Відео

The RHF cut is my favourite. I sold that other Rhino AAA CB cut as It was a pain to listen to (in regards to my setup and sonic preferences). I'm COMPLETELY happy with the KPG cut. You can REALLY CRANK it, and the high freqs don't RIP your head off. It's a great listen now.

Hello, my friend. I just found this video as a result of looking up this album. I subscribed right away. Thanks for the interesting information about an album by a band I have liked a lot since I sound them circa 2000.

How about an interview with JN-H? I'm probably one of a dozen people who listens to modern pop like TS on vinyl and gets nerdy about stuff like the mastering engineer and I'd love to hear from the horse's mouth what it's like to work with this kinda music for vinyl.

Thank you. ❤

hey bro i think i’ve come across a first press 1991 vinyl of this album. i’ve seen some good prices online. how do i go about grading and selling this vinyl to a new loving deserving home that will show proper full appreciation

Just found this after buying Swordishtrombones vinyl reissue. Great video! The LP I bought sounds OK, but honestly the digital remasters sound better, wider and larger on the same system, which I wasn't expecting. Also there are plenty of pops that happen to occur in especially quiet songs like Town With No Cheer. Mine was pressed in Canada. While I love the vinyl experience I'm trying to decide whether or not to return it. $33 for a merely OK sounding vinyl remaster doesn't feel good to me. My system, for reference, is: Rega RP3 Shelter 201 Bugle2 Phono stage Cambridge CX81 PSB Synchrony 2 Speakers

Thank you for the fascinating discussion, Ian! I really relate to your skeptical sort of approach and the questions you are asking when it comes to these quandaries of audio. You also just come across as a very down to earth dude, which can't be said for many of the so-called "audiophile reviewers" on UA-cam. There are so many variables involved in comparing an early pressing of an album to a reissue, to take "English Settlement" as an example. Whatever the thing is that makes one sound so much better than the other, I'm about 99% certain it's not only in our heads.

4:29 I'm pretty sure the computer that tells the lathe what to do only reads the audio data, and does not convert the actual signal to digital. Though, I could very well be wrong.

I have the OG pressing and bought this repress. It sounds great but it's not Marquee Moon for me. Why does everything need to be MORE today? Why this obsession with high def? I love how the original sounds. Mind you, I come from punk and collect and listen to punk, hardcore, post punk, metal, jazz and fusion since 1987. I like raw music. I actually sold back this reissue to my local record store, so little I cared for it. I am sure I made somebody else happy. To each his own.

u like a happy kid good on u. im going thru. a tome waits. rwvisit i have raindogs orginal blue valentine. heart and attack and vine. now vfranks wild years and just got orphand s bastards etc. in austrlia vinyls are nearly 70 or more. enjoy ur music

The Europe 1st press (Sonopress Germany) is nearly identical to the U.S. 1st, is beautifully pressed, and is still available for way less than the U.S. don’t waste your time or money on reissues. I’ve heard 3-5x Pallas BG pressings and they’re not great. Sonopress IS great.

I have the original, which sounds great except the last two cuts. The drums sound great, not too bassy. If I can afford the new one I might check it out. I also liked the cd with the bonus cuts as well.

do you have a problem with static? i use a vinylvac aswell and i get left with so much static from the vacuum. ive been wet cleaning the records after vacuuming them to try and eliminate the static but it doesnt always work

Have you heard the Walmart Justice? I was skeptical but impressed. Only had the Justice CD when it came out. Did all your Tom Waits reissues sound good? I was chomping at the bit but heard about a lot of pressing problems. Do you have Disintegration on lp? Another one I’ve always heard there is issues with. Love your takes. I just want great soundstage. I went back to vinyl some years ago due to immune related tinnitus. I get the volume with out the beaming compressed quality of digital that can sometimes overwhelm the room and lose space in the music. Would love to have a great phono stage someday. I’m in line….another year at least before it came new through.

Is that new Levi master the one they put out as the 30th anniversary with the 7”? I’ve never opened it due to the not so heralded pressing.

(1) Kevin Gray uses a solid state mastering chain (Class A), not tube; (2) R.E.M. took digital 8 track recorders on tour and worked up versions at soundchecks - parts of which ended up on the record; (3) other tracking/mixing was done in the studio using ProTools (which didn't get a 24 bit upgrade until the year after this record was released); (4) I'm not convinced 'digital' has a perceptible sound on a recording in this genre.

Good to know. Great video. As I'm writing this, 1 away from 1000 subs.

