Insights on vinyl

^ Currently I only have the "standard" CD release - I'm looking for the remaster on Ebay.

I'm just surprised that "Metal Master" and "Metal Mother" aren't in the archives

If there are any fans of Ted Nugent out there (who are willing to admit to being one), you'll be familiar with the appalling mix on the original vinyl issue of "Double Live Gonzo"; somehow, on the CD version, they actually managed to make it worse - imagine a hand held mike, covered in 4 layers of sport socks, connected to a 1970s Phillips portable cassette player and held up to the PA...

Now apparently, 30 years on, they've got round to remastering the original tapes - has anyone heard this version, and has it made any improvement whatsoever?

Jim Garten wrote: If there are any fans of Ted Nugent out there (who are willing to admit to being one), you'll be familiar with the appalling mix on the original vinyl issue of "Double Live Gonzo"; somehow, on the CD version, they actually managed to make it worse - imagine a hand held mike, covered in 4 layers of sport socks, connected to a 1970s Phillips portable cassette player and held up to the PA... Now apparently, 30 years on, they've got round to remastering the original tapes - has anyone heard this version, and has it made any improvement whatsoever?

I always thought that DLG was recorded in mono....it is that bad a recording....so flat and one dimensional.
    

Jim Garten wrote: True - it's a real shame, as (embarrassing gonzoid stage banter aside) Ted Nugent is on seriously good form on that album & it's his only live album featuring Derek St Holmes (David St Hubbins...??) on vocals/rhythm guitar.

^ no objection, but also consider this example:

Miles Davis - Kind of Blue

Most (old) people who are really used to listening to the vinyl version don't like the remastered CD at all - they say it feels unnatural. As it turns out the original pressings were flawed - the tapes were running a bit too slow and as a result the songs are slower and off-key (nearly one half tone).

I think the example simply shows that the adaptability of the human brain sometimes works for us, but sometimes also against us.

^ Sorry, but even if it may be hard to reproduce most people will say that it still sounds like a trumpet (and not a distorted one). So while the instrument may be a good "benchmark" for detecting digital sampling artefacts, listening tests will (and have) been inconclusive.

And isn't a trumpet by definition a harsh instrument? It has a harsh signal (sawtooth)!

Here's one experience that CD can never beat:

The first Faust album was released on clear vinyl that was specially cut so that it would appear to rotate a quarter of a turn, slow down, then rotate backwards.


Another great area of vinyl that CD is trying oh-so-hard to mimic with the 24k Gold CDs, is audiophile pressings.

I picked up an audiophile "Hotel California" for the relatvely bargain price of £10 at the weekend. The difference in sound is amazing - but that's because the engineers responsible for the pressing had access to the master tapes, and cut a new master disk after re-engineering the sound using technologies that are as close as possible to the originals, ie tube amps and small monitors.

I say amazing, because it's so noticeable, dynamic and clear - but it's possible that I've been conditioned by the original, as I still prefer the warmer sound.


There was a series of half-speed remasters released by Mobile Fidelity Sound Labs in the late 1970s-early 1980s which I'm still trying to get examples of - these are supposed to blow standard vinyl pressings out of the water - even pukka Beatles albums.

Certif1ed wrote: Here's one experience that CD can never beat: The first Faust album was released on clear vinyl that was specially cut so that it would appear to rotate a quarter of a turn, slow down, then rotate backwards. Another great area of vinyl that CD is trying oh-so-hard to mimic with the 24k Gold CDs, is audiophile pressings. I picked up an audiophile "Hotel California" for the relatvely bargain price of £10 at the weekend. The difference in sound is amazing - but that's because the engineers responsible for the pressing had access to the master tapes, and cut a new master disk after re-engineering the sound using technologies that are as close as possible to the originals, ie tube amps and small monitors. I say amazing, because it's so noticeable, dynamic and clear - but it's possible that I've been conditioned by the original, as I still prefer the warmer sound. There was a series of half-speed remasters released by Mobile Fidelity Sound Labs in the late 1970s-early 1980s which I'm still trying to get examples of - these are supposed to blow standard vinyl pressings out of the water - even pukka Beatles albums.

    

Another example showing vynil's superiority!

Being the scientist that I am I still don't think that these audiophile pressings really *contain* substantially more of the original signal than a properly mastered CD would. Heavyfreight posted a very interesting article about the quantising effect of vinyls ... makes much sense to me.

But at the same time I do own some vinyls which - to my ears - sound better than the CD version. My opinion: I simply prefer the mix on the vinyl, or in other words: I don't like the mix of the CD version.