pulinap Posted August 31, 2012 Posted August 31, 2012 I kind of vaguely understand the process of half-speed mastering. What I would like to know is whether half-speed mastering is better than the original pressings and/or 180/200g re-issues?
TP1 Posted September 3, 2012 Posted September 3, 2012 I guess it depends on the label and whether the engineers knew what they were doing. IMO, Mobile Fidelity and Nautilus both did excellent half speed masters and i have bought quite a few both new and secondhand. I prefer them to most of the newer pressings, although some of these are quite good too. If I had to choose between which one to buy - I would go for the Mofi / Nautilus half speed master if one in good nick was available.
ZEN MISTER Posted September 3, 2012 Posted September 3, 2012 Mofi has a great site that explains the matter quite well. Nautilus editions were excellent, and CBS also did a bunch. However, many factors went into the optimization of these editions. Sourcing of original, or studio masters was an important step, but so was the insistence on excellent quality of vinyl. Some of the best Mofi issues were cut by the legendary Stan Ricker, but all the mastering teams were on the ball. There was quite a backlash to half-speed mastering about 15 years ago, that continues in some quarters ( check the DCC /HOT STAMPERS site for the requisite vitriol), with some contending that such mastering produced a softer bass, and that they tweaked the mids a bit. To my ears, the are usually excellent. In fact, I believe the CBS master sound edition of Bridge Over Troubled Water is the one to beat. Some standard editions were 1/2 speeds, but not touted as such, I.e. The Metro album, FUTURE IMPERFECT, and sound great. Collecting the Mofis on vinyl is timely, as a lot of very good nick issues are turning up on flea bay for modest prices. I recently scored Mint copies of JOHN KLEMMER "TOUCH" and AL STEWART " TIME PASSAGES" at $12 each plus postage. You don't see the Nautilus or the CBS as often. The Mofi has a list of every titled released. ZM.
metal beat Posted September 3, 2012 Posted September 3, 2012 If you are talking about the CBS mastersound half speed masters - they are all digital masters. They sound Ok.
pulinap Posted September 3, 2012 Author Posted September 3, 2012 If you are talking about the CBS mastersound half speed masters - they are all digital masters. They sound Ok. Not sure... there were few 'old' LPs advertised on eBay, Agon and Audio Asylum as being half-speed mastered.
metal beat Posted September 3, 2012 Posted September 3, 2012 Not sure... there were few 'old' LPs advertised on eBay, Agon and Audio Asylum as being half-speed mastered. If you mean the Neil Diamond,, ELO and Men At Work ones in the link - they are the CBS digitral masterworks - the Neil Diamond at $4.99 is worth it. the other two for $40 and $50 are a rip off. http://www.ebay.com.au/sch/i.html?_kw=half-speed&_kw=mastered
LogicprObe Posted September 3, 2012 Posted September 3, 2012 I can understand why it should be better ......................but it's just another thing that can go wrong!
soundfan Posted September 3, 2012 Posted September 3, 2012 Mofi is hit and miss in my opinion in regards to half speed mastering. I've heard better sounding standard vinyl releases. Take that comment for what its worth.
ZEN MISTER Posted September 3, 2012 Posted September 3, 2012 Soundfan, I would be sincerely interested to know which ones you consider misses. ZM.
soundfan Posted September 3, 2012 Posted September 3, 2012 (edited) Soundfan, I would be sincerely interested to know which ones you consider misses. ZM. Bruce Springsteen: Born To Run. It sucks IMO. Rolling Stones: Sticky Fingers. Sucks even worse. The Band: Music From Big Pink. The original Capitol pressing is better IMO. There are a few examples from personal experience. I could name more, but am over 1000k from my precious vinyl atm and those sprang to mind. Like Bose, MFSL market these releases quite well, but in my experience, more often I find them not up to expectations. Edited September 3, 2012 by soundfan
Phill451 Posted September 3, 2012 Posted September 3, 2012 I have the Springsteen and would tend to agree, it sounds quite compressed to my ears, although perhaps all versions suffer from this.
LogicprObe Posted September 3, 2012 Posted September 3, 2012 Springsteen would be a poor example considering he uses the wall of sound technique.
davidsss Posted September 3, 2012 Posted September 3, 2012 The Sticky Fingers is not much chop. Seems to lack bottom end. The Japanese pressing is the pick of pressings I've found for Sticky Fingers. DS
Dr Good Vibe Posted September 3, 2012 Posted September 3, 2012 The Sticky Fingers is not much chop. Seems to lack bottom end. The Japanese pressing is the pick of pressings I've found for Sticky Fingers. DS Would have to agree.
Al Leece Posted September 8, 2012 Posted September 8, 2012 I am not sure that an "audiophile quality" version of Born To Run is ever going to sound any less dirty and grungy as Springsteen intended. That concept really was marketing going mad.
LogicprObe Posted September 8, 2012 Posted September 8, 2012 Wall of sound is not for the benefit of audio freaks, it's for radio. It pretty much achieved what mastering engineers these days do with brick wall compression.
Recommended Posts