Miles Davis - Kind of Blue - Analogue Productions UHQR 45rpm. Is it better than everything else?
Вставка
- Опубліковано 15 жов 2022
- Today I've been listening to the new Analogue Productions UHQR 45rpm release of Miles Davis - Kind of Blue. I compare it to the Analogue Productions UHQR 33rpm version, as well as the original US 6-eye Columbia first pressing.
You can watch my review of the 33rpm version here: • Miles Davis - Kind of ...
Many thanks to David Brook at The Vinyl Adventure:
www.thevinyladventure.com/pro...
Thank you for going into the weeds on magnetism
Great content mate, liked and subscribed and put my order in with The vinyl adventure, which have 20% off at present. Very excited.
Glad you liked the video David, and thanks for subscribing!
I owned the MoFi 45 and replaced it with the UHQR 45, and that was a heck of an upgrade. glad I got a copy, it really does sound superb.
Yep, I've had the MOFI too, I preferred my original 6-eyes. This UHQR 45 is in another league!
Dave, your reviews are my favorite! Mike Esposito is my second favorite, but you're definitely my first. Reflective, dispassioned candor is how I might describe your brand. I'd appreciate your review of tye 2022 RM of DIRT by Alice In Chains and RETURN OF THE DREAM CANTEEN by RHCP.
Hi Austin, wow, thanks!
As it happens I've just been chatting with my son about the new release of Dirt. I have an original and he has the Music on Vinyl issue, which he got from my out-pile ;-)
I'll be passing by my local record shop tomorrow... We shall have to see... :-)
Hi Dave! Since you have a high quality, 15ips tape machine at hand, I wondered if you ever thought of taping the 45rpm edition so as to restore the flow of the listening experience. Would the sonic loss make it not worth doing? Would it turn out less enjoyable than the 33rpm edition? I'm curious to hear your thoughts.
Thanks for the review. I have only listened to 24-96 and 24-192 transfers of the 33 and 45 editions, made by a couple of friends who have high end hardware. I only have a decent DAC and a mid-fi speaker system to playback with. I have to tell you, I am not at all sure that I could pick these digital transfers apart in an A/B test. If I had headphones on, maybe I could. The 45rpm is a shade more lively perhaps, so I am somewhat reassured by your comments that I'm not imagining it because I want to believe it.
I also have a 24-96 transfer of the mono edition (mastered by Kevin Gray unless I'm mistaken) and I have to say, I probably like it most of all. There is something about old recordings in mono that just feels right. *Kind Of Blue* stereo sounds nice enough, but I tend to go with the mono edition of *A Love Supreme* most of the time. With the exception of *Abbey Road* for example I always listen to the Beatles albums in mono----Japanese first pressings from 1968-72, with Parlophone labels, transferred in 24-192.
Hi Isaiah, I have only two 'party' tapes I've recorded myself from vinyl and to get the longest play time at 3 3/4ips. They do sound really good, and you get over 2 hours of music and slowly turning reels. They are great fun, but I've no desire to simply copy a vinyl album to tape. I'd rather just play the lp.
Regarding mono, I really do like mono, a mono cartridge will really get the best out of it. In fact I'm half tempted to go back and remake my party tape as when I made that both the stereo the mono tracks were played using a (very high end) stereo phono cartridge...
Thanks for commenting!
I was planning on selling my 33 rpm UHQR when I got the 45 rpm but I think I’ll keep both. I use the 45 when I’m critical listening and really just soaking in the music. I’ve been playing the 33 when I’m listening but also doing other things.
I agree with that. It's a bit ironic that when I really want to sit down and listen I will have to keep getting up to change sides, but with this it's absolutely worth it!
@@DaveDenyer Couldn't agree more. Personally, I very much dislike the music interruption with 45rpm records. i did notice that on my 45rpm UHQR Davis that there are some serious run out grooves. Seemingly more so than a lot of other 45rpm reissues that i own. If it wasn't for the potential ( as this is not always the case) for increased SQ over the 33, I would never buy the 45rpm version.
