Speed stabilty issues with vinyl remastering -what are the possible causes?

[Bruce B]

Thanks for all the great information Fiddle!

 

[MadFloyd]

It may be the tape machine but I am thinking it is more likely the lathe itself. I could of course be wrong, but I really find it difficult to think that the engineer wouldn't have heard it had it come off the tape machine. It should be so obvious to any mastering engineer that they would have stopped the cut there and then. So I feel it is more likely the lathe, but then again I am now aware that some people are unable to detect extremely high levels of wow during a music program, so maybe it is the tape machine after all. The wow is so bad in this recording that it exceeds quarter tones in some places and borders on full semi-tones!

I did not even know about your book! I am going to save up for it and have bookmarked it at the First Impression Music website! Thanks!

Fiddle, I looked into acquiring this book but it is no longer in stock.

 

[rockitman]

I have both of these record issues in question. Do you have to ask for the replacement or will they come automatically when finished pressing ? I did receive their email about the speed stability issue with these two releases.

 

[MadFloyd]

In terms of the highest echelon, I rank the ORG London 45 RPM classical reissues far above anything else. As you probably already know, these are actually Deccas licenced for release in the US market. They may be more expensive but in my opinion they are actually better value because they come very close to open reel quality for less than $60 US. Bernie Grundman is a top notch engineer and any and all of these reissues are head and shoulders above anything else in my opinion - at least in terms of what you can still buy new from a retail store. The only one of these reissues I would hesitate to get is SR90006 (Mercury), as the tape has degraded significantly since Wilma Cozart Fine and Grundman did the same title 15 years(?) prior, also on 45 RPM. But since the latter is now incredibly expensive, the oxide-shedding delight of the relatively recent ORG is still pretty spectacular, even if it does sound like vacuum tubes about to die...

I also like these a lot, but the pressings are not great. Not an issue of non-fill so much as constant pops and clicks. I really like the John Lanchberry and bought more than 1 copy only to be disappointed.

The Analogue Productions US RCA Living Stereos are a mixed big in my opinion. To be honest, I am not the fan of these as much as I am Deccas, since in my opinion the Deccas always captured the sound of the concert hall better than any other label. Also, despite the 25 titles having apparently been "hand picked", I am not sure whoever picked them really knew their stuff - either in terms of repertoire or sonics. A good proportion of these don't really showcase what RCA was able to achieve to my ears. Many are inherently dry recordings, bordering on abrasive and missing the ultra-smooth string sound that RCA was supposed to be famous for. Compare these reissues to the originals and you will see what I mean. I am not saying don't buy them, but if you do, buy them for the performance or because of what they represent, rather than sonics. There are much, much better sounding US RCAs out there (the originals are significantly better in my opinion, though these are pretty good for $35 reissues on the current new record market). Really good sounding ones from this series that I have are LSC 2111, LSC 2222, LSC 2230, LSC 2367, LSC 2398, LSC 2446.

Agreed!

Speakers Corner nearly always produces excellent material, especially from the Decca and currently the Columbia catalogue. I can unhesitatingly recommend all the Deccas bar the Lalo Symphonie Espagnole and Swan Lake. For some reason these two sound dull and lifeless. I can also unhesitatingly recommend all of the Columbia reissues. Their DG reissues, however, are like the US RCA ones - a mixed bag. Most are actually pretty good though, but just be aware that the DG sound was always a very present and bright one if you are comparing to say, Decca or many of the Living Stereos. The star of their DG catalogue is 2531 302 (Beethoven Piano Concerto No. 1 - live). One of the best recordings I have ever heard.

The problem I have with Speakers Corner is pressing quality - lots of pops clicks and non-fill. I've lost count on the number of copies of Rite of Spring that I bought only to have it play like I have a bug zapper in my room. So frustrating.

They can sound a little thick in the lower midrange but otherwise, even with them being produced from second generation tapes, they are good.

This one is particularly good imo :
http://store.acousticsounds.com/d/40173/Martha_Argerich-Chopin_Scherzo_No_3_Brahms_Rhapsodies-180_Gram_Vinyl_Record

If you can still find any of the US RCA Living Stereos from the defunct Classic Records, I would actually pick these over the Analogue Productions reissues. I know the latter are supposed to be the ants pants and Fremer and many others goes nuts over them, but in my opinion the older remasterings for Classic Records by Grundman are more accurate to the master tape and stand up better when listened to over a very resolving system - better top end, less grain, better dynamics, less bass bloat and more bass resolution (I say this because they sound more like all the other digital reissues I have heard, especially the Sound Mirror SACDS that were painstakingly done with full respect to the original master tapes). Try to stick to the 180 gram titles as the 200 grams often had problems with fill and heaps of clicks, pops and anything else that dogs vinyl. You won't find many of these new anymore unfortunately.

