My copy of this MOFI vinyl is excellent, however I do NOT have any other copy/format to compare it to. This is the only one I have listened to. I sure didn't think there was anything out of the ordinary with this pressing? |
Maybe you have a bad copy,can you exchange it? |
the time when customer is right is over. |
Strat, Same as you, I have a lot of MoFi's and love them all but my brand new, opened for the first time copy of Santana's first eponymous album on MoFi was the same as your Patricia Barber album, dull, lifeless, very low in level. The Santana was not a UHQR or Gain 2, it was one of the fairly recent Silver Series, so maybe that explains it. Am also a Strat player ( 1983 two-tone sunburst reissue of a 1954), if thats what your name is about. |
Mrmitch...the Santana LP you have is NOT a Silver Series. MOFI hasn't released any Santana titles on the Silver label.
It has to be a Gain 2. My copy is fine. It's a pretty low serial number, but doesn't sound as you describe.
Also, most of the Silver Series LPs have been very good, (I have them all). Matter of fact, I have almost every MOFI LP ever made. I think I'm only short maybe 25 titles or so. |
Ditto for my Mythologies. Dull, compressed and low level. |
Thanks for the clarification MoFi, as usual you da man on MoFi stuff. You're right, it's a Gain 2, my bad! Serial number 5330 so maybe the latter number explains why my copy isn't the greatest, I dont know. |
Thanks for the clarification MoFi, as usual you da man on MoFi stuff. You're right, it's a Gain 2, my bad! Serial number 5330 so maybe the latter number explains why my copy isn't the greatest, I dont know. System it's played on is a TW Akustic Raven One with Ortofon 12 inch arm and a Dynavector cart to a Fosgate Signature phono pre via Synergistic Research Tricon Analog interconnect, then on to a Joule Electra LA-150 Mk2 pre via Purist Audio Venustas interconnect, then on to a Belles 350A amp via Acoustic Zen Zero Crystal interconnects, and thus to Unity Audio Signature 1 speakers (new Salk Soundscape 8's being made as I type)thru Acoustic Zen Satori shotgun cables. |
I find most MFSL recordings even the early ones I had to turn my system volume up further than with mass produced recordings. Even with most current reissues that are not MFSL releases I find I turn the volume up more than with older originals. I think they are recording at lower volume to give more room for the hi's and lows in the recording also to minimize surface noise from the recording tape (less hiss) as MOFI did in the early days. Each recording has a volume point where it sounds best IMHO and if not at that volume the recording sounds flat and lifeless and if too load the recording sounds harsh. Just because the number on the dial is higher does not mean the volume is higher.
I own every MFSL released and some that were not and find all sound better when I get them to that point where they punch out of my speakers.
Do not get me wrong there are a few that sound like crap as all manufactures have.
I have had systems where to get to that volume the sound is too load and think it had more to do with the system being too large for the room. I like my system to have great energy at about 12 o'clock. This may be the old way but I myself am getting old also.
Enjoy |
The best are japanese pressings sounds better than most MFSL. |
My copy of Mythologies (#611) sounds a touch dull at low volume but I wouldn't call it compressed. Its dynamic range sounds natural. OTOH, my copy of Sinatra's Only the Lonely does sound a bit dull and compressed.
It's my second copy of Mythologies. The first one had a lot of right-channel surface noise so I returned it. This one's much quieter but still a little noisy. Great record.
Like Hevac1, I find many MFSL releases need turning up to really come to life. Milt Jackson's Invitation is a gorgeous exception. That record sounds phenomenal at any volume. |
You can EQ any remaster disc, vinyl or CD, or down load and make it sound different, in the end it is what you like. All sound quality gets back to this basic, and no one holds the best all the time. I've been very disappoint in the SACD of Nat King Cole "After Midnight" SACD, it sounds good, but not like a recording of that era should. They made it more present, and cleaner, but it lost a lot of meat to the bone and the Soul, another person I know just loves it due to that sound. |
definitely had to turn my copy up. forgot i did it and next lp a mofi w nelson was a more than a little too loud. i have a fair amount of gain in my rig. i did have to turn up barber to the point where i start to get hum from speakers when there is no signal. nelson record sound level fell more into my systems sweet spot. to be fair though i have started getting that hum at lower levels latley from what i believe is my speed box psu. regardless of that though i still had to turn it up past what i normally listen at. when i fix that i wont be disappointed in record at all, but as of now quiet spots are distracting. |
I can't speak on the Mythologies album but there seems to be some confusion here. If a recording is not as loud as some others (a lot of modern, or modern rock recordings for example) that does not mean it's compressed. Compression is actually when the recording is produced at a louder volume and the dynamics of the recording are narrowed. Which means usually the volume of the quieter parts of the recording is raised to more closely match the louder parts of the recording. Thus everything sounds louder and you need less of the volume knob to get the music loud. Sometimes barely any at all and it's VERY LOUD. I much prefer the wider dynamics as that is what music generally has, dynamics. Squeezing out the dynamics is what makes the recordings lifeless, good for earbuds and a car system though if that's where your at. A good stereo system with the proper volume adjustment will certainly bring most lower volume recorded music to life. Maybe some don't like to adjust volume in the new pitiful quality I-tunes world? |
Yesterday we played Cafe Blue, 45 rpm mofi box edition, and were amazed by the sound. Next, the mofi Mythologies, at 33 rpm. This was clearly a step down in sound quality. I have been thinking - should I invest more in 45 rpm records, and less in 33. Since these generally sound better. 33 rpm was decided against protests from RCA recording engineers (who wanted 45), if I am correct - back in the 1950s.
|
45rpm (rounds per minute) doesn’t save a bad recording...or poor music...of course. But what was "marginal" at 33,3 rpm may now become engaging. It reminds me of my experience with the Revox A77 recorder - turn the tape speed up to double (from 3 3/4 ips to 7 1/2 ips -. inches per second), and the sound will be better, with more enjoyment and engagement on the listener side. Same thing with my Tascam DSD recorder - double DSD is better, if only by a notch.
So of course the speed of the record is only one part of the sonic picture, but it means more than I have realized. My failure rate with 33 rpm albums I have bought (failure = collecting dust, seldom listened to) is far higher than for the 45s I have bought. This may be due to more expense and more scrutiny before buying the 45s, as well as the better sound quality. I only have 30 or so albums in 45 version. Almost all of these are great, in terms of sound, although it varies with the original take. If the recording is poor, the "lift" by the new resolution wont maybe matter so much. Still, I’ve yet to see a case where I’ve actually REGRETTED a 45rpm buy due to no sonic impact. It is allways there, but how much it matters, depends on the recording and production. Grunge in, grunge out. But with higher speed, more of what I’ve thought was "grunge" emerges as integral and melodic parts of the music.
|