Yes, the 45-rpm totally changed my opinion of this album. I had it on cd, and only heard it this way since the early 90’s. I had other Miles Davis albums that I rated much higher than Kind of Blue. Then, I sat down for my first listen of the 45-rpm version. Wow!!! Kind of Blue is now my favorite. It was like going back in time and being in the studio. So, does Chad have a reel to reel of this album for you? I bet that would be unbelievable.
That's awesome. Thanks for sharing.
Sadly I don't think we'll ever see the tapes released like we have with the Coltrane recently.
Love my Furutech and use it on every record before every play. Noticeably cuts down/gets rid of cracks and pops.
Thanks for sharing Dave! Own myself 1996 Classic Records 2x LP version that contains wrong speed and normal speed versions plus 1x 45RPM alternate take track on it. Also I own 2013 MONO release done by Ryan K Smith pressed at RTI and again, you dont have that one🙂 I must say that Classic Records and Mono have differ tonality, mono sounds fresher, if you like. Both releases are fantastic in their own way. Cheers.
Thanks for commenting: sounds like I need to hear that 2013 Ryan K Smith mono.
@@DaveDenyer Check Michael Fremer review if you like. Just type Michael Fremer Kind of Blue mono and you get the analogplanet link right away. Regarding comparison you are interested in, check out this name of the youtube video:
WE HAVE A WINNER! Review Kind Of Blue Classic Records 45 rpm, Acoustic Sounds UHQR 45rpm 33 rpm , I found pretty interesting.
@@jabensergei thanks, I'll check that out.
Hello Dave, did you have issues on the third track, Blue on Green, distortion? Thanks
Hi @C R, no, I didn't notice any distortion. I'll have another listen to make sure...
@@DaveDenyer Hello, On my system, it's after 2min and 5 min, the piano solos. Thanks and thanks for your videos.
Do you possibly have the De Agostini issue? Cost £5 new. I'm convinced it's the Bernie cut also and perfectly pressed on quality vinyl.
Hi, thanks for the question: no, I think the only De Agostini issue I have had is Blue Train (I’ve done a video on this) but sadly, in my opinion, that wasn’t great, although for the money…
@@DaveDenyer The BN's are a bit hit n miss. Somethin' Else from the series is mono and not bad at all.
i ve got AP the 45rpm 2022, i found track#3 blue in green quite distorted, it starts having distortion after half playing for about 12seconds.... not sure if anyone having the same issue? I have the mofi 45rpm as well, and it is far better than the AP one for Blue in Green.
I found this on the 33 also, really annoying. Dave, did you experience this?
Very nice review of the two AP Miles Davis releases. I just received my copy of this album from AP...and was sent by mistake the 33 version! I am going to replace it with the 45 version, so your review re-enforced the fact that the 45rpm was the way to go. I own numerous copies of this album, including several Mint condition original six eyes in stereo, the MoFi 45rpm release and a few OG mono's. I listened to the AP 33 to compare to the OG's, both mono and stereo and then to the MoFi..which as we now know is sourced from a DSD file! The MoFi is not bad, the OG's are better, and in my case the OG stereo six eye is superior sounding to the AP 33...in the ways that you allude to. The MoFi 45 is a very nice play copy, IF you cannot access a OG ( and even if you do, it will be pricey) and if you cannot access the newer AP's. One thing about the original six eyes, and it is this, the speed of the album is slightly off..( which was apparently corrected by MoFi).. this makes little difference, but I do think you can ascertain this if you do the ABs.
Thanks Davey, and I'm rather envious of your .several mint OGs'! Interesting that you come to a similar conclusion to me. If my OG 6-eye was mint, maybe I'd prefer it to the 33 UHQR, maybe, but the 45 UHQR does win overall. Similarly, I had the MOFI but never really played it. Sometimes that happens, almost subliminally, you don't get drawn back to an LP...
