|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
76.178.184.119
I picked up a copy of Abbey Rd MFSL last week. I grade the disc VG. I was shocked when I listened to 'Come Together'. Instead of a super-slinky bass, I heard a muddy mess. I tested a few more tracks: 'Bathroom Window' sounded like it was being played through a megaphone. The lyrics were barely audible and the inidividual notes in the bass line were indistinguishable. I was worried that maybe my cart died or got whacked out of alignment. I grabbed my other copy of Abbey Road: It appears to be a 70s UK Apple (pcs 7088, YEX 749-6 & YEX 750-4), and it sounded amazing. The difference is hard to describe. The PCS 7088 sounded like what I expected the MFSL to sound like. So, what gives? Did I just get a bad disc, or is the MFSL pressing notoriously poor? I'm a bit nervous about picking up more MFSL., as they are not cheap. Any thoughts or comments?
Thanks
Follow Ups:
Just grabbed a bunch of MFSL Beatles vinyl (Rubber Soul through Abbey Road). Looking forward to comparing them to my other (mostly purple label) copies. Still holding out for a good deal on a BC-13 Blue Box.
"You see what you want to see, you hear what you want to hear." Nilsson
Edits: 06/27/12
I enjoy my MFSL copy of Abbey Road. It was the album that broke the ice for me, when it came buying more expensive, somewhat collectable vinyl.
As another poster mentioned, the MFSL of Fleetwood Mac S/T 1975 is a winner.
In case anyone is still interested...
The volume level difference between the two is about 7db. i.e. i have to turn the volume up ~7db on the MFSL to match the volume level of the UK pressing.
MFSL had their LPs pressed at JVC Japan and they were pressed on something JVC called Super Vinyl. Its translucent and very wear resistant. JVC developed it for use with the CD-4 format quad system.
One of the great things about Super Vinyl is that it was about 3db quieter than any other vinyl available at the time of those pressings. As a result the LPs were cut to take advantage of the lower noise floor.
The lower level on quieter vinyl yields a LP with greater dynamic range and it also means that the mastering engineer could cut the lacquer without using any compression or peak limiting (or much less of any of that stuff).
The down side to this is that inexperienced listeners consider MFSL pressings less dynamic sounding when in fact they are have more dynamic range than commercial pressings. People also complain that MFSL pressings have less "drive" than commercial pressings.
That term almost always means that the LP being referred to as having more "drive" is the one with more compression. Those who complain about this type of thing may as well listen to MP3s and CDs since they have the ultimate "drive".
Ed
We don't shush around here!
Life is analog...digital is just samples thereof
The rumor is/was that the JVC Super Vinyl formulation was lost, actually destroyed, when it became apparent that vinyl was dead in the late 80's, early 90's. It will be interesting to see if given vinyl's resurrection if the Super Vinyl will become Lazarus as well. There were complaints/comments that there was a characteristic "sound" that permeated all of the MSFL pressings of that era. Is is possible that the Super Vinyl formulation was responsible for that?
I think even though the JVC "Super Vinyl" formulation is still patented it was found to be too toxic in its manufacturing process for the Japanese Industry Standards....which controlled record pressing in Japan.
I think the best formulations are more about quiet surfaces. Some say a harder vinyl like the Super Vinyl can be a little brighter than softer formulations like German ones. I think the characteristic "sound" of mofi’s were more about mastering and eq decisions than the Super Vinyl formulation. Personally I find the Pallas and Clarity formulations to be some of the best being used today.
And the Super Vinyl formulation was not about being harder, which it isn't, its about its ability to stress, deform and recover without forming any cracks. If the vinyl in question is too hard its also a problem.I'm trying to remember and I'll find the information if I can but it had to do with the research JVC did into the problem of vinyl fatigue, yes it is a problem with some formulations, and how to create a vinyl that could stress and recover indefinately.
The 30kHz carrier and difference information that is required to make CD-4 work pushed the envelope on vinyl formulations and they needed something where that 30kHz would not get lopped off. Too hard or too soft or anything that would not stress and recover indefinately and you have a problem. The formulation they came up with uses something that is not that unusual but its just the mixture of the plasticizers with the PVC that's the ticket.
Like I said, I'll try to find the information and I'll post it here if I do.
Ed
UPDATE: The formulation is officially known as Q-540 vinyl
We don't shush around here!
Life is analog...digital is just samples thereof
Edits: 06/27/12
well...i'd say it was a harder and stronger formulation than what cbs was using for quads...which was the intent of both rca and jvc and also what drew the initial interest from mofi
Put no extra requirements on the vinyl whatsoever since SQ was an out of phase recording technique. CD-4 was an entirely different animal. It didn't work very well, but when it did work it was capable of much better seperation than any of the quad matrix techniques (SQ, QS, ABC Command Quad and any of the others that I may have left out).
