . I prefer it over my friend UDS1 Mofi. Though I enjoy listening to uDS1 Mofi version.Iam not decided to get the Waltz for Debby UHQR.I will both buy them on SAcd when in stock.
The guy from Music direct said the Sunday at Village Vanguard is analog. They did not used DSD. Why it was not included on the lawsuit.I was waiting if there will be returns but none. Iam so happy it was reissue on UHQR .
@sokogear: The two best known moving iron pickups are from Grado (U.S.A.) and London/Decca (England). Both are very high output designs, the London/Decca 5mv!
You must have a verified phone number and physical address in order to post in the Audiogon Forums. Please return to Audiogon.com and complete this step. If you have any questions please contact Support.
.