What are your go to LP's for evaluating new gear or new tubes?

Dear @billpete   : Exist several LPs track recordings to make an overall/whole evaluation and IMHO not one LP for everything.

Btw, I can't understand using tube electronics your deep bass is just optimal, makes no sense to me. I listened several times the original/stock AR9 speakers and are good overall but not so good for me, of course not liesten your modified units.

R.

buellrider97

Yes, I believe Webcors are Mullard variants. I've not been a big Mullard fan either.

As to DiMeola, his talent is easily recognized and I appreciate it, just not my style of music for the most part. His recordings seem to be very well done. Fun story too.

Thanks

rauliruegas

I use lots of different recordings to evaluate things. Never just one.

Not sure what you mean about the tubes. Are you saying that they have no bass?

My AR9's were restored back to original. They are old school. Not for everyone, not even my favorites for some loud rock tunes but I use them for everything for now. I have others, just not set up to enjoy all. Maybe someday. :)

To @billpete, good for you. I like AR9s quite a bit and their history.  As you may be well aware, known as the "inspiration of future audio products" in its era. While I’ve never owned a set myself, a local dealer had a set a few months back to admire. I suspect with the right amplifier(s) handling them and those two parallel-wired 4-ohm woofers, i.e. the "electronic automatic transmission" as I recall, can sound really cool.

Not to sidetrack too much, yet Audioholics did an updated editorial review in 2023 on your AR9s. Just have to love all the speakers made back when. I enjoyed seeing them back then, not too often though. Not sure if you saw this before but thought i’d mention it - https://www.audioholics.com/editorials/acoustic-research-ar9

I have read that article. Always makes me smile. They were a reference of their day. They are still pretty damn good in my book. They don't do everything perfectly but they were designed around classical music and they do a wonderful job with classical music, orchestra, organ, piano, any acoustic strings, horns and percussion. They were very well thought out for the purpose of listening to classical music. Any acoustic stuff is really good. Not as great for loud rock concert listening but I'm OK with that too. Not terrible at rock, just not what they were made for.

Lots more AR3's out there than 9's but there is a fair following for the 9's with many still in use today. The 9's like power and I biamp with two 250 X 2 @8ohm SS A/B amps. The difference between single amp to biamp is night and day. I've been listening to them for over 20 years and I do not get tired of them. Getting the Linn and a different cartridge into the system yesterday brought some new life back to the old classics. Most enjoyable. More improvements to make but having fun for now. Next up will be the SLP98, another classic to add to my system. Looking forward to it.

I'll have to watch for Opus 3's. I'm not sure I have any but I might. I have a fairly extensive collection and I often find things that I don't recall even buying. Getting old has it's advantages as well as disadvantages. :)

I know what you mean! I happen to be listening to one of their finest this morning, Cyndee Peter's Black Is The Color (1977, Opus 3 77-06). (Which is quite a change from the one I played before it—Quadrophenia!) I would not normally think of myself as a candidate for gospel singing, but It's impossible not to love this woman's voice!

dogberry

I can completely identify with that. I certainly have Quadrophenia, have not heard it in a long time but that doesn't mean I won't ever hear it again. I also have some Amy Grant somewhere, another beautiful voice. Last night I was going through some of my collection that I don't normally look through and found 3 albums by Joni Mitchell that I didn't remember having. Court and Spark was one that someone had mentioned so I put it on and was very pleasantly surprised. Very well recorded and her voice was better than I remembered. My son had never heard it before and he enjoyed it. I probably hadn't heard it in close to 50 years and it was far better than I remembered. Even my wife commented on how good her voice was. Joni did the cover art herself. I believe that Cat Stevens used to do some of his as well. Art work was a good part of having albums and I collect some for the art as much as the music. Fun stuff.

The overture of The Who's Tommy. Japanese pressing. Mostly for Townsend's acoustic guitar work and Moon's drums.  

Who's Next, Japanese pressing: Behind Blue Eyes. For the vocals and Townsend's Electric guitar.

Court and Spark 1980 Nautilus half speed remaster. Mainly, because I am so familiar with the album.

Anything from the Louis Armstrong/Duke Ellington sessions: 1999 Classic Records remaster. For the detail, Armstrong's voice, and the heavenly sound of the clarinet.

Karajan conducting the Berliner Philharmonica: Beethoven's 9th, 4th movement. 1963 pressing. Mainly for the extreme dynamics. And the cello/double basses near the beginning of the movement.

Cat Steven's "Where do the Children Play" from Tea for the Tillerman. Mainly because it is such a beautifully recorded song with great dynamics and very large lows.

The Pretender's unplugged "Isle of View". Broadcast live on BBC television in 1995. An incredible performance. Chrissie Hynde is at the top of her game. And the recording is superb. The inclusion of The Duke String Quartet iin the arrangements works very well. Although getting your hands on a vinyl pressing can be challenging. Since it was only released on vinyl in the UK. My vinyl copy did not come cheap. But CDs are readily available.

And anything that has well recorded cellos. Elenor Rigby comes to mind. 

Dear @billpete  :  " Next up will be the SLP98, another classic to add to my system. "

Now I can understand a little where you are " seated " and why the Linn and who knows which cartridges in use.

I think  you need to listen this Lp: title Paramita, label Wind Music and composer/producer He Xun-Tian

R.

@flash56 

Just heard Court and Spark, very good. Mine is on Asylum Records and is very well done and nice clean vinyl.

Don't think I have any Japanese pressings of the Who but have the albums. Been awhile for me on those.

Have nothing on Armstrong or Ellington, just not part of my collection. 

Also came across several Pretenders LP's. 

Have a good amount of cello music. Good test music.