I'm trying to find the patent filing for Q-540 vinyl. That will tell the story of their approach.
Ed
We don't shush around here!
Life is analog...digital is just samples thereof
To the vinly is it's quietness. MoFi were not alone in being able to produce LPs as quiet as they did back in those days. I believe that Reference Recordings also had their LPs pressed at JVC Japan on Super Vinyl but I don't own any of these so someone else will have to chime in to verify this. Nautilus and some other speciality pressings used a very quiet vinyl as well.
There are some that perpetuate a rumor that MoFi used some sort of equalization boosting or some such nonsense. I own over 40 MoFis from that era and I also own the corresponding commercial pressings for a lot of those. I have played both the MoFi and the corresponding commercial pressings more than a handful of times and there is nothing in the way of boosting or cutting of any specific frequency that I can figure out.
What I can figure out is that MoFi did cut their lacquers at a lower level, most likely due to the fact they had an additional 3db of head room, due to the vinyl being used at JVC Japan. They also use less compression and peak limiting, again due to the fact they had more headroom.
Whatever they used they used less of it compared to commercial pressings. This sometimes worked in favor of MoFi and sometimes people didn't like the outcome. MoFi pressings sometimes sound less dynamic than commercial pressings. The word "dynamic" amuses me since the MoFi pressing is, in fact, much more dynamic. I think a better word might be "drive".
Whatever word you use, MoFi produced a pressing on better vinyl, that I believe was more faithful to the original stereo master tape. If you prefer the commercial pressing then it is probably due to the fact that the resulting product benefitted from whatever the mastering engineer did when they cut the lacquer.
MoFi did screw up. I have a copy of that abomination they did for Jethro Tull - Aqualung. I don't know if this was what they were handed to use (Aqualung had a few masters floating around due to the state of the original master) or they were somehow asked to do this, whatever it was the LP ended up with way too much bass energy and an opportunity was lost.
Producing LPs is as much an art form as a product of engineering. MoFi produced some damm fine art work and some things that didn't quite work out. All of them are collectors items and they are all damm fine pressings.
You can't ask much more from a record company.
Ed
PS The new MoFi is a damm good operation as well.
We don't shush around here!
Life is analog...digital is just samples thereof
I don't think there is a 'rumor' about the EQ on the early MFSL product. Can't find the link but as I recall Stan Ricker himself stated he used the EQ because that is what they wanted. And my ears tell me many of titles had a fair amount of boost at the extreme. Some with like this others will not.
Some of the early MFSL records are fantastic. Some of them are turds. Like anything else. Listen to Steely Dan 'Aja' and tell me they did not use a huge amount of EQ boosting the frequency extremes. The thing is unlistenable. The standard ABC pressing simply smokes the MFSL version.
There are others.
When MFSL got it right they were a revelation like the bulk of the Beatles catalogue. When they got it wrong they were barking dogs. Every title must be evaluated on their own merit.
I actually find the second generation MFSL, once the original company got back into vinyl, to be far more consistent title-to-title than the original catalogue.
Hard to make a generalization about any labels product.
I have both MFSL Aja and the orginal ABC pressing. I'll make 24/96 WAVs of a track on that LP, match levels on the digital recordings, post it on my web site where everyone can get to it and be back.Aja is not my favorite Steely Dan LP so it gets little play but I'll drag it out for a test.
Ed
We don't shush around here!
Life is analog...digital is just samples thereof
Edits: 06/29/12
nt
"Outside of a dog, a book is a man's best friend.Inside of a dog, it's too dark to read"
he might have talked about it in his long interview in positive feedback...i think the cardas site has the interview in three parts. i know in that interview he talks about the jvc super vinyl being harder than anything available in the US and jvc was where he met brad miller of mofi
.
Have Fun and Enjoy the Music
"Still Working the Problem"
On Vinyl, Abbey Road MFSL is excellent. In my experience, the UK Blue Box version is a close second.
The Purple Capitol pressing is very good. Great detail without sounding sterile.
If you come on over to the digital side, you have to check out the "Remasters" version. That's easily as good as the MFSL. The one that is even better than that is the "Toshiba Black Triangle" version. This is a Japanese version of Abbey Road. Toshiba Japan got the original masters and essentially copied them with no Dolby, and no remixing. They just made the most transparent copy, at 16/44.1 they could from the original tapes. When you listen to the Black Triangle with Dolby Preemphasis added, what you get, in my opinion, is the Holy Grail of all Abbey Road versions. All the air and detail of the MFSL and Blue Box is surpassed, but bass and drums have greater seperation, as do keyboards and vocals. Tracking Pual and Ringo on "Something" is really, really cool.
