Billy Joel's 52nd Street different masterings

Hi,

As an offshoot to The Stranger mastering thread (http://www.stevehoffman.tv/forums/showthread.php?t=146808&page=2)
So far this album is not as complicated.

Looking for more data from different 52nd Street non-remastered pressings especially the Japan For Japan 35DP-1 . Thanks

 

Float to the top as this got buried 8 pages down really fast.

 

I have the early Japan-for-Europe version:


The label says:

CDCBS 83181
(CK35609)
DIDP-1

Matrix number: 35DP-1 151A2

Peak levels are the same as your DADC Europe CD.
No PreEmphasis