Have several Karajan, just came across some last night as I went through part of my collection. 

Cat Stevens, I have most records that he ever made. I have about 6 copies of Tea For The Tillerman, including a 200G remaster, which sucks. Best one I have is on Island. The American versions (/Atlantic, I think?) aren't bad but Island is better. Most of Cat Stevens albums are very dynamic, acoustic guitar, drums and that wonderful voice. All that I have were well done except for the remaster. 

@rauliruegas 

Not sure what you mean about why the Linn, if that is a question or not. Just something I always kind of wanted. Been having issues with various old turntables, VPI needing bearing (off to VAS for repair), most recently was using my old AR (OK not great). Found the Linn at a reasonable price with Ekos arm, Lingo PS, Cirkus bearing. Not sure about any other upgrades. The cartridge sent with it is an old Linn Karma but has been very pleasant listening so far. 

Taking notes on all suggestions. Thanks.

Johnny Hartman. "Easy Living", on Bethlehem stereo.

"Laughing" from "If I Could Only Remember My Name" by David Crosby.

David Lindley's 1981 album El Rayo-X. "Mercury Blues" is a killer track.

Shostakovich Tenth Symphony Karajan/Berlin or the previously mentioned Reiner/CSO Scherazade.

  I listen primarily to digital and the OP is analog but the above are 2 LPs that sound great and the works test every bit of the orchestra.  For organ I would find a good copy of E Power Biggs Bach at the Thomaskirche.

  I can’t resist telling the OP that yes, streaming and all forms of digital media can sound ‘as good’ as vinyl, and IMO usually better 

@billpete

Thanks for the advice for "Tea for the Tillerman". I am actually in the market for a better copy of the album. I had been considering Analog Productions 200g remaster. But they were a limited edition. And are now quite expensive. I currently have an A&M 1973 reissue that has seen its better days. I have read many good things about the Island pressings. Based on your experience, I will abandon the AP 200g idea, and search for a pristine Island pressing instead. You just saved me from an expensive disappointment. Thank you.

I find many remasters to be a disappointment when compared to the original pressings. I have a 1981 Mobile Fidelity half speed remaster of the Stones' Sticky Fingers. It is an abomination when compared to my 1971 original pressing or my 1974 reissue pressing. MoFi managed to remaster the life out of the album. And that is pretty difficult to do to an album such as Sticky Fingers. I am not saying that all of the 1980s MoFi half speed remasters are bad. But they are certainly hit and miss at best. And they didn't even come close to the target with Sticky Fingers.

Just a side note to your album art remark. I have heard Joni Mitchell say in an interview, that she did not consider music to be her native tongue. That she considers painting as her native tongue. She is an avid painter. And all of her albums have her original artwork on the covers. She also did the album artwork for CSNY "So Far". I have never heard of her selling any of her paintings. But she has done quite a number of them. I believe that you are correct about Cat Stevens doing his own album artwork as well. At least I am quite sure that Tea for the Tillerman was painted by him.

@flash56 

I just checked and my digital remaster is 180G, not 200 and on the Universal label. I bought it a long time ago from Music Direct, $30 or $40 even then. I didn't bother to open it for a couple of years, just put it in the collection. When I finally did and tried to play it, I discovered that the hole is drilled off-center, rendering it unplayable unless you're into really odd sounding music. :) What I was able to discern was that it didn't particularly seem to capture the essence of the original anyway. It just sits in the collection. I have plenty that don't get played for various reasons. 

Most of my copies of Tea For The Tillerman are A&M, not Atlantic. I just mixed that up and thought after I said it that I was probably wrong. I bought my Island copy as used but excellent. It does have a touch of surface noise but still better than the A&M's without noise. The differences aren't huge but they are there. I just wish I'd have had the instincts to buy the "import copies" back in the day. They could all be had for $1 to $2 more but back in those days, it was a quarter tank of gas or whatever. Had I known they were indeed far better, I'd have bought them every time. I used to buy most of my records at head shops. Most of the employees were not usually audiophiles, they were mostly young hippie stoner kids who worked in a cool shop. My main record rack (for storage) came from one of those old head shops. It was the record rack for a store called The Grass Menagerie.  A piece of history. :) We didn't really have record stores until years later. 

Cat Stevens was a pretty fair artist himself. He even did an animated film around 1969 or 1970. I remember watching it at a buddy's house. Interesting film and showed the introspective nature of Mr Stevens, obviously a very kind and gentle soul. I can't think of the name of the film but it has something to do with points. Either you have a point or you don't. Try to find the film and you will understand.

I just recently watched an interview with Joni Mitchell and she did speak of her art. Joni is/was "The Classic Hippie Chick". She epitomizes it. She is like the girls I used to date and eventually chose to marry. Growing up in the 60's and 70's is something that cannot be replicated and it never will be. OK, enough of my nonsense. I listened to another Joni Mitchell named Blue on Warner label. In some ways even better than my copy of Court and Spark. Both are certainly very enjoyable and well worth a listen. Great acoustics and a lovely voice. 

@mahler123 

Still rounding up my Karajan recordings. So far, Showpieces For Orchestra Album 2 on Angel label. I have found some Angel and EMI/Angel recordings to be very good. Another is Liszt/Karajan Mezeppa Les Preludes, Hungarian Rhapsodies/Berlin Philharmonic on Deutsche Gramaphon and Swan Lake & Sleeping Beauty with Vienna Philharmonic on London ffrr. All good labels.

I know that I have quite a few E Power Biggs organ LP's. Still going through to see which ones. He was very good. My favorite organist is Virgil Fox but I have many recordings of other organists that are very good. 