@@DaveDenyer I received my 45 UHQR, but have not had a chance to listen yet. This copy looks pristine. I did notice on the 33 copy a little distortion on the first side of the record, nothing that serious and short lived. This is apparently a common issue with some of these UHQR's. On the Hoffman forum, there is mention of this problem, which seems to be a pressing issue. Presumably your 33 copy does not have this issue?
I have a Furutech demag, it does makes a small difference
Cool, thanks for sharing.
I have both UHQR's, 33 and 45rpm versions. Typically, I had to get replacements of the QRP pressings as they weren't quite right and had too much surface noise. They've had poor QC, typically.
I like the 45 rpm version the best. I wish that I had the original Classic Records 45 rpm version. Though AP used the same CR master discs, RTI pressed those from CR and they had better vinyl and QC.
Hi, I'm sorry to hear of your QC issues with the Analogue Productions UHQRs. I've got 6 or 7 of these and so far every one of them is perfect (something I can't say about certain other audiophile LPs pressed at RTI).
Whilst I don't have the CR Kind of Blue, I do have several Classic Records releases and yes, they're good, but I wouldn't say they're exceptional, not as good as the UHQRs to be honest, although that is of course, only my opinion...thanks for your feedback.
@@DaveDenyer Yes, opinions are opinions and what may be true for one person may not necessarily be true for another person.
The biggest problems QRP pressings have is being off-center on one side. With their first UHQR record by Jimi Hendrix, UHQR00001, My copy was virtually unplayable due to being off-center, slightly warped and lots of surface noise. Someone at Acoustic Sounds told me that they had a 16% defect rate, which amounts to something like 800 LP's. Not very good for a premium record. Now, 16% was all they knew about. I wonder about all those sealed records where people bought extra copies as an investment. Just how many of those are defective and will never be opened.
This is one of the reasons CR did the one-sided LPs. Only one side of the record will be affected by a defect and you don't have to sometimes go through several exchanges before you get an LP that is good on both sides.
CR liked those 200g pressings, but they were difficult to press and that is why RTI won't press 200g anymore. Too many defects. CR resurrected their own pressing plant so they could continue pressing 200g and they had even more defects.
All record pressing plants sometimes have defects, but I've found that QRP, PRC and URP in North American seem to have a lot of problems. A lot of the problems are from lack of experience and old worn presses. Although they have been refurbished and upgraded, anything is only new once. URP has been expanding of late, they are still mostly using old record presses, but they have been replacing them with new state-of-the-art record presses.
URP bought all of Rainbo Records equipment and one good thing about it, Rainbo Records bought all their presses new and then they maintained them keeping them in tip-top shape.
Additionally, I don't think many people don't understand what makes a high-quality record. People don't realize that when playing a record, the tone arm is NOT supposed to wag back and forth. That is what off-center is all about. As the tone arm wags back and forth, that's like speeding up and slowing down the speed of a record. That speed-sound variation really bothers me.
@@automatedelectronics6062 you should try a DS-Audio ES-001. I am trying one out at the moment. Your analogy is spot-on. I have only had it a few days and have discovered that my best-sounding LPs are less than 10 microns from true concentricity.
I will be discussing this in future videos for sure!
Thanks for your excellent feedback.
Cool glasses! Are they vintage?
LOL. Thanks, but no. They're from Specsavers. :-)
Interesting video, I thought the UHQRs were far better than the original, stereo in this case, but the original wasn't mono?
I agree, after a few listens the UHQRs is the ones I'm going back to. This was originally released in mono and stereo.
I'm happy with my UHQR 33 rpm. No doubt the 45 rpm sounds marginally better but I'm not a fan of 45 rpm records. 😉
Hi Rich, I know what you mean about 45rpm LPs. Generally, I’d agree with you.
Same here. Not generally a fan of 45 RPM records. Glad they did this in 33.
Strange that you say that demag works on clearity vinyl?
When I saw a interview there at the time the owner of classic record told the story about when he were at M Fremer house and experienced when he used the demagnetize on a record and the sound got better.
And again the same explanation that the black stuff has a magnetic property. And there the idea of clarity vinyl came from. He then thought why not remove the black stuff and the issue all together!
