That's what I'm sayin'. I've read before that different glass masters can change the peaks and whatnot. So many factors and different pressings I'm sure there was some digital factor that accounts for the slight variance in my EAC peaks from Mal's copy. Look, I even downloaded that 10-second clip of "Black Cow" that Mal uploaded, and compared it to my copy. I may have a craptastic system but they both sounded identical in a side by side comparison, one right after the other. This CD sounds great and sounds as good as the Kevin Gray Cisco vinyl I bought months ago. To my ears, there is that "magic in the midrange". I'd be happy to send my copy to Steve for his opinion if he is open to the idea.
The soundstage and imaging is different between these pressings. The center of the image on the Canada was less full than the others IIRC. They probably are. The Canada disc (DIDX 55??) has the same EAC as the 32XD, but not the same sound or imaging. I know from the shootout thread you started you like the 32XD most. So do I.
I still say that these discs all have the same mastering: * Japanese CBS/Sony pressing with catalog number MCAD-37214 * Japanese JVC pressing with catalog number MCAD-37214 * Japanese issue with catalog number 32XD-112 * European issue with catalog number DMCL 1745 * European issue with catalog number MCLD 19145 I have not heard the Japanese 20P2 issue, but it would not surprise me if it had the same mastering as well. These discs have the same mastering. Differences you may be hearing could be due to jitter (if you believe in that). I am not trying to start a debate about jitter from different glass masters. My point is that we are not hearing mastering differences. I don't believe that a 0.1 difference in peak levels is indicative of a different mastering. That's my take.
The exact same one I used to own. I'm not sure if I just got a bad or later pressing, but the DMCL 1745 I also used to own sounded like a squeezed [slight compression] and a tad hard version of the non-Hoffman MCA's.
What is the catalogue number for this one? http://www.stevehoffman.tv/forums/showpost.php?p=1988961&postcount=145
I've been listening to the 32XD disc a lot lately, but I was never able to convince myself without question that it beat the MCAD-37214 discs. The 32XD disc sounds great. That's all I can say.
How did the imaging sound with these two for you Keith? The differences were in the imaging on my rig. The 32XD sounds more open and more like actual musicians in the room with you as opposed to a slightly compressed [imaging space gone, not as good sound staging] copy of the former. I can only imagine they may sound the same through headphones without the complete imagery. Both are good, but the 32XD is the one that resides in my collection now.
Just for the record, here's a pic of my copy of Aja and the details. EAC levels match those of Mal's SH confirmed pressing: Made in England (on CD) Catalog number (on CD) DMCL 1745 Bar code 08811 91452 3 Matrix: DMCL 1745 1:2 Mastered by Nimbus Total playing time in EAC: 39:54:02 Levels: 90.7 --- 91.7 --- 90.8 --- 88.9 --- 96.3 --- 86.1 --- 97.5
I've also put on Rapidshare the first 1 min of Black Cow: http://rapidshare.com/files/110573587/Black_Cow_-_1min.flac.html
Thanks. I checked with the member who bought my old Canada pressing (DIDX 55 on the back tray card and no bar code) and it has this matrix: MCAD-37214 MFG BY CINRAM #910723FF
I have an interesting variation. Mine is a solid silver to the cent cd, with made in Germany in the inner ring. The cd itsel has 2 catalogue numbers on it, one just below the other. Both are at about 2:00 and are MCD 01745 with DMCL 1745 right below it. Matrix is MCD01745, followed by 50169033 01 +. The 2 catalogue numbers also appear on the back inlay and the booklet. I have played this CD and it sounds nice, but I could not hear an appreciable diff. to my US disc (made in JPN.) which is still my fave on this cd. However, I don't have Mal's disc, nor the 32XD, nor the JPN. 20P2 one. Just thought I'd chime in, FWIW.
I have an interesting version not yet discussed in this thread. Maybe someone can confirm what it is? It has the same printing on the disc and the same back cover as shown in the pictures in #211, except that it has a different inner ring, it's missing the CRC on the back cover and it has the following matrix: MCAD-37214-T5E21 The 2 and 1 at the end look like they're handwritten. EAC peak levels are like this: 90.8, 91.7, 90.6, 88.7, 96.3, 86.2, 97.6 I can post a scan of the disc.
Checking the EAC peak levels, they are identical to the ones of the following CDs, as posted by jackieboy in post #114: Didx 55 mcad-37214 made in japan for MCA matrix:MCAD 37214 M2e14 and Didy 55 mcad-37214 made in japan for MCA matrix:MCAD 37214 T6E13 Like my copy both made in Japan for MCA, but with a different matrix.
You mean this one, mentioned in post #42? MCAD 37214 DIDX-55, JVC, Made In Japan [Leppo] That would mean it's Steve's mastering?
Is there really nobody on here who can tell if my copy is the same as Leppo's copy and therefore Steve's mastering?
Mine is 20P2-2055 11A3 (D-112) made by the Warner-Pioneer Corporation, Japan. Date on the artwork is 1984. EAC levels: 90.8 --- 91.7 --- 90.6 --- 88.7 --- 96.3 --- 86.2 --- 97.6 Compared Black Cow with Mal's 10 second clip found here: http://www.stevehoffman.tv/forums/showpost.php?p=1290890&postcount=346 It doesn't quite pass a null test in so far that the residual audio is about -45 dB down. This seems due to differences in DC offset. Mal's has no offset whereas mine has a minor offset, probably accounting for EAC discrepancies. When gained up the residual audio is pretty much exclusively low frequency energy. Timing wise both Mal's and my edition are precisely locked over the 10 seconds, they do not diverge. The peaks over the 10 seconds are the same and when Mal's is summed to mono and placed in the left channel and mine in the right, the sound, to my ears, is the same.
Thanks for posting the link to that sample. I've compared the first 10 seconds of "Black cow" of my copy to the one from Steve's master. The frequency analysis of both appear to be identical (shown below, above is my copy and middle is Mal's copy of Steve's master). Comparing the 2 leads to the same DC offset that Chris Malone is talking about. After inverting my copy and adding Steve's master to that and normalising the result, a frequency analysis of this difference leads to the frequency analysis at the bottom. The peaks you can see are obviously the result of sampling errors. They're most likely made by Adobe Audition while inverting, summing or re-sampling the signals. This can mean 2 things. Either my copy hass Steve Hoffman's mastering and the DC offset and sampling errors are the cause of the differences which still exist. Or I have a copy of Roger Nichols' mastering which is nearly identical and that story about the frequency gap which should exist in the Nichols mastering is simply not true.
Suspect that versions with EAC levels very similar to Mal's -- within 0.1% or so -- are from the same 1610 source tape. I don't know if it is Steve's mastering or not but I do know that it sounds great. Here is another frequency analysis of Mal's MCLD 19145 versus my 20P2-2055. Mal's is at the top.
Those spectrums look the same to me as well. Mal's sample, your copy and my copy are obviously from the exact same digital source tape.
I've said for awhile that I suspected all early Japanese pressing to have the same mastering, whether it be Steve's or someone else's.* Some people may be hearing pressing differences, but not mastering differences. * The exception is the first Japanese issue with catalog number VDP-27. It has a unique mastering, which I find inferior to the other early Japanese pressings.
That's what I think as well. Is there actually any hard evidence that Mal's copy is Steve Hoffman's mastering and that the Japan for USA pressings are not (apart from the minor EAC differences that is)?
I agree. My copy is only off from Mal's by 0.1%-0.2%, and 2 songs have the exact same levels. So if Mal's is the SH mastering, I think mine is too. Best sounding version I've heard so far.