@bdp24 

I'll have to check that out. I don't stream as yet so I tend to buy cheap CD's, see if I like it and then look for a vinyl copy. I keep hearing of all these "converts" to streaming. I'm shocked in some ways but I suppose at some point, it will find it's way into my system. I have never gotten rid of a vinyl record and still have no plans of doing so. I am actually very happy that I kept all of my LP's. To me, they are invaluable. 

@unreceivedogma 

Thanks for the suggestion. I don't think I have this one but loved his voice. CSN&Y still high on all time favorites........even though not mentioned. Some of the best harmonizing in pop/rock music. I don't think I have any of his solo work but will look for it. 

@billpete

Blue is the classic Joni album. She once said that it was her favorite because there wasn't an insincere note on it. I got a chance to see her perform. Right before an intermission, she sent the band offstage and sit with a dulcimer in her lap and sang "A Case of You". Just as it is on the album. It was a magical moment. "Miles of Aisles" her live album is also good should you run across it in your collection. Yes I also grew up in the 60s. Unfortunately through my teenage and 20s years. Many of my albums got trashed. My stoner friends would "borrow" them without asking. But fail to return them, or return them ruined. I could not convince them to put them back into the covers. During parties, people would even set their drinks on them. Spill there drinks on them. You name it.

As far as streaming goes. It is really quite impressive if you stream through Qobuz, who exclusively streams FLAC files. Just like with everything else. Apple refuses to play in the same sandbox, and has developed their own version of "lossless" compression ALAC. It is inferior. I would not recommend Apple Music. The term "lossless" is a misnomer. As impressive as FLAC is. It is not "lossless". I worked as a sound design engineer for PBS for 30 years. A friend of mine released an album and sent it to Apple Music. I ask him for the uncompressed LPCM files. The exact copies of what were delivered to Apple. Apple converted them to ALAC for streaming. I compared  the ALAC stream to the uncompressed LPCM files. It was night and day. Lossless my a##!

As far as digital is concerned. Anything LPCM with a bit depth of less than 24 bits is in no way as good and definitely not better than analog. CDs are 44.1K/16bit. It simply does not have the resolution ability. Which causes the imaging to collapse among other things. CDs are an archaic delivery method for digital. It was necessary because at that time, they did not have the bandwidth ability to stream more information than that. I am frankly surprised that CDs have not faded out of existence. As the technology advanced with the arrival of DVD the bandwidth pipeline was many times larger. DVD Audio, and SACD (which is DSD) came on the scene. DVD Audio was capable of streaming 192K/24bit uncompressed LPCM. A 16 bit word has a resolution of 65,536. A 24 bit word has a resolution of 16,777,216. That is a huge  difference. 256 times greater resolution. And then if you increase the sampling rate by a factor of 4. You have 1,024 times the resolution of a CD. I would be hard pressed to argue that uncompressed digital audio of today isn't superior in many ways to analog. And yet DVD Audio and SACD failed to take hold and fell by the wayside. But CDs are still being manufactured as the standard. Why?

When it comes to streaming via the internet, the bandwidth pipeline is smaller than even CD. And now the new buzz word "HiRez" is being haphazardly thrown around. Since there is no standard in place to define what constitutes "HiRez". And with the use of "Lossless" compression codecs capable of reducing the stream to the size that the internet is capable of delivering. We now have "HiRez streaming available. Don't get me wrong. FLAC is a truly impressive codec. ALAC not as impressive. I am a fan of streaming. It delivers amazingly quality audio. However. It does not sound as good as quality vinyl. I have did A/B tests between the two. It is getting close. You can stream 196k/24 bit from Qobuz using FLAC compression. And it can sound amazing. When the time comes that the pipeline becomes large enough to stream uncompressed files, then we will be there. Because let's face it. Even the older analog albums that are being remastered and pressed to vinyl today are being delivered to the remastering facilities as extremely high resolution digital files. The actual analog tape masters are too old, fragile, and valuable, to allow them to leave their home. Unless it says "Analog remastered from the original Analog Masters", which they are doing with some of the Jimi Hendrix collection. It More than likely has been converted to digital at some point.

But I must disagree with the premise that ALL FORMS of digital media is as good or better than analog. It simply isn't correct.

As for vinyl. It isn't just the warm sound of vinyl that intrigues me, and puts me in my happy place. It is the entire tactile experience for me. I am a certified vinyl junkie in that regard.

Sorry for the long digital tutorial.

@flash56 

No apologies necessary whatsoever. You are preaching to the choir.

I am another like you, who finds that most re-masters are not as well done as the originals. I find even US 2nd gen. recordings to be better than many or most re-masters. I started avoiding them if they used the word "digital". Madonna, Ray of Light, was done in a digital recording studio and it is actually very well done on the Warner label, German pressing. I'm not a big Madonna fan but to me, this is her best work. I know she took lessons for her voice and the music is very dynamic and very good. This tells me that digital is on the right track at least. It has no digital signal or sign that I can discern but it is on vinyl. I used to have the same CD and was not impressed enough to play it at all. Same music, different format. I have always said that the CD was a flawed media. While I do enjoy some of them, I still hold to that belief.

I wasn't one to loan records out by the mid 70's. My experiences before that were the same as yours. I have had similar results with books not coming back or getting trashed. Inexcusable. 

Hearing what you say with the numbers to back you up, I do understand that digital has come a long way. Perhaps at some point, it will at least equal analog. I don't see how surpassing it is possible. I remember talking to a guy in a camera store about digital cameras as I had just bought a Nikon digital camera. I asked him at what point did digital surpass 35mm photography and he said when it reached about 7 megapixels. Now, you can get a cell phone that is considerably higher than that. Kind of crazy. So..........it stands to reason that the technology will come along to at least equal analog. I've just never heard it yet. I remember hearing Neal Young talk about it once and he was supposedly working on a technology that was to vastly improve digital music. I have no idea if he accomplished it or not or what it may have become. 