A good early example of analog and digital is Eye in The Sky by The Alan Parsons ProJet 1982 ..Recorded by analog and mastered to digital and it sounds great when you hear it on an original 1982 lp copy and that was the big change then that actually started in the late 70s with Ry Cooder Bop till You Drop in 1979 all digital studio recorded and the 80s and beyond was mostly digital recorded by the record companies contract artist but the first album that was recorded digitally was by a Japanese artist in 1970 but the record companies were not ready for a big change to digital yet .. Maybe the older digital high end recorders had better over quality along with the industry oligarchs that made sure the quality was as good or better than analog mastering alone and made the end product of high quality ..

Wow you're a regular on YT now 😂 This was an education for me. I think the Garage Days Re-Revisited is the Metallica I like best and it's all covers. I'm not sure what that all means though. I remember a friend saying I have to hear Tornado Of Souls. It was pretty amazing & I still love that track. Slayer are probably as heavy as I get. Death & anything heavier than that are just too full on for me. It's weird because I have experimental & noise stuff that could be argued is just as full on but for me in a different way. For some reason that I can't explain the metal that I do own is all on cd. Exodus...woah! OG's of just about anything is getting to be unattainable for your average record collector. The prices for even relatively recent OG's are even getting ridiculous. Anyway good to see you on the Tube. Cheers...Ben

Great to see you. Come visit sometime we can drive around with the old cassette of Ride the Lightening in the car. Hope all is well.

When I was big into Sonic Youth and wanted to get EVOL and Sister, the US pressings were twice the price of the UK copies even with shipping. They sound great!

To be or not to be that is the question.

Wire , what a band ! Still making music since 1977 .

"Isn't Anything" was cut from 1/4" analogue non-dolby

Excellent food for thought on what the lay-person does not know or assumes. Thx for this.

G’day Ian, I have learned that if it sounds good to my ears, it sounds good…whatever the source. There’s too much smoke & mirrors in the reissue market to really know what you’re getting. It’s not standardised & the wording is different from label to label, so we’ll never know for sure. I have been collecting quite a few Flying Nun, Citadel, Waterfront & Hot records OG’s. Mainly because they’ve never been reissued & are still a decent price. They are all from back in the day when the whole process was analogue. Weirdly they are so much sharper, very punchy & crisp sounding which are terms usually associated with digital. They sound great, but I don’t know what that means for this argument 😂 I don’t know that album that you’re named after sorry. I’m not a fan of anything that ends with ‘phile 🤔Hope you’re well mate & your big move has turned out great. Cheers…Ben

There are a lot of digital recordings that sound wonderful to me I think that the people who are saying it’s got to be analog and digital sucks are way wrong A lot of them sold off their records when the CD was released talking about how great digital music was and now they’re crapping all over the CD I listen to analog and digital music and love both

hey Ian, good to see you again. I hope you’re now settled in in Minneapolis, last I checked you had just moved from Iowa (where I am). I only have one data point to offer and it may not answer any questions raised here, or even be relevant. Last year, The Chills re-mixed their Brave Words record from 1987. The original mix had some issues which some fans accept for what it is and others don’t like. The new mix was intended to rectify those issues. The problem with the new mix (which also has its fans and detractors) is that levels have been limited, lowering the levels of louder sounds and raising the levels of quieter sounds. That’s limiting, more or less. The benefit is that instruments previously buried can be better heard. The remixing itself also brings out sounds that were less prominent in the original mix. That leveling/limiting has the effect of diminishing dynamic range, because the quiet passages are less quiet and the louder ones less loud. It sounds lifeless as a result. Even for albums remastered (and not remixed), the added limiting can have the same effect. I wonder if that’s part of what’s going on with the XTC reissues (and many other titles)? If everything is loud, nothing is loud. This isn’t the same as the compression used during the loudness wars, but it is related. It doesn’t sound squashed, just lifeless as you had described. So not related to digital vs. analog at all, just (over)processing. Just a thought, may or may not be the case for every reissue that sounds lifeless. Cheers!

Like you I felt that vinyl records gave me better sound than digital until I recently upgraded to a high end DAC. I now enjoy the same musical qualities that I once believed was only possible with analog with my digital sources. No doubt there is no shortage of terrible digital recordings around, just as there are analog ones but I’ve come to the conclusion that the underperformance of digital over the decades has been mostly due to poor performance in available digital hardware not the medium itself.

It’s all about how it’s recorded, mixed, how it’s transferred to digital, how it’s mastered. So many things involved. So yeah, sometimes the digital can sound better. But all things being done to the best standard…there’s something really nice about vinyl.