With all that said then a demagnetizeition of clarity vinyl should not have a effect when the clarity vinyl were designed to not have any magnetic properties..
But of course there could be other factors in play also. Like how plastic can hold static electricity charge when it can not lead it away from the disc in anyway when there is no "transport mechanisms" in the disc anymore therefore stuck in/on the disc. Who knows?
(Then it can mean that clearity vinyl need the demagnetizeition MORE than a black disc need it because of the static charge?)
Thanks for the video and a good analogy with the power filtered systems 💞🎼🎶🎵
I think I saw that same interview...
To be honest, in my 'day job' I do have a professional connection with Furutech, have done so for several years. When I first heard a DeMag it was at reviewer Paul Rigby's (the audiophile man). This was when he first started writing for HiFi World magazine, long before he started his UA-cam channel. Anyway, he'd bought a DeMag off of the previous UK importer. He gave me a demo, and honestly, I didn't hear that much difference on his system. However it did pique my interest and over subsequent years I had many opportunities to try it out at various hifi shows. When the DeMag alpha came out, I finally decided the time had come to get one.
Now I use it on every LP I play.
I do on very occasion Demag cables too, which can work wonders.
I have tried it on CDs which I felt worked well, although I don't really play CDs any more, I rip them and play from a NAS.
Being a tape enthusiast, I did worry about having it in the same room as my tapes so I took a not-precious tape and attempted to demagnetise that - fortunately there was no obvious change.
I honestly don't know exactly why it works on vinyl. I know Furutech have done some research which pointed at the pigment but I think it goes beyond that.
There are many things in audio we don't fully (or even partly) understand, I just go with what my ears tell me. In fact in my day job, I typically prefer the unusual these days. I relish working with companies that push the boundaries and come up with genuine innovations. Like CAD for example, with their Ground Controls, which I do use on my mains and signal grounds; and which many hifi companies are now trying to copy.
FWIW: I demag an LP every play. I am sure that the action of playing it, the revolving the disc in close proximity to the magnet in the cartridge, magnetises the LP. This is just my own observation. I'd had my suspicion about clear and coloured vinyl, and used this as an opportunity to test that.
Despite that first hard-to-hear experience at Paul Rigby's now I can easily demonstrate to every visitor, from 'normal people' who just listen to spotify, seasoned audiophiles, musicians and recording engineers, its a very clear and obvious improvement.
You can never have too many copies of K.O.B.
To be honest, I've got rid of quite a few over the years. I think at one time I might have had thirteen different issues of K.O.B, but shelf space is always an issue...
Which is testament to just how good these UHQRs are: at an inch or so wide, they have to be exceptional to justify their self-space.
@@DaveDenyer You are right about space. Always a tricky subject.
Have you ever compared the uhqr over any original from 1959 or 1963 2 eye
Hi Errol, Yes I have, if you check my video about the 33rpm UHQR I compare it to my references: original 6-eye mono, 6-eye stereo, and 2-eye stereo... ua-cam.com/video/1PXNw2Aet4A/v-deo.html
Also with ALL the preconditions that are the SAME.
Then this is the perfect comparison on WHAT and IF 45 rpm brings ANYTHING in SQ improvement compared to a 33⅓.
I have been in forums that I have been told that there is no benefits sonically with 45 rpm and also that mastering engineer X have told them that there is no SQ benefits..
But here is certainly the prof ?!
That if we only alter one thing and do a 45 rpm instead that it has a improvement in SQ that it is brought to the table.
Thanks for clearing that up for me. 😉💞🎼🎶🎵
Hi Optimize, thanks for your comments.
I've certainly heard 45s that I don't prefer to the 33 originals, but of course, they've been 'fiddled with', so not a like for like comparison.
@@DaveDenyer Yes, there a so many possibilities to that what the source that is going into the disc can and will be difrent.
But as you said we know in this specific occurrence that this master tape were accessed at one and the same time at B Grundman and he did both of them at the same point in time on the same lathe and so on.