I for one, completely enjoyed your tutorial. I believe that you know of what you speak. It is evident in what you say and by what you can hear. I'm with you, certified vinyl junkie.

@billpete: If you're going to look for a UK Island copy of Tea For The Tillerman, make sure to find the original version, with the Pink center paper label. I had the second version, with the "sunray" Island label, which I found to sound very odd.

The pink label pressing was on Harry Pearson's Super Disc list for many years, and was raved about by Michael Fremer as well. When I found a copy with the sunray label I bought it, thinking there might be little or no difference. My finding of the Island LP's odd sound may be explained by reading on.....

I've never heard a pink label copy of the album, but here's the full story on the Analogue Productions version of Tea For The Tillerman:

When Chad Kassem (owner of Analogue Productions, Quality Record Pressing, and Acoustic Sounds) obtained the rights to produce an "audiophile-grade" pressing of the album, he hired Bernie Grundman to do the mastering and cut the lacquers (used to produce the metal plates from which LP stampers are made). When Bernie received the original master tapes, he made a startling discovery: the tape was NOT Dolby encoded, but all LP's mastered from that tape had been done assuming Dolby noise reduction HAD been used.

Do you realize what that means?! It certainly explains why I found my Island LP to sound odd. I'm a drummer, and there was a number of things seriously wrong with the sound of the drums and cymbals on my LP (heard through loudspeakers employing ESL tweeters). The harmonic overtones of the cymbals are almost completely missing-in-action. The same is true of Cat's acoustic guitar. The kick drum is lacking in punch, and the whole mess just sounds "wrong" to me. For years I assumed the fault lay in my sunray pressing of the album, but didn't like the music enough to look for a pink label pressing.

To appreciate the significance of Grundman's discovery, you need to know how the Dolby "A" (the version used in recording studios) noise reduction circuit works. It pre-emphasizes the signal it receives with four bands of boosted frequencies, each with 12dB/octave slopes. That's for the recording of the master tape. When the Dolby-encoded tape is played back during the mastering process, the Dolby playback circuit reduces the boosted frequencies by the same amount they were increased during recording, thereby restoring the tape's original frequency response, while simultaneously decreasing tape his by the same amount.

Grundman reported his discovery to Kassem, and Chad instructed him to do his master without Dolby A engaged, as it hadn't been used in the making of the master tape. Grundman did so, and reported to Kassem that the sound of Cat's acoustic guitar was extremely bright. Grundman wasn't sure consumers would like the sound he was hearing. The thing is, Cat's guitar was an Ovation, which unlike "normal" acoustics has a plastic body, not a wooden one. It's suppose to sound extremely bright!

Kassem gave Fremer a call, telling him the whole story. Michael told him "Hey, the sound on the original tape is how Cat and producer Paul Samwell-Smith wanted it." Kassem had Grundman make a production master "flat" (no change in frequency response), and another splitting the difference in about half (between flat and Dolby boosted). After hearing test pressings, it was decided to master the album "flat".

Anyone who prefers the sound of the Island (or A & M) pressing of Tea For The Tillerman to that of the Analogue Productions pressing might want to consider having his system checked for timbral accuracy. 

@bdp24 

Well, you certainly got my curiosity up so I had to check. I only find 5 copies of TFTT, not 6. My Island copy is the pink label and is gatefold. None of the A&M'a are gatefold but the 180G on Universal is. I've never opened it past the cello wrap, just the end to pull the album out to test initially. The 3 copies on A&M all bear the same number, likely all are the same. One is still in cello and has a dbx "Full dynamic range recording" label. 

I've always wondered why people don't talk about the dynamics of Cat Stevens recordings. I've always found them to be so, even the A&M's. It is no wonder though that I am so fond of the Island copy. Thanks for the great info. You guys never cease to amaze. 

Here are a few that I like to test my system with whenever I make changes:

Radiohead – In Rainbows 

Roger Waters – Amused to Death

Jack Johnson - In Between the Dreams

Bruce Cockburn - Dancing in the Dragon's Jaws (True North pressing) 

@bdp24 

This is incredibly fascinating!

I am very familiar with  Dolby A, B, and SR.  And the headaches involved with having to deal with tapes that have been dubbed with the wrong settings. Sometimes multiple times. Virtually rendering it to garbage. I would use Dolby SR when recording with my Studer 2" 24 track. It was a godsend. But not if it was not decoded.

Incorrect encoding and decoding of Dolby A  was an issue in the audio/video  world for years. I say video, because the 1" helical scan video machines were also equipped with Dolby A encoding and decoding.

I am also familiar with Ovation guitars since I am a guitarist myself.

I am not sure, however, that I am following the chain of events correctly. Exactly which pressings were pressed with Dolby decode incorrectly engaged? Are the original pink inside label Island pressings correct? Or were they pressed with incorrectly mastered plates also? And if I am understanding you correctly. The Analog Productions pressings were mastered correctly without Dolby A decode incorrectly applied? I just want to make sure that I have this sequence straight. So that I will purchase a correctly mastered  pressing. There is nothing worse than a Dolby A encoded tape which has not been decoded. Other than a tape without  Dolby A encoding, with Dolby A decoding incorrectly applied.

And thank you for the information about this. This is truly an amazing revelation. And one enormous f**k up on many levels.

