[FYFL]

I would expect Stokowski to sound really good.

Pearl Jam is not something you would relate to audiophile, but there is probably better quality in the original records. Compilation records used to reek of easy profit and lackluster execution. Really disappointing when people don't give a s#it, yet still want you to pay in full. That's what they call a 'bad actor. Kinda like that guy in the armygreen t-shirt with the green screen demanding, screaming we give him more billions.

And Elton John, wasn't that the guy who was to blame for monkey pox? Or what did Mr president thank him for? If there's one guy who can snif people out... "You know, I'm the go-to guy! " Exit stage LEFT. NO LEFT. LEFT! JOE LEFT!

I just ordered one more lp on Amazon. I had no idea it was available. Amon Tobin - Isam on lp.


Edit: nice records. The RHCP 'blood sugar sex magic' is arguably their best record musically., sheer drive and energy. I have the original.

RHCP cut from analog tapes.
Pearl Jam cut from cassette tapes (wouldn’t surprise me).
I agree, can’t expect a whole lot from compilation LPs but you do expect above CD quality effort. Not Pearl Jam. As trashy as they come. Total joke. Nat King Cole is fine. Not great, just fine. Enough to be enjoyable. And it won’t make you feel as if you have thrown your money in the toilet.
Revolver is more of a comparison project purchase.
BN is the one that I was missing for some strange reason.
Rory Gallagher 50th anniversary triple lp came before the one I reviewed earlier. It sounded so good that I couldn’t pass on the triplets that came before that one.
Very active on social media. Expecting more great things to come from Rory’s stable.

 

[FYFL]

Concert is quite an eye candy.

 

[FYFL]

Not all compilations are created equal. This one is definitely an exception.

Elton John was pretty good as well.
Just saying.

 

[FYFL]

Some good old classics spinning today.

 

[The Jester]

I had this spinning yesterday as well but I was already in such a disappointing mood that I decided to give it a rest. It sounded very good but I felt that listening session needed a reset after Pearl Jam disaster. Today, football is mostly on the menu but I’ll get to some fun stuff tomorrow.



After having a bitter taste in my mouth after listening to some new releases, I went for some older and OG pressings. And my mood improved dramatically.

A little shootout

And

What was your take on the original pressing vs the remastered version of The Wall ?

 

[FYFL]

What was your take on the original pressing vs the remastered version of The Wall ?

I like both. Both are different in a way. New remix is fresh, quite, very well made. But, OG has certain level of snap and dynamics that newer version doesn’t have. Don’t get me wrong, new remix does punch but in less natural, organic way. My OG is very noisy at times so there’s that. Remix is almost silent. Both have pros and cons. If you like Pink Floyd, you gotta have both. I might go into more details tomorrow.

As to anyone trying to save on Blue Note reissues or trying to get into Jazz on the cheap, find the compilation I just posted. It sounds great and most of the greatest pieces are on it. Ofcause, I have no idea if it’s available, where or how much they might ask for it? But it shouldn’t be much (I hope).

Stamper F2. (Hot white stamper lmao - for free)

And someone wrote a **** load of notes on the inside.

 

[]eep]

What was your take on the original pressing vs the remastered version of The Wall ?

I have them both, I bought the new one because I couldn't find the original. So by mistake. But I don't regret it. It's exactly as fyfl wrote. The original is more penetrating but mine also has a bit of noise that is not as much distracting as it breaks the illusion. The new version has that certain softness but it's so quiet that you get into the flow. So I don't really have a preference.

 

[FYFL]

My OG copy is weird. There are quiet parts and parts that are very noisy. Last time I’ve cleaned it was b4 I acquire ultrasonic cleaner so perhaps another, more in depth cleaning is in order.
I’ll clean both tomorrow and do a proper comparison.

Listening to another diva.

Amazing if you can get a clean copy.