The only thing that we for example don't know here is how many mother's we can get from the father.
(If it is the last or first mother copy)
And how many son (stampers) we can get from a mother.
So the worst case comparison would be that the 45 rpm record you have is from the first mother and from that mother the first son (stamper).
Compared to a 33⅓ record you have from the last/later mother copy and last/later son (stamper) from that mother.
Maybe we may can read that in the lead out (dead wax), i don't know?
But as we see there is so many variables to consider so that B Grundman were doing all "the same" and eliminate many of the variables in the 33⅓ and 45 comparison, helps here a lot. 🙏💞🎵🎶🎼
All this begs the question, why didn’t AP release the 45 first, so 33 buyers didn’t waste their money?
I guess, as these UHQRs seem to go up in value quite rapidly once they're out of print, that shouldn't create a big problem. I'll be selling my 33rpm UHQR on at some point in time...
I have to have regular record clear-outs, for space reasons.
Got my UHQR 33rpm version. With $150 heavy price tag, it should definitely sounds far better or it will be a scam. Sounds good but still my 4 track CBS reel tape sounds better than this. I think these UHQR stuffs are awfully overpriced.
the 33 UHQR was good enough for me, 1 track per side and 150, no thanks
The 33 UHQR is still an incredibly good record!
@@DaveDenyer I agree and saw no reason to spend 150 on the 45 rpm
I´ll take the 1959 mono, any day. Why ?
THATs how it was recorded, mixed.. intended to sound. I have only few 50s and early 60s jazz albums, sadly. But nothing sounds like that.
When will people wake up ? 🙃 .. there is NO true analog vinyl after, say, 1982.. All we´ve got after that has some
A/D conversion in the chain, which makes it nothing else than a big, black ("vinyl") CD..
Even if someone sources the original master tapes - there is AT LEAST that digital "preview" on the lathe... kaboom,
ruined for good ;)
I think there were only 2 truly analog lathes in the whole world, and that was some 5-10 years ago.
So.. raving about this and that reissue .. is futile exercise, and money lost.. but, whatever makes you happy..
I´ve hoarded hundreds of "vinyl" albums with bar codes :)) before I understood why my ears say No... not this.
I'm not at all sure about your comment 'there are only two analogue lathes in the whole world'. Sure, this is a 'specialist' area, and perhaps one of the hallmarks of the current batch of 'audiophile' pressings, but I believe there are a lot more than just two. The Electric Recording Company have one, I presume (but don't know for sure) that Bernie Grundman has one, and Kevin Gray at Coherent, and Ryan K Smith at Sterling. Maybe they don't, I don't know for sure. I've only visited one mastering facility, at Air Studios, London. OK, so I didn't examine their lathe in great detail but they were using a Studer A80 preview master recorder. i.e. the machine you need to use in order to adjust the pitch manually. Even MOFI use one of those, heavily modified by Tim de Paravicini. So, whilst I think it's correct to say that 100% of the 'standard' vinyl production uses digital preview to automatically control the cutting pitch, I think this is not the case in the analogue world. If I discover different of course I'll share that here.
@@DaveDenyer Thanks ! That would be great to know.. What I meant was - these days (in fact, couple of decades already) - it is just too cumbersome to recreate a 100% true analog path from recordings in the studio to the album at hand. Digital makes everything so much easier.. and I can not swear I can hear it always, but most of the time I think I can .. it is the space what´s missing most
My KOB 33 arrived with surface noise throughout side one!
Hi Paul, That's really not good, I hope you contacted them and can get a replacement.
@@DaveDenyer I could only get a replacement if i placed a new order purchasing more items, because it's an international shipment,which i did, and received another copy with ABOUT 80% less noise! WHAT A RIP OFF! better off playing my kevin gray mono LP
@@paulbata9649 it is a difficult one: I buy my stuff from UK importers if possible even if it costs a little more so I can return if necessary. It is a sad fact that even these premium records are not always perfect. However I've been lucky with Analogue Productions so far, MOFI on the other hand, I've had to return a few, mostly through being warped.