A good question to ask @flash56, as I don’t think @billpete fully absorbed the somewhat complicated and confusing chain of events. Before I answer you, let me correct one mistake I inadvertently made in my long post above: In the next to the last paragraph (the one starting with "Kassem gave Fremer a call"), in the next to the last sentence I wrote ".....and another splitting the difference in about half (between flat and Dolby boosted)." The part in parenthesis should have read "between flat and Dolby engaged." With the Dolby circuitry engaged during playback, the high frequencies would have been reduced, not boosted. In comparison to the tape played back with the Dolby engaged, the tape played without the Dolby engaged sounds brighter. In spite of that, the tape played without Dolby---since it wasn’t recorded with it---is "flat".

I learned all these details in a few videos all the involved parties made and posted on YouTube a few years ago. According to them, ALL LP’s pressed prior to Grundman’s discovery of Dolby A noise reduction being used in the making of the production master tape (from which the lacquers were cut)---including the pink label Island, the sunray Island, in fact all Island pressings, as well as those on A & M---all were incorrectly mastered and lacquers cut with a tape in which the Dolby playback circuitry was engaged, thereby robbing the recordings of a lot of their mid-to high frequencies. That’s why the cymbals and Cat’s guitar don’t sound right, amongst other sonic problems.

The Analogue Productions pressing of Tea For The Tillerman is the first version mastered and produced without the Dolby circuitry engaged, and sounds dramatically better than the sunray label Island I had (it’s long gone). But of course as always everyone is entitled to their own opinion. I can understand not "liking" the true sound of Cat’s Ovation guitar; lots of players of Martin guitars don’t either.

For those who want to know what a tape made without Dolby n/r but played back with the Dolby circuit engaged sounds like, make a cassette tape yourself duplicating that process. I’m pretty sure you will NOT like how it sounds. Unless your loudspeakers themselves are very, very bright. It wouldn’t surprise me to learn that Tea For The Tillerman was mastered using Yamaha NS10’s. Oy!

The obvious question that follows is: after Grundman’s discovery, did everyone else also make new production master tapes from which to cut their lacquers and then press their LP's, without Dolby used in playback? I don’t know.

One re-master definitely worth listening to is Steve Hoffman’s version of Joni Mitchell’s Blue. Lovely!

@billpete

- The Crosby track is good because it has that great Bill Weir bass to test the bottom, Jerry Garcia’s pedal steel for the high end, Steven Stills and Joni Mitchell and Graham Nash and Paul Kantner in the chorus to test separation, and Crosby out front, with a large acoustical space.

- I personally look for original or second press in NM or SS condition over remasters. With the exception of Rino, I find almost reissues and remasters to be inferior, sometimes decidedly so. I was particularly disappointed with the MoFi 45rpm remasters if Fleeteood Mac and the Airplane’s Volunteers.

@bdp24 

I had to recheck my Island copy of TFTT. I was not aware of a solid pink label but mine is surrounded in pink and thought perhaps that was the reference. I decided I needed to see for myself if I was thinking wrong and I was, not knowing there was a solid pink label out there. I do have the sunray in pink outline but if you read on Steve Hoffman reviews of this, the early ones like I have are supposed to be the same as the solid pink copy. There was reference to the code in the wax, U2, I think which matched what I have. I just can't remember from one minute to the next so I may have that wrong. You can check Hoffman for yourself or maybe you have. I certainly believe you as your description has a rather amazing amount of details that I would think is known by a very small group. Interesting for sure. 

I never had a problem with the A&M's as they were all that I had. If you have no better reference, they become the reference. There are differences even among them as one says dbx and that one got high praise at least from someone. I'll have to check and see what I can hear as differences among my own. I just always found the Island copy to be somewhat better than the A&M'a that I had for so many years before. If I have the wrong one, I can only imagine how good the solid pink one must be and I guess I have to throw my system out the window. :) Thanks for the info and no, I am not following it 100%. It would take me awhile to absorb it all. 

@unreceivedogma 

Funny, that is the same gang that I was just listening to on Joni Mitchell's own recording. Very good stuff and well done.

Remasters have almost always been a disappointment to me, especially for the price. Originals have been better virtually every time. Rino rings a bell, might have something on that label somewhere. I think I remember reading that you have 6k LP's and know them all. I have somewhere between 2 and 3k and keep finding ones that I don't remember. Kind of fun and kind of sobering at the same time.

Someone said that analog remasters are fine and that stands to reason, especially if they go back to the original master tapes. D2D eliminates all of that and it's not hard to understand how it can be so good. Recorded direct to cutting lathe, no tape involved. I've never had the pleasure of hearing a master tape first hand but have spoken to some old internet buddies who had that luxury. I guess nothing quite compares but D2D is probably as close as it would get. Anyway, all good stuff. Thanks.

@dogberry 

I didn't know there was a Steve Hoffman version. I'll have to look for that. I guess this is why people stream. I have to buy it all to find out. Takes time.

@billpete

My theory in all this, and someone please correct me if I’m off, is that remastered issues from “original master tapes” suffer because tapes are magnetic, and after sitting on a shelf for 3, 4, or more decades, the original masters have suffered degradation.

Therefore, a SS or NM copy is likely to be better than a remastered one.

@unreceivedogma 

Yup. It is also my understanding that master tapes are so fragile (and valuable) that the owners do not want to let them out for any reason. They will be archived somewhere in a controlled environment, as are films etc. 

According to Bernie Grundman---who has been mastering since the 1960’s---analogue masters tapes are relatively hearty, and suffer no degradation from sitting on a shelf unplayed (assuming the shelf is in a climate controlled environment, which is generally the case). What DOES degrade tapes is being played; the more they are played, the more oxide particles are "shed" from the backing polyester film onto which the oxide is applied. Tapes which have been store unused for fifty years have been found to have startling sound quality, assuming the recording sounded excellent to begin with. To paraphrase Mark Twain’s joke about reports of his death, reports of tape degradation by the mere passage of time are greatly exaggerated.