The process of making a purchasable (if that's a word) product from a recording is so complex that it's almost in the chaos theory category! I studied recording for a couple of years (Kevin Gray mastered our class's EP). People who claim that a phonograph record sounds "richer, warmer and more lifelike, than digital" are just trying to sell more product. Yes, it *might* but often it doesn't. It's a subjective art married to a science, so a mastering engineer always has preferences and they will not line up with every listener's. Also, consider all the gadgetry in a recording studio: solid state desks, valve (tube) desks, compressors, limiters, digital delay, Aphex (used on many '80's recordings but I think it fell out of favor later) & EQ. It's a sonic stew pot and some like extra basil while others forbid it. One woman's "crystal clarity" may be another man's "over analytic." Is "pure analog" worth pursuing? The Sistine Chapel has been retouched over the centuries so the original paint is gone but people still admire its beauty.

What is your system ?

I was in my 20s (with a couple thousand records) when LPs gave way to CDs. Apart from the vast improvements in dynamic range and the elimination of "analog" surface noise on CD, I felt like the records I was used to still sounded better at the time, many of which felt thin and sterile to me. That probably had to do with 1) the mixing (including EQ) and widely touted "digital remastering" (which the engineers evidently hadn't quite figured out yet); and 2) the not-so-great DACs built into early CD players that were being sold in big electronics stores. Today, we also have external phono pre-amps that allow us to use turntables with line-level (AUX) inputs in amplifiers that may not even have phono inputs. Although I burned most of my CDs to hard drives (in FLAC or ALAC), which I play through Roon, I still have a CD player and a couple Universal Disc Players that I can use as transports feeding into standalone DACs. Depending on the sources (say, an LP and a CD version of the same release of that LP), I'm hard-pressed to say which sounds "better" to me. (I can A-B through different players, DACs, tube or solid state amps and speakers.) Sometimes I appreciate the LP more. Sometimes, it's the digital version. That probably has more to do with me in the moment than it does with any enduring quality of the recording, the format, or the equipment. It would be interesting to compare an early UK CD of "English Settlement" with the 2019 version -- on LP and CD..

Dude! These are terrific questions. I have wondered about all these releases. Only thing I can think of is how the XTC and Metallica pressings were spread over four spacious sides. Those initial pressings are magnificent. But then I have examples of single albums released in the late 70s and 80s on thin vinyl, probably digitally mastered, yet superior to the expanded double album reissues on 180 gram vinyl. You're raising something with these questions, and I have never heard convincing answers from 'audiophiles.'

Very humble comment. Indeed, it's not about digital vs Analog, both can sound great or crappy depending on the quality of the recording ...and the equipment playing it. And there are no longer any original "analog" only recording on master tape. Personally, I can't stand the crackle, pops and all the shenanigans required to make your record sound "the best". Also, I truly feel that vinyl is heavily promoted by the HI-FI industry because it is a never ending source of upgrades, required improvements, and therefore, a money generating machine.

DMM has nothing to do with "digital". It is shorthand for DIRECT METAL MASTERING. The music-- wether analog or digital--is cut directly to a copper plate, skipping a traditional lacquer.

Im not sure that lathe grooves being spaced with a digital setting is going introduce digital into the actual sound though right? Its literally measuring the spaces for more accuracy but doesnt put anything onto the disc. Not sure on this though. Id double check that. Just to be clear also DMM is not a digital process. It is Direct Metal Mastering. The source may or may not be digital. For instance Tracy Chapman’s S/T was recorded digitally so when they cut it to DMM (copper) that cut is still going to be digital. And vice versa. As far as being able to “hear digital” what people are describing is not digital itself. It only possible to “hear” digital when its done poorly (low sample rates, bad converters, poor initial/archived sources etc) BUT that is not digital one is hearing it is caused artifacts and poor EXECUTION of digital. The culprit is the execution, poor quality machines and inept operators, not digital. Most likely what one is hearing has more to do with eq choices in the mastering than anything else. Mofigate is the biggest example of the latter. Every complaint was due to eq not some imaginary digital artifact they went “Ah ha!” on after Mofi spilled the beans. So yeah, moving on from all the above blah blah blah.. After having been in this hobby for 40 yrs and pondering the same exact questions you are now this is my conclusion: There are AAA cut lps that sound kind of meh and there are digital recordings to lp that sound great. Livelike as you say. And vice versa in that there are AAA cut lps that sound incredible and digital cut lps that sound harsh and meh. It is a case by case basis. Digital transfers and all the tech involved has came a long long way. I challenge anyone to be able to identify actual digital in a recording. Again, what they would be describing is not “digital” itself but the process, eq involved and operator ability. Inferior sound? Sure. But “hearing” digital? I dont think so. What I have found makes the biggest difference are two things: Was the album recorded well? (You are not going to be able to do much to save Oasis or Death Magnetic) And secondarily, is the mastering done well? The digital vs aaa debate is really kind of a dead horse as far as reissues. Of course there are folks like Chad at AP doing AAA. But more and more the AAA tapes are going to be transfered to 4XDSD or another hi-rez method and that is what is going to be transfered to vinyl lps. Conclusion: Well, it is what you are doing now. Use your ears and do comparisons. It is a case by case situation. There is a pattern to when you are doing the comparisons. Did you notice that everyone of those you pretty much picked the original? ;) 90% of my collection are originals. I asked Bernie Grundman once why he couldnt have just done the Led Zeppelin Classic Record versions to sound the way the best originals sound? They got it right the first time imo. He pretty much said “That is impossible to do. Different equipment, no way to know everything the engineers did, different engineers etc etc” Basically, he was saying that “You can’t go back” Im not sure I totally agree because why not use the originals for a template at least? Get as close as possible. Because those CR Zeps are nothing like the best og’s. Where does that leave me? Same place as you really lol. Case by case basis. No easy way into the best sounding versions of an album we love on lp. One other thing. You have great questions. There is a mastering engineer that does streams that you may or may not be aware of. He is a smart dude on this. The name of his channel is George Borden. Very nice guy and you might pose these questions to him. Goes live on Sundays. Thanks for the video :thumbsup: It is a question many ponder.