Also agree. I have pretty much all the 45 RPMs and prefer them to the new Analog Productions versions.

Speaking of Classic Records, for the last few years the label existed, they reissued a number of recordings from the Everest catalogue. I treasure these, though being 200 gram pressings from RTA, it is really hard to find a good one. I sometimes had to return a pressing two or three times to get a good one and even then they are flawed. And I now wish I had waited longer for the Everests, since over the last few years, they have been reissued as high res downloads using the Plangent analogue to digital conversion process. So being high res digital AND resolving the wow problems which afflicted this series particularly badly, I cannot recommend any of these vinyl reissues, despite the excellent sonics. Better to get the high res downloads instead.

What's interesting about this is that aside from the non-fill issues, the playback is exceptionally clean. I played a couple yesterday and heard about 4 or 5 non-fill events but apart from that it was enjoyable and I would still reach for these over the digital versions.

For Mercuries, the very best were a series of 6 done in the early 2000s I believe by both Grundman and Wilma Cozart-Fine (Classic Records). These are the best of best. Failing these, the ORGs would be my choice, however only one has been reissued so far (though 3 more are supposed to be pending, but that has been the case for over two years now and I think the label might actually now be out of business). The Speakers Corner ones were made from second generation 1/4" tape rather than first generation half inch (so same sources likely used for the Golden Imports) and this shows with less dynamics, less resolution and a double dose of tube sound - especially noticeable in the relatively muddy bass. It is not that they sound bad. But they just are not as good as the originals, nor the aforementioned Classic Records ones.

Agreed - the Classic Records ones are superb.

On the EMI front, the HIQ Records series is remastered on a DMM lathe at Abbey Rd. If you can actually get a pressing without defects (good luck), this is as good EMI sound as I have ever come across (not that EMI is the greatest sounding of labels but when they got it right, they really got it right). Some have criticised these for sounding "digital" but to me that is actually praise, because it means they are going to the trouble of trying to make them accurate to the source. And I don't find them "digital" myself anyway, except in a complimentary way (and no, they are definitely fully analogue). My main reason for the caveats on these is pressing quality. If these were pressed at Quality Record Pressings instead of Hayes in England, I would be all over these. As it stands, over half of the ones I have purchased have had pretty serious defects - heaps of clicks and pops and more lately terrible fill problems - even worse than the Classic 200 grams.

This surprised me - I didn't recall any issues with the HIQ. I can't say I love them and play them often but yesterday I played through side 1 of a few titles and didn't hear any problems at all. Very quiet pressings. Maybe I just got lucky - or perhaps it's because I had stopped buying them and the ones I have were the earlier releases.

On the surprise front, the majors are now doing reissues on the Decca and DG labels (so Universal Classics) and these are actually pretty darned good! The DG titles come almost exclusively from 24/96 masters made from the original analogue tapes and the Decca ones are multi-sourced - sometimes from 24/96 and sometimes from the original tapes. Any remastered by Sean Magee at Abbey Rd are highly recommended, even if they come from digital files. I probably have more than a dozen of these now and I rate them just as highly as anything else I own, bar the ORGs (which as I say, are in a class of their own). If you want a fair taste of what you are going to get with these, buy DG 138 820 (Oistrakh Bach Concertos) and 138 822 (Tchaikovsky Piano Concerto - Richter). I think you will be surprised given they came from 24/96 masters. The Bach sounds pretty much identical to an original DG pressing!

Thanks for mentioning these - I am going to pick these two up and see what I think.

And a much bigger thanks for taking the time to write all of this! These historical classical titles have been my number one obsession for the past couple years and any information on them is of extreme value to me.

 

[Fiddle Faddle]

Fiddle, I looked into acquiring this book but it is no longer in stock.

I'd originally bookmarked First Impression Music but then found my normal supplier, Acoustic Sounds, also has them in stock. The reason I missed this first time around is because I assumed it would be stocked under books, but it is actually classified as a CD boxed set (with a book obviously).

http://store.acousticsounds.com/d/9...Decca_Supreme_Stereophonic_Legacy-CD_Box_Sets

 

[MadFloyd]

I'd originally bookmarked First Impression Music but then found my normal supplier, Acoustic Sounds, also has them in stock. The reason I missed this first time around is because I assumed it would be stocked under books, but it is actually classified as a CD boxed set (with a book obviously).

http://store.acousticsounds.com/d/9...Decca_Supreme_Stereophonic_Legacy-CD_Box_Sets

Thanks! I've ordered it and am looking forward to it.

 

[microstrip]

I'd originally bookmarked First Impression Music but then found my normal supplier, Acoustic Sounds, also has them in stock. The reason I missed this first time around is because I assumed it would be stocked under books, but it is actually classified as a CD boxed set (with a book obviously).

http://store.acousticsounds.com/d/9...Decca_Supreme_Stereophonic_Legacy-CD_Box_Sets

Thanks for the link. Can I ask what does exactly mean:

Ultra-High Definition 32-Bit CDs replicated with the industry-leading Pure Reflection process and authenticated with Pit Art anti-piracy technology.?

 

[Bruce B]

Thanks for the link. Can I ask what does exactly mean:

Ultra-High Definition 32-Bit CDs replicated with the industry-leading Pure Reflection process and authenticated with Pit Art anti-piracy technology.?

Just like any Redbook 16/44.1 CD.... with only more marketing!

Mine ripped just fine....

 

[Fiddle Faddle]

I also like these a lot, but the pressings are not great. Not an issue of non-fill so much as constant pops and clicks. I really like the John Lanchberry and bought more than 1 copy only to be disappointed.

I have to agree too. The quality is a very up and down. I guess I should have mentioned this but my enthusiasm for the actual sonics got the better of me. My Oistrakh Scottish Fantasy / Hindemith was appalling. They are still better overall than the Classic Records 200 gram disks, however I honestly just wish everyone could press as well as Quality Record Pressings does. I've only had two faulty QRP disks in probably 80 purchases since they went into business and one was their very first (Cat Stevens) where they admitted there was a teething issue.

As for HiQ, it just goes to show how random everyone's experience is. I have had terrible trouble with HiQ (to the point where I am almost about to give up and would have were it not for the fact that the only alternative are plain CDs), yet my experience with Speakers Corner has been fantastic. Well, yes, I have had a few duds but about the same ratio as QRP. I actually wrote to HiQ pleading with them to either hand the pressing over to QRP in the US or Pallas / Optimal if they felt compelled to stay in Europe. I even said I'd happily pay another $5 per title just for them to change pressing plants to QRP. But I think the label is very partisan British one and they take the "Made in England" typeset on the label with obvious pride.

Not much has ever been said in audiophile forums about pressings from Optimal, perhaps because a large number of them tend to be remasters of original analogue material that itself was previously transferred to 24/96 (sometimes some years ago as I think is the case for the majority of the DG and Decca catalogues). And there remains a prejudice against these, though personally speaking, although an intervening digital step (at high resolution) will colour the final sound, it doesn't arguably make it any more distasteful to listen to the final product, though I do have to admit even at 24/96, there is a slight compression of the soundstage that does not occur when remaining wholly within the analogue domain. But that is probably the worst sin of a professionally done 24/96 transfer using top notch equipment. And in many cases, these records are actually better because once an analogue tape is transferred to the digital domain, a whole heap of things can be fixed that could never be fixed in a wholly analogue one. Those Universal Classics 24/96 masters have another advantage - they were made in the late 90s I believe and the tapes are deteriorating as every year goes by. As I have said before, that ORG reissue of SR90006 is the best example of why the latest may not be the greatest. Just listen to the deterioration of that master tape compared to the transfer made a decade and a half prior. It is almost enough for me to want to only buy these $23 "ADA" titles since I know master tape deterioration is never a factor in these (well, so far in all the ones I have heard).

Then you get the opposite happening! The Classic Records reissue of LSC 2767 (Rozsa Violin Concerto - Heifetz and Benjamin Romantic Fantasy - Heifetz / Primrose) had a lot of evidence of tape deterioration. The usual clues were there - it sounds like your old mahogany console did from the late 1960s when you turned off the power but the sound kept coming out - like a massive overdrive of a tube amp, but the actual recorded levels are low - that is oxide shedding for you. But Ryan Smith's remastering of it (only just released last month), shows no evidence of any tape problems at all (apart from the usual case of RCA running everything into the red - including the microphones - on occasion). So perhaps they actually found another tape there (it doesn't sound anything like the Classic Records reissue either).

 

[Fiddle Faddle]

Just an upload for anyone interested - these are transcriptions I made from the vinyl record either over the last couple of months or last week (Mahler and the Bach). The Mahler is analogue everything (up to the actual vinyl record itself obviously). Kenneth Wilkinson on his "A" game and a performance that gets an A+ from me in every single aspect I use to judge a recording and performance. This was remastered by Sean Magee at Abbey Rd using the original master tapes. The Bach and Tchaikovsky are the two titles I recommended in a previous post.

http://store.acousticsounds.com/d/107904/Georg_Solti-Mahler_Symphony_No_8-Vinyl_Box_Sets

http://store.acousticsounds.com/d/108860/David_Oistrakh-Bach_Violin_Concertos_Nos_1__2-180_Gram_Vinyl_Record

http://store.acousticsounds.com/d/102236/Sviatoslav_Richter-Tchaikovsky_Piano_Concerto_No_1_Karajan-Vinyl_Record


The Bach and Tchaikovsky are on the other hand, humble DG recordings and they are sourced from the 24/96 masters Universal had made from the original analogue tapes back a couple of decades ago or thereabouts. Of course, this is not a fair comparison because we are comparing Wilkie / Decca to DG to begin with, but I guess the point I want to make is that you can turn on your sound system, put the Tchaikovsky and Bach on, and they are very enjoyable. The sins are ones of omission and little else. More of what you are hearing is just a characteristic of the DG sound than it is the 24/96 step in the remastering process, though the compression of the soundstage is noticeable.

When I was a violin student in the early 80s I listened to the DG Oistrakh Bach LP scores of times. I know it is a funny thing to say, but I remember the sound as if it were yesterday (the school had a very decent sound system - top of the line Sansui front ends and amplification and very decent KEF speakers). I honestly have to admit I do not quite hear the soundstage I remember, but honestly, it is really close. I am probably recalling the 1980s with rose-coloured glasses, as I am apt to do on too many occasions! If I went back and listened to that system today I would no doubt pick many faults with it!

https://www.sendspace.com/file/ntcgya

 

[astrotoy]

Thanks for the link. Can I ask what does exactly mean:

Ultra-High Definition 32-Bit CDs replicated with the industry-leading Pure Reflection process and authenticated with Pit Art anti-piracy technology.?

Winston Ma has had a lot of issues with piracy of his CD's. The Pit Art doesn't prevent ripping or copying the CD, but it prevents pirates from passing off copies of the CD's as originals. He also has developed a more accurate way of making the CD's using a technique derived from blu-ray technology. He explained it to me, but I don't remember the details.

For my book, Michael Bishop and Robert Friedrich, who did the mastering of the CD's, worked in the higher bit rates and higher sampling rates, before reducing the final product to 16-44. They (Five Four Productions) have been doing similarly for the more recent FIM CD releases.

Larry

 

[Fiddle Faddle]

For my book, Michael Bishop and Robert Friedrich, who did the mastering of the CD's, worked in the higher bit rates and higher sampling rates, before reducing the final product to 16-44. They (Five Four Productions) have been doing similarly for the more recent FIM CD releases.

Larry

I know with my own long experiences with high resolution to CD work, the fact I am working with a high resolution file to begin with affords two advantages. One is of course that the source is superior to begin with. But the second - and just as important - aspect is that it gives me a great deal of flexibility in terms of fine tuning various parameters that are crucial to the final sonic result and which I otherwise would not be able to use.

As one example of many, miniscule changes to pre-ring settings (I mean even as small as five-hundreths of one percent) can produce a clearly audible change to critical ears on a resolving system and fine tuning that can dramatically improve the sense of free flow and timing to the music program. But the price to pay is that textures can thin out a bit, so it is always a significant compromise at 44.1 kHz, much less so at 48 kHz and by 192 kHz it is no longer an issue at all. But the fact that it does have such a dramatic effect at 44.1 kHz does mean there is a great deal of tuning available in order to preserve as much as possible the musical sense and advantages of the high resolution master.

So yes, although a CD is still a CD, at least in my experience in both creating CD master files and buying these higher quality redbook CDs, what goes on prior to that final 16/44.1 cut can make a massive amount of difference. A make or break one actually.

 

[Bruce B]

For my book, Michael Bishop and Robert Friedrich, who did the mastering of the CD's, worked in the higher bit rates and higher sampling rates, before reducing the final product to 16-44. They (Five Four Productions) have been doing similarly for the more recent FIM CD releases.

Larry

As did I with all the DXD (32/352.8kHz) discs.

 

[microstrip]

(...) As one example of many, miniscule changes to pre-ring settings (I mean even as small as five-hundreths of one percent) can produce a clearly audible change to critical ears on a resolving system and fine tuning that can dramatically improve the sense of free flow and timing to the music program.(...)

Can we guess that many CDs that lack involvement and rhythm when compared to the corresponding LPs are due to poor choices of the steepness and ringing during mastering?