 

[The Jester]

Thanks guys,
Have the original so the choice is look for “improved” versions of favourites, or move on to “undiscovered” titles …

 

[FYFL]

Sometimes reissues don’t make a lot of sense. Older or OG versions can sound really, really good.
Like I’ve said before, Jazz might be one of the genres that could benefit from reissues done on what supposed to be a superior audio chain. Given that it’s mastered from OG master tapes.
But even older records sound pretty good to my ear.
Are there differences? Pretty sure there are. But if you can find OG or other well made copies, then there’s really no need to pay premium for iffy reissues.
Main issue with OGs and older reissues is surface noise and condition. But if you can find them relatively inexpensive and in decent shape, worth a shot IMO.
I don’t understand the concept of “the best” copy bc there are to many variables and preferences to determine what is best.
It’s a case by case scenario IMO.
As long as it’s not a really crappy junk (like Pearl Jam) and it makes your foot taping, that’s all that matters. If you wanna go nuts, sure, there are those holly grails that might be worth having. I would probably reserve those rare titles to records you really love.
Listening to:

Lot of these titles sound pretty good and investing in reissues might not make a lot of sense.

I think I’ll have this title coming from BN classic series. But this oldie sounds great too. It’s a little noisy tho.

 

[FYFL]

This is an example that I see as a candidate for a reissue. However, would they cut it from master tapes? Quiet recordings really benefit from low surface noise and this could benefit from audiophile treatment as well. However, I doubt they can make it any better, in an honest way that could improve on OG.
There’s effortlessness are realism about these records that is hard to replicate. Piano, strings, vocal, it all just sounds real and right. Sure, I can see some improvements possibilities in the original mix that seems to struggle with instrument placement in stereo soundscape but other than that, there’s not much to ask for.
If you want to try this album, make sure that it’s an actual stereo copy (ABCS 595). Mono is ABC 595.
Stereo copy has a backing glued over the mono cover (they probably use the same jacket for both). See pics.

There are plenty mono versions, not many stereo ones.

Critics (back then. Don’t know about now.) either loved it or hated this album. Personally, I love it. I wouldn’t call it “soft” but perhaps a very intimate, tuneful compilation that’s very pleasant and enjoyable.

 

[FYFL]

Case for reissues done right….. they can sound fantastic and are ultra quiet for the most part. (And if reissue is done from a copy closest to OG masters)
This is a good example:

Is it perfect? Nothing is. But it sound great and it doesn’t make you question its worth. You just sit, lean back and enjoy the ride.

(Is it better then “Return of the Dream Canteen”? From mastering/sound quality, probably not. Musically? It’s a different vibe. Not really comparable. Both are great on their own. “Canteen” is a bomb as far as sound quality goes but both albums are done with care and pride. Limited “Canteen” is far better product all around tho. Sandwiching LPs in a single pocket is a bit lazy. Should have been a gatefold.)

 

[FYFL]

Rory Gallagher 50th anniversary edition.
Well, we all know all those BS anniversary editions that don’t deliver and just look to scam another buck from their fans.
This is different. The way they’ve done it, the care they put into it, amount of pictures, notes information, master tapes pictures. You can tell that a lot of heart went into making these albums. They aren’t cheap ($50-60 3LPs tri-fold). But you certainly get what you’re paying for and then some. Such a great album. Such a great release. Simply BRAVO!!!

Packaging/pressing 5 out of 5
Sound 4.5-4.75 out of 5.
Wish every reissue was just like this one.

 

[FYFL]

ANA[DIA]LOG just posted a video about this new app that catalogs your LP collection. Uses Discogs database and both barcode and cover scan to find your record. And gives you approximate price (don’t know about that). Looks interesting.

 

[]eep]

Yes, I've tried that app. I'm not one to instantly install apps. And indeed, I get good results. Country of origin is not that good (affects price) but if recognises even old records.

The only downside is, if you have 10k albums like me, it still takes a long time.

And it doesn't take into account if it's mint or only poor. I guess it takes the average price 'sold for'.