"Hope is a good thing. Maybe, the best of things. And no good thing ever dies."
I have a copy of that black triangle edition, but to be honest never really listened that closely. I'll have to pay attention.
While it may be heresy in this forum, the USB-stick version issued a few years back in 24/44.1 FLAC format is very good. I generally prefer it to the many various vinyl versions I've collected. Those vinyl versions include everything from reissues, back to LPs I bought the moment they hit U.S. record stores.
As a sidenote, Steve Addabbo, who owns Shelter Island Sound where I help out as the world's oldest perpetual studio intern, is headed to London to track a session at Abbey Road Studio Two for "The Act Francis" with the New London Children's Choir. Is that cool or what?
WW
New Orthophonic High Fidelity
The early MFSL have really good wear resistance (they are ever so slightly translucent - would be good to check - hold it up to the light and see if you can see the light bulb through the record a little bit).
I suspect that it needs to be cleaned thoroughly. If you have one of the fancy vacuum machines - use it. If you don't - run out and get a Spin clean ($80) and use it. I spin clean and then clean with the RCA kit - and them sometimes spin clean again for really dirty records.
You got nothing to lose at this point. That MFSL pressing is first rate.
"Knowledge is knowing that a tomato is a fruit. Wisdom is knowing not to put it in a fruit salad"
Thanks,
I should have mentioned that I've cleaned it a couple of times. I have the KAB EV-1 vacuum cleaner. I use 5:1 distilled water:99% isopropyl solution.
You should do a search on DIY record cleaning fluid. I think you need more that just alcohol and water to do the job properly.
Actually, I think you have a trashed pressing.
Dave
My fingers are complaining about what I am typing. Original MoFi LPs are cut differently. In fact many LPs are cut differently...not just MoFi. In the case of original regular weight MoFi LPs you have to play them back as if you were spinning a 180-200gm LP.
If you play these back with your rig setup the normal way the resulting sound will be muddy and the bass over accentuated.
When played back properly the Beatles LPs are very good with some of them outstanding. Abbey Road is one of those outstanding. The best of the MoFi Beatles LPs are:
1) Sgt Peppers on UHQR
2) Let It Be
3) Beatles For Sale
4) Revolver
5) Abbey Road
6) Sgt Peppers on standard weight vinyl
7) The Beatles (White Album)
Also...please note that I own the UK Blue Box (BC-13) and the MoFi The Beatles, The Collection. I prefer the MoFi box because its vocals are much more realistic and the LPs sound less processed. Some years ago I spent considerable money comparing Beatles pressings and I like the MoFi stuff very much. The best pressing of Abbey Road is the original UK Apple pressing...if you can find a good one. The MoFi pressing is also very good. I also own an original UK Abbey Road (without Her Majesty on the back cover) and the MoFi sounds less processed.
Less processing on a LP is a mixed bag. Many times a master tape requires some processing (peak limiting, compression, equalization, etc) to make it sound a bit more exciting or to make the program content fit on the lacquer. This processing comes at a cost and sometimes the vocals are effected. The MoFi Beatles pressings are a prime example of LPs where the master tape got less processing and the resulting LPs are sometimes considered less desirable due to this fact.
Ed
We don't shush around here!
Life is analog...digital is just samples thereof
Thanks for all of the great feedback.
Ed,
Sorry to get your fingers all riled up. I did some searching before I posted, and wasn't able to come up with a definitive answer. I'll play around with some settings tonight to see if I can make that MoFi sing. I'll also do some research wrt setup for 180 gram vinyl. I really don't want to have to mess with too much when I switch records. Hopefully I can find a one size fits all setup.
In the case of original regular weight MoFi LPs you have to play them back as if you were spinning a 180-200gm LP.
Play with the VTA ?
Dean.
reelsmith's axiom: Its going to be used equipment when I sell it, so it may as well be used equipment when I buy it.
nt
We don't shush around here!
Life is analog...digital is just samples thereof
Why would you mess with the VTA while playing a disc that's not thicker than your average LP? To offset the "smiley face" EQ perhaps? Seems to me you would be lessening the bass (good thing, maybe) while increasing the treble even more (assuming you're raising the back of the tonearm).The MoFi "Abbey Road" sounds great to me, as does "Rubber Soul." I'm not as impressed with the MoFi White Album, however.