 

[Fiddle Faddle]

Can we guess that many CDs that lack involvement and rhythm when compared to the corresponding LPs are due to poor choices of the steepness and ringing during mastering?

That is my own personal experience. Ever since Universal started to make their 24/96 material available, it's made it possible to compare their 24/96 products directly to their 16/44.1 products. And yes, at least my ears I think the losses with the 16/44.1 material are subjectively more than they need to be. Even if I use something like Izotope at the highest quality default settings, for example, I don't get a particularly pleasing result at all (though it might technically measure fine if I then re-upsampled it again).

I was reading into this last year when I noticed myself how tiny changes to ring settings produced such audibly obvious results at 44.1. I believe it has something to do with human hearings incredible ability to perceive issues related to timing. I can't remember where I read it, but it intimated that an experienced listener had far more timing acuity than 44.1 could ever possibly offer in terms of precision. And that certainly is consistent with my own listening tests. I can "tune" 44.1 to resolve the sense of lost timing (which I like to call a grainy, constipated sound!), but I can't do it without side effects. Every time I make the filter less linear, the more the textures thin out and the more peaky the subjective frequency response becomes. But the more linear I make the filter, the grainer and "slower" the sound becomes. For me, as someone who values the impeccable timing that only very high res digital or analogue audio can provide, I tend to prefer to sacrifice linearity as far as I can go without the actual sound starting to become excessively bright and thin compared to the 24/96 or 24/192 version.

Put it this way, in the settings I use, I have to sacrifice roughly 3.35% of linearity to preserve the sense of integrity and timing at 44.1. At 48 kHz, I only need to sacrifice 0.4%, at 96 kHz it is 0.1% and at 192 KHz it is no longer necessary to my ears.

I'd wager that most mass market CDs you hear would just have had whatever resampling happens to be available to the engineer and most likely at one of the available default settings. I suspect better sounding / audiophile CDs have had much more merticulous attention paid not only to the resampling steps, but also to the dithering step which in my experience is equally critical.

 

[MadFloyd]

Just an upload for anyone interested - these are transcriptions I made from the vinyl record either over the last couple of months or last week (Mahler and the Bach). The Mahler is analogue everything (up to the actual vinyl record itself obviously). Kenneth Wilkinson on his "A" game and a performance that gets an A+ from me in every single aspect I use to judge a recording and performance. This was remastered by Sean Magee at Abbey Rd using the original master tapes. The Bach and Tchaikovsky are the two titles I recommended in a previous post.

http://store.acousticsounds.com/d/107904/Georg_Solti-Mahler_Symphony_No_8-Vinyl_Box_Sets

http://store.acousticsounds.com/d/108860/David_Oistrakh-Bach_Violin_Concertos_Nos_1__2-180_Gram_Vinyl_Record

http://store.acousticsounds.com/d/102236/Sviatoslav_Richter-Tchaikovsky_Piano_Concerto_No_1_Karajan-Vinyl_Record


The Bach and Tchaikovsky are on the other hand, humble DG recordings and they are sourced from the 24/96 masters Universal had made from the original analogue tapes back a couple of decades ago or thereabouts. Of course, this is not a fair comparison because we are comparing Wilkie / Decca to DG to begin with, but I guess the point I want to make is that you can turn on your sound system, put the Tchaikovsky and Bach on, and they are very enjoyable. The sins are ones of omission and little else. More of what you are hearing is just a characteristic of the DG sound than it is the 24/96 step in the remastering process, though the compression of the soundstage is noticeable.

When I was a violin student in the early 80s I listened to the DG Oistrakh Bach LP scores of times. I know it is a funny thing to say, but I remember the sound as if it were yesterday (the school had a very decent sound system - top of the line Sansui front ends and amplification and very decent KEF speakers). I honestly have to admit I do not quite hear the soundstage I remember, but honestly, it is really close. I am probably recalling the 1980s with rose-coloured glasses, as I am apt to do on too many occasions! If I went back and listened to that system today I would no doubt pick many faults with it!

https://www.sendspace.com/file/ntcgya

Thanks for this, Fiddle. While I already have the other two on order, I don't have the Mahler and will order it.

 

[Fiddle Faddle]

I forgot to mention that the two DG titles come with MP3 download vouchers. Useful if you want to listen on a portable player in a noisy train going to work I suppose. But the one for the Oistrakh Bach is corrupted. I emailed DG three times about this before I even got a reply. And after they claimed they fixed it, they still hadn't (if you use a zip repair utility it is still short the last movement of the E major).

 

[Nevillekapadia]

Wow, what a great thread. So much to learn. Thank you Fiddle.