The usual practice is to make a "production master" tape from the original 2-channel (if stereo) final mix tape, the original master tape then being put away. Safety copy is another term used in place of production master. That production master tape is then used to cut the lacquer from which the metal pressing "plates" are made. The plates are installed in the LP pressing machine, and voila, you have a vinyl LP. There is another step involving father and mother transfers, but this is already complicated enough.

For the Analogue Production mastering and pressing of Miles Davis’ Kind Of Blue, however, Chad Kassem was able to get the original multitrack tape (only three tracks. Remember the album was recorded in 1957), which had not been played since the original production master copies were made at the time of the album’s original release. Grundman said the tapes (two of them) were immaculate.

Rather than making a new stereo production master copy from the 3-track master., Bernie mixed the three channels and sent the resulting 2-track mix straight into the mastering console, thereby eliminating one stage of analogue tape copy degradation. THAT degradation is real.

But there’s even more to the story. While playing the two master tapes---one made each day of the two day sessions for the album, and each on a different 3-track machine---Grundman discovered that one of the tapes was playing back at the wrong speed, thereby changing the pitch of the instruments and the "feel" of the songs and musicianship. What had happened is that during one of the two sessions, the recorded used that day was running either slightly too fast or too slow (I don’t remember which). Hence since the tape was then played back on a playback deck that was running at perfect speed when the lacquer for that LP side was cut (the two days of recording were placed on the two opposite sides of the LP), that side of the LP is out of tune and time. And that was true of every version of Kind Of Blue ever made up to that point in time (1997)!

Naturally Kassem had Grundman adjust the speed of the playback deck to get the music on that side of the LP back to the speed it had been played at in the studio. Once again, Bernie Grundman to the rescue! This is just one more example of why Analogue Production LP’s are as good as they are. And we haven’t talked about the sound quality of the mastering itself, and the quality of the QRP LP pressings.

@bdp24, @billpete  

You don't have to convince me. Now that you have pointed it out. I can hear it. Obviously, the sound of the guitar. The pick across the strings. The songs that I listened to didn't have much cymbal hits. A small crash cymbal here and there. But the drums themselves were very revealing. The initial impact of the stick hitting the head of the snare or toms is very revealing. Also, the vocals are affected quite drastically. It reeks of Dolby A decoding an unencoded recording. The best way that I can describe it is that it sounds as if you are squashing the highs out by applying too much compression. Not allowing it to breathe. If that makes any sense. Being a sound engineer, I have been guilty of that mistake a number of times. That isn't a great description. But, you get the picture. It sounds dull and subdued.

I got on Qobuz. Many times they will have the original and the remasters. The only original that they were streaming was TFTT. Which they were streaming at 192K/24bit. All of the other albums were the 2020 remasters. And are being streamed at 44.1K/16 bit??? They had to be supplied with a digital copy of the original production master. Because it is evident there as well. However, the 2020 remasters do not have that problem. They also have the 2020 remixes of the albums. Which if I am not wrong were only available on CD in the 50th Anniversary Box set. Yusof/Cat was very involved in all of that. The 2020 remasters, at times, sound more like a remix than just a remaster. In any case, I am almost certain that it was remastered digitally, not that that matters. But it would have had to come from the original master tape. And I am certain that they were aware of what Grundman had discovered. And did not make that mistake twice. And, of course,  the remixes had to come from the original multi-track tapes. Which wouldn't have been subject to the decoding blunder. My point is that Cat Stevens' guitar and his voice and the drums, all sound the same in the 2020  remixes as in the 2020 remasters. Have you ever had a chance to listen to the Analog Production remaster, by any chance? Now I am definitely going to have to get my hands on a copy. Out of curiosity if nothing else.

Now the biggest question for me becomes:  Was TFTT the only album where this blunder was made? I do not have an extensive Cat Steven's vinyl collection. However, I do have a 1973 A&M reissue of Mona Bone Jakon. And after checking it. I will bet you lunch that the same thing occurred with that album. In fact, it does more harm to MBJ than it does to TFTT when comparing it to the 2020 remasters. I have only one more Cat Steven's album that I can compare. A 1974 A&M CRC release of Buddha and the Chocolate Factory. I have not yet had time to hear if it also suffers from this expanding blunder. The only remaster that has been done with MBJ prior to the 2020 remaster. Was done by Island Records in 2013. Which would have been two years after the Analog Productions discovery was made by Grundman.

However, with TFTT. Mobile Fidelity released a 1980 half speed remaster from the original master tape. And a UHQR box set in 1982. Did they make the same mistake? Does anyone know?

There have been numerous remasters for CD.

The only other remaster pressed to vinyl prior to the AP 200g. Was done by Island Records in 2008 on 180g. And distributed in Europe. Is that remaster flawed. Did they even use the original master or a flawed production master?

@billpete

You originally said that you had a 200g Universal remaster. And then you said that actually it was 180g. Are you certain that it is not 200g. The only pressings that I can find tied to Universal are the Analog Productions remasters. And I can only find the 200g release in 2011, and the 200g double lp 45 rpm release in 2015. Is this the remaster release that you own? https://www.discogs.com/release/3101375-Cat-Stevens-Tea-For-The-Tillerman

And I agree whole heartedly with you as far as reference goes. When you have  only one reference that you have been given. That is what you expect it to sound like. Had @bp24 not made me aware of this. I would have considered that to be the sound that the album was meant to sound like. With only other flawed pressings to compare it to, you will choose amongst your choices as to which one is best. It is a shame that your remaster pressing has the spindle off center. That is not the first time that I have read about that problem with some of those pressings. If it were playable. I would ask you to consider giving it a listen from a totally different perspective and tell me what you think. But you certainly can't judge anything if the spindle hole is off center. BTW, NM pink copies for sale are few. And scattered around the globe. And not inexpensive. And if they are also pressed from the flawed production masters. What is the point?