I like your old digital better than your new digital...😁🤷‍♂

Im 43. I wouldn't know the difference in my ear about AAA or digital because most of what I grew up on was digital. I just go with what sounds good to my ears.

Hi Ian - This is a very discussion. I have all original mostly Canadian XTC pressings and I always wondered how they stacked up to the reissues. I did get the Nonsuch reissue, because originals are hard to find. If you ever find answers, I would love to know what they are 🙂 I think there is a saying something like the more information you learn, the more questions you have or maybe the less you know. . . Something like that anyway.

do you have thoughts on the steven wilson remasters?

I think you have been recording your vinyl. Are you still doing this with the Korg? I think if Digital is done right….then it can maybe even sound better. Van Gelder said: “The biggest distorter is the LP itself. I've made thousands of LP masters. I used to make 17 a day, with two lathes going simultaneously, and I'm glad to see the LP go. As far as I'm concerned, good riddance. It was a constant battle to try to make that music sound the way it should. It was never any good. And if people don't like what they hear in digital, they should blame the engineer who did it. Blame the mastering house. Blame the mixing engineer. That's why some digital recordings sound terrible, and I'm not denying that they do, but don't blame the medium.” Most modern mastering people are just poor quality and they don’t know how to master for sound. Like anything….there are degrees of skill. The mastering/cutting engineer is an artist in their own right.

what it means is ,its a real crap shoot getting great sounding records

In order to produce a vinyl record, you have a lot of steps. Recording -> Mixing -> Mastering -> Plating -> Pressing at any point something can go awry. So I think it's not an analog vs. digital issue, but a good sounding album vs. not a good sounding album. If you play an instrument, this analogy may strike you. If you put an expensive 5000$ custom shop guitar in the hands of someone who has been playing a week, it will sound bad. If you put a cheap 200$ guitar in front of a guitar expert, its going to sound good. So is it the gear, or the person who understands the tools that make something sound good?

Spot on. The XTC reissues have great reviews but I found them flat sounding. The originals easily beat them out. Sold off all the reissues

I’m not a fan of remasters, most of them sound weird to my ears, mainly because they lack the atmosphere i associate with the music in the first place. No matter if its digital or analog. I guess your sonic memory plays a major role and might even play a trick on you. I remember being overwhelmed by my uncle’s vinyl collection, making copies of those records on cassette tape in my teenage years and listening to those tapes over and over again. Each recorded imperfection, the placement of the stylus, clicks on the record, all became part of the listening experience. When i started listened to the same albums on cd, it just didn’t give me the same emotional kick. Years later i inherited those original vinyl records and the feeling was back. The clicks were there, the sound was there, a bit more crisp because it wasn’t a cassette recording, but this was how i remembered the sound of those records. But it works the other way around as well. The original cd issue of Sonic youth’s Dirty sounds so much better to my ears than the remastered vinyl version. But who knows, maybe someone who first got familiar with the remastered version will think the opposite when they hear the original master. There simply is no standard for making the best sounding recording or master or pressing. It’s all about taste and feeling.

I've had 2 other pressings of this album (2018 and CB cut), THIS KG cut IS the REAL DEAL. Absolutely CrAnKabLe without the ear fatigue !!!!

It’s REM ….of course it sounds great