"Transferred from original analogue master tapes"

If it doesn't say analogue mastering, it is probably digital mastering from analogue tapes.

"Transferred from original analogue master tapes"

Typically means they pulled the original analogue tapes out of archives or storage, then used an ATR to transfer them to digital (usually a hard drive). All work was then performed in the digital domain.

This says the original master tapes were used. The better remasters use the original analogue source tapes; ie, Jimmy Page and the LZ remasters.

Sound impressive on the cover, now how does it sound to you? Nothing else matter unless they are going NUTS on the price..

There is a point where analog is good enough. I listen to 78s still. LOL

Regards

It depends on the company which is in possession of the masters, the company which is licensing the rights to those tapes, the mastering engineer, etc. Some record companies won’t let the masters out of their storage facility, providing the reissue company only with a copy, either digital or analog.

By "original master tape" are they referring to the 3, 4, 8, or 16-track multitrack tape (1/4", 1/2", 1", or 2" wide), or to the original 2-track (1/4" or 1/2" wide in most cases) mixdown tape? Both are considered masters. Most LP pressings are made from a lacquer cut from not a master tape, but from a "production" or "work" master, which is a copy of the real master. 

Some reissue record companies are well known to use a purely analog signal path (MoFi, Analogue Productions, Speakers Corner, Intervention, etc.), so are a safe buy.

The Beatles 2014 mono LP boxset is pure analog (the stereo boxset is not), the source the multi-track masters, which allowed the new mono mixes to be made (efforts were taken to make the new mix match that of original 1960’s mono mixes, but without the low frequency rolloff which eviscerated the sound of Ringo’s kick drum and Paul’s bass).

Thanks, all. I wish the industry had a labeling standard like we get on nutritional content, but we know that's not happening! 

Yes, @bdp24 I know about:

Some reissue record companies are well known to use a purely analog signal path (MoFi, Analogue Productions, Speakers Corner, Intervention, etc.), so are a safe buy.

In today's example, I'm pondering the purchase at LRS, knowing I'd love a good compilation of this genre, where my knowledge and collection are minimal. Knowing the era, and Stax's reputation, it seems like all analogue would be naturally expected.  The language struck me as shady, and I concluded it was digitally mastered. But, considering the lack of a good alternative, I bought it anyone. 

@oldhvymec the music is so good on most tracks that I'm not analytically focusing on SQ when listening. It's a quiet enough pressing to not be a distraction. My gut tells me the same on redbook or high-rez would probably be equally satisfying. Not bad for a $29 double LP, but a missed opportunity in a way...cheers,

Spencer

I suggest you read the reviews  here. First 2 speak of "substandard" sound. I also like funk. I also like R&B from the 60's & early 70's. But Phil Spector's Wall of sound prohibits it from sounding good. Oh well. I may peruse that site to look for some good funk. Thanks for the thread

@artemus_5 Thanks. FYI, I read those Amazon reviews. The one detailed review mentions near the end that he's listening to the CDs...

One label that produces some great sounding funky LPs is Daptone. Start with Daptone Gold comp. or some Sharon Jones & The Dap Kings. Cheers,

Spencer

Daptone Records built their own all analog studio to get a specific sound for their artists.  They didn't even use digital reverbs and instead went with spring and plate units.  Here's a short video about the studio by one of the label's founders explaining their philosophy and work methods.

i caught Sharon at a tobacco warehouse in Charleston, she ruled that place for hours….

I believe that it needs to say cut from the original master tapes to be all analog. Anything else could mean a digital transfer from the tape.

What it is supposed to mean is they used the original master tapes to cut the LP. But notice this is a compilation.

So, think about it. Records are cut on a cutting lathe. They don’t stop the cutting lathe between tracks to change tapes. This is why Direct to Disc is so rare, the performance has to be real-time continuous. Same goes for cutting from tape. The only way they can use original master tapes on a compilation LP is to first make a copy of the master tape tracks they want to go on the LP.

Then think about how record labels handle their tapes. The original master is the first tape of the mix-down. As such all the tremendous investment of resources is distilled down to that one tape. Studio execs abhor risk, and this is major monster risk. First thing they do is make a copy, at least one, and away goes the master to a vault makes the one in Indiana Jones look all neat and tidy.

Merely finding one of these Ark’s of the Covenant is an archeological epic. Tracking down a slew of them to make a compilation? Dream on!

I could go on. And on.

Bottom line. What does "transferred from original analogue master tapes" mean?

Marketing. That’s what it means.

@sbank 

Good catch. I keep forgetting that they mix cd w/ vinyl reviews.SJ & the Dap Kings have been on my buy list but I keep forgetting to buy.. Merry Christmas

@onhwy61 Thanks for sharing that link. Very cool. For something more extended but similar, have you seen the Muscle Shoals film? It's really good.

@millercarbon Good point! Maybe that VMP TSOP box set would be worth the high price after all. That or find a few good used OGs and just stream the compilations. 

@tomic601 Lucky dog, never got to see her live.

Cheers,

Spencer

My take on it is, most important thing to know about buying records is yourself. Are you a sound quality buyer? If so then marketing schtick like original analog master tape is just that, marketing schtick. The luck of the draw in terms of the quality of the individual pressing you happen to get has far more to do with the sound quality you will hear than anything else. Are you a record collector? If so then you will be happy to have what no one else does, the rare original test pressing of, well whatever. The one with the accidentally printed upside down cover, I guess. Are you a fan? Impulse? Buy the hits follow the crowd? 

Whatever it is the more you are honest with yourself the better luck you will have. 

If you are a sound quality buyer there really is only one source for records of guaranteed extreme high sound quality- Better Records. Not cheap, but they are the only records I know with a 100% money back guarantee if you don't like the sound. Which they are able to do because unlike all the others they actually do have the sound quality, original master or no original master. They don't care. Only thing Tom cares about is how good it sounds. 

It’s preferred to use the original source. I have cd’s that were remastered from wax cylinder’s. They sound great, given they were recorded in 1918 without electrical equipment. Sometimes an old 78 rpm shellac record is the best you’re gonna get. I personally, was disappointed with the all analog mono Beatles vinyl from years back. My thought was that it might have sounded better if digital were used somewhere in the chain. The Donald Fagen recording ’The Nightfly’ was an all digital recording and to my ears it sounds great. So this debate between all analogue or digital, I believe has substance however ’all analogue’ shouldn’t be an absolute rule.