The thing that I find utterly amazing is that the sound of Cat Steven's that the world has become familiar with, is not the sound that Cat Stevens intended. Simply because of a simple technical assumption

I apologize for the length of this reply. But this has lit a fire under my a**..

@flash56: Yes, the misapplied Dolby playback equalization decreased the percussive attack of the drumstick tip striking the snare drum and tom tom drumheads, and of the felt bass drum beater striking the kick drum batter head. With my sunray Island copy of the LP, the kick always sounded weak, anemic to me, with no punch or power. I attributed the dead, lifeless sound of the drumset to the then-common practice of over-muffling drumset heads in the studio (Ringo’s snare drum sound on Abbey Road is terrible for that reason. He recorded with a towel on top of his snare drum head!). Still, I couldn’t understand why Harry Pearson and Michael Fremer considered TFTT to be such a great sounding LP, and chalked it up to my having only a sunray label pressing, not an original pink label one.

But the first, most obvious difference is the missing "click" of the pick on the guitar strings, and the missing harmonic overtones of the guitar. And Cat Stevens and producer Paul Samwell-Smith didn’t notice that?!

By the way, Analogue Productions made the album in both 1-LP/33-1/3 RPM and 2-LP/45 RPM versions. The 45 RPM version is of course reported to sound slightly better than the 33-1/3, but I went with the 33-1/3 pressing as I’m willing to sacrifice a small degree of sound quality to get the full musical programming flow of each LP side. Music first, people!

I think this is the pink label version of TFTT, which I shall have to play this morning:

@flash56 

I just checked my re-master copy of TFTT. It is 180G, vinyl re-release, and says mastered from original tapes so not the typical digital remaster. For some reason, I thought it was a digital remaster, probably just because I'm so used to the term. The label reads UNIVERSAL MUSIC FOR THE WORLD, on a gray label with black circle. On the back, it says Universal and Island. Maybe it had a shot at being a good one. Maybe there is a way to re-drill the center hole? Will have to look into that. 

My Island copy is the sunray version but according to what I read on Hoffman's site, it should be the same as the pink label. Is BDP24 saying that none of them are right? There is so much info, I have trouble following. Is there a difference in the dbx version on A&M as I have that one too. 

I find nearly all Cat Stevens albums to have great dynamics, when compared to other records of the same time period. It always seemed to me that he must have been very particular about these things. It is really surprising to find that so many mistakes were made. My other favorites are Buddha and The Chocolate Box and Catch Bull at Four. I haver several others as well but the three named are more of my favorites and get more play time. There are good songs on all of his records and I am now inspired to listen to all of them, including each copy to see what I can pick up. 

This has been extremely interesting.

@bdp24 

Trying to make sure I am understanding what you say. I think you said that the very first Island (pink label) copies of TFTT got it right? Is that correct? My sunray may also be that same recording, according to the Hoffman site. Then Analog Productions did it right again? Or did they change it somehow? I don't mean to drag this on forever, just trying to be clear on what is being said. 

@dogberry 

You are a lucky dog...........berry. :) Hoping mine is the same just different label. Verdict not quite in yet. 

No problem @billpete, you confusion is quite understandable. I’ll look through YouTube videos and see if I can find the ones wherein Chad Kassem, Bernie Grundman, Michael Fremer, and Kassem’s QRP (Quality Record Production) production manager sit around for a coupla hours discussing the whole Tea For The Tillerman debacle.

In the meantime, let me see if I can simplify and clarify things for you..Since the advent of Dolby "A" noise reduction (a more complex, full range version of the Dolby "B" and "C" used in cassette decks), it has been very widely used in recording studios. By the time of the taping of Tea For The Tillerman, there were few recordings made without it.

Here’s how Dolby A works. When a 2" 16 or 24 track master tape is mixed down to two channels (left and right, for stereo), the mix is almost always recorded onto a 1/4" or 1/2" master mix tape, the recorder running at either 15 inches per second or 30. During the recording of the master mix tape, the recording engineer, record producer, and sometimes the artist make choices regarding equalization, compression, relative track levels (volume), added reverb and/or echo, etc., etc., etc.

And here’s the important relevant point to be made: when that 2-trk master mix tape is made, the engineer and producer can decide to make it either with or without Dolby A noise reduction employed. Dolby A is a 4-band (four different frequency "groups", each with it’s own frequency response curve. I don’t know the specific frequency bands involved, but for the sake of argument let’s hypothetically imagine them to be 1,000-2,000Hz, 3,000-5,000Hz, 6,000-10,000Hz, and 10,000-20,000Hz. The numbers aren’t important in what we are trying to understand here.).

And here’s the crucial thing to understand: when that tape is made with Dolby A noise reduction employed, the Dolby circuit boosts each of the frequency bands, the boost having a frequency response curve, similar to the filters in a loudspeaker’s crossover. And during playback of the tape in the process of mastering, the Dolby A playback circuitry applies a complimentary but exactly opposite amount of frequency response reduction, returning the response of the 2-trk. tape to that of the 2" 16 or 24-trk. master tape. And since the noise inherent in all analogue tape recording is added to the signal created on the 2-trk. tape---the noise is organically mixed in with the sound contained in each of the 16 or 24 tracks---when the Dolby playback circuitry reduces the frequency response of the signal sent to the recording head, the noise inherent in the signal is reduced by the exact same amount, hence noise reduction is achieved.

When the original mastering engineer received the production master tape of Tea For The Tillerman, he apparently mistakenly assumed the tape had been made with Dolby A employed. It hadn’t. So he used the Dolby playback circuitry, which applied the frequency response reduction curves to the signal used to "cut" the lacquers needed to make an LP.. Since the tape had NOT had the Dolby frequency response boost added to in when it was made, when the Dolby A playback circuit applied the response "cuts" to the signal, the "flat" response of the multi-track master tape now resembled the response curves of the Dolby playback circuitry, not the sound on the tape itself. Oops.

The end result is that the LP was mastered with severe cuts in frequency response, cuts increasing in level as the frequencies increased (deeper cuts at 5,000Hz that at 2,000Hz, say). That’s why the original LP sounds dead, lifeless, missing a significant degree of it’s high frequency content, along with other attributes such as dynamic range. That includes the original pink label Island pressing.

Bernie Grundman made his discovery when mastering the album for Classic Records, whenever that was. When Chad Kassem bought Classic Records from Michael Hobsen, that purchase included the "metal works" for TFTT that Grundman had made for Classic."Metal "works" is the term for the metal disc that is made from the lacquer that a mastering engineer "cuts" (literally), required in the production of all LP’s.

I hope my explanation makes sense, but if not ask away!

Your explanation makes a lot of sense for the recording process, which I now know at least something about, thanks to you and others here.

Still wondering about the TFTT recordings. I thought you said that the earliest Island recordings got it right. Yes?

Then again, corrections were made by Analog Productions. Is that also correct? Is one more correct than the other? Just curious. Thanks for taking the time to go through this extremely informative explanation. Good stuff.

@billpete

Does your remaster have this Barcode number by any chance?

Barcode: 602517753129

If so, you have an Island 2008  "Back to Black" 180g remaster. Pressed in the UK. Discogs doesn't have photos of the labels nor any dead wax matrix info. It was only released in Europe. It should also contain a mp3 voucher.

My vote is to drag this out until we get the correct information. We seem to have inadvertantly hi-jacked the original intent of the thread. @billpete, you are the OP. It is your thread. If you don't mind. I would like to get to the bottom of this. Or we can start a new thread.

Here is another concern. Are we speaking of solid pink labels pressed in the UK? I ask because there were both pink label and sunray labels being pressed at the same time all over the world. For example: The Netherlands, Scandanavia, and Israel among others were pressing sunray labels. While, Germany, France and Argentina were pressing solid pink labels. All of them pressed in 1970. Those production plates had to be distributed throughout the world as fast as they could produce them. I think that it would be impossible to have a difference between the pink and sunray labels. Unless it is narrowed down to just UK pressings. The UK  didn't distribute a repressing with the sunray label until 1971. If there is a difference between the two labels. I am inclined to believe that it didn't happen until the repressing was released in the UK in 1971. So in theory. You could have a  1970 Scandinavian sunray label that was pressed with plates made from the same production master as the UK pink labels. So I must ask both @billpete and @bdp24 where were your pressings made? And when were they pressed?

@flash56 

I don't mind this at all. I'm enjoying it since I've been an avid listener of Cat Stevens for at least 55 years. My wife is also a big fan. He is/was a truly unique talent, being gifted a fantastic voice and multiple musical and artistic talents. 

My 180G has the barcode 42284 23521. Below that is the number 842 352-1 and beside that is LC00407 and the Island insignia. To the left it states P 1970 Universal Island Records Ltd. C 1970 Universal Island Records Ltd.

If there may be more info inside the gatefold, I can take the cello off. I've just left it on to preserve it. The label on the record is another sunray pink rim Island label that says made in the EU. In the wax, appears to be A33 842 352-1 S1 320

@flash56 

I don't mind this at all. I'm enjoying it since I've been an avid listener of Cat Stevens for at least 55 years. My wife is also a big fan. He is/was a truly unique talent, being gifted a fantastic voice and multiple musical and artistic talents. 

My 180G has the barcode 42284 23521. Below that is the number 842 352-1 and beside that is LC00407 and the Island insignia. To the left it states P 1970 Universal Island Records Ltd. C 1970 Universal Island Records Ltd.

If there may be more info inside the gatefold, I can take the cello off. I've just left it on to preserve it. The label on the record is another sunray pink rim Island label that says made in the EU. In the wax, appears to be A33 842 352-1 S1 320

oops, repeating myself :)

@billpete

I found it! It is not a remaster. It is a 2004 reissue on 180g vinyl. It may have included an insert advertising other Universal albums. Some did and some didn't. It was released in the UK and Europe. 

Is your regular Island copy of TFTT pressed in the UK? Is it a pink rim palm tree label? I assume that it is a gatefold. It will probably be printed in small font on the inside in one of the corners underneath the "I" logo which may be pink or white. If it isn't. It would be my guess that it is a UK pressing. There were many reissues with pink rim labels between 1971 - 1972 out of the UK.. A couple of them were not gatefold. If it was not pressed in the UK. It would be my guess that it would say which country somewhere.on the cover or labels.

Thanks for taking the time to check for me.

Yes, my 180G says EU and 04 sounds about right. I know that I bought it a long time ago. One of the first things I ever bought from Music Direct. When I lived in IL, I could order one day and get it the next. 

Yes, my regular Island copy is from the UK. It is a gatefold very glossy outer cover, very dull and rough inner paper. The record sleeve is blue paper with pink writing. Says island records ltd. basing street london w11. Has a patent number and says MADE IN GREAT BRITAIN. I don't find any dates other than the original date of 1970. It does say Freshwater in blue writing on the back cover. Also has the number ILPS9135. The record label is palm tree, Island, sunray and pink rim.