Edits: 06/26/12
If your average disc is 180-200g then Lucky You! My average disc is a a good deal thinner than the 180-200g discs. By raising the VTA a few mm, I think that he is saying that you get a better balance in the response by eliminating extra bass from tail dragging with exotic diamond tips(only conical and elliptical diamonds are sort of immune to VTA).
I found this to be true if the cartridge is sensitive to VTA. I definitely had to do this when I was using a Talisman S.
Dave
...very rig dependent.
With the set-up I am currently using (Denon DL-S1 cartridge with Technics EPA-250 arm) minor changes in VTA provide no audible differences or benefits that I can discern.
However, if I make a large adjustment, in either direction, I can make the the sound worse in a variety of ways.
I am quite happy that it has worked out that way ...because fiddling with VTA all the time to find the sweet spot is not something I want to do.
Dean.
reelsmith's axiom: Its going to be used equipment when I sell it, so it may as well be used equipment when I buy it.
I can't hear much of a difference on the Technics. With the Thorens it seems more pronounced (and is a lot more difficult to adjust). I generally set it and forget it.
are variable in SQ. The Steely Dan "Aja" has highs that take my head off, but others, like G. Lightfoot's "Sundown" and the white 1975 Fleetwood Mac
album sound wonderfully smooth and detailed.Pink Floyd DSOTM is good, but not outstanding, in my opinion.
-Mark
"Outside of a dog, a book is a man's best friend.Inside of a dog, it's too dark to read"
I was perfectly happy with it and really enjoyed two of the set in particular - Rubber Soul and Abbey Road. Then, about 8 years ago, I bought a BC-13 Blue Box set from a U.K. seller. After one turn through the BC-13, I put my MFSL set up for sale. It wasn't that the Mofi offering was bad, but that the BC-13 just was more involving, dynamic.
The U.K. seller said the only reason he was selling his set was that he finally had collected all of the original U.K. Parlophone/Apple releases.
With my BC-13, original U.K. Red and Blue LPs and the German MMT, I'm finally happy with my Beatles.
Opus 104
So I will do that tomorrow. It is too late to play at a reasonable level, and earphones are not what i want to use first.
(though I might to listen closely later on.)
I just happen to have both LPs. Most of my stuff i do not have multiple copies.. (I must have run into one or the other cheap...?? Just like my Mono Rubber Soul)
My copy has mega inner detail, but that does come ate the expense of the PRAT of the original recording.
I don't own an old UK pressing, but my '80s BC-13 copy has much better PRAT than the MoFi.
Around 2001 I was doing a lot of work in the bay area and nearly bought a MoFi from the Analog Room in San Jose. The Proprietor, Brian, told me that a good UK pressing was really a better listen except for some of the inner detail. Pretty much exactly my experience. I'm glad I didn't dump $120 on that copy.
The copy I have was unopened in a box a records given to me from a storage unit getting cleaned out. My copy of BC-13 was also in that box.
eso
They were a carnival of American decay on parade, and they had no idea of the atrocity they had inflicted upon themselves.“ Henry Chinaski
My MFSL copy, which has been in my family since new, is outstanding. In fact, the bass in "Come Together" from the first time I heard it on my dad's old system 30 years ago just astounded me. I could not believe that the music was supposed to sound that way. On my rig today, it's even better...crisp highs, and solid bass that shakes my house. It's hard to believe how well that album was recorded. The vinyl is dead quiet as well.
Anyhow, I'd say you either have a bad copy, a bootleg, or there is something amiss in your setup.
My MoFi Abbey Road is stupendous. It's by far the best I've heard it.
Cheers,
Bobbo :-)
My MFSL copy has great bass and sounds superb. I also have the standard North American (Canadian) pressing and the Parlophone UK box.
“The thing about quotes on the Internet is you cannot confirm their validity.” - Abraham Lincoln
I have frequently been disappointed by MFSL pressings. For example, there release of Patricia Barber's Verse sounds dark and dull. I don't have an original pressing of that one, but in general the Premonition Records releases are fabulously good, so I expect it is their fault.
That's not the same company.
By 2005 MFSL had been sold.
The original records press in Japan on Super Vinyl were very different that what you get today from MFSL.
Tre'
Have Fun and Enjoy the Music
"Still Working the Problem"
As you discovered, the original is a damn fine recording, one of the first LPs I ever listened to on my first ever "high end" system, back in the early 70s. My then wife and I were dancing around the living room.
Post a Followup:
FAQ |
Post a Message! |
Forgot Password? |
|
||||||||||||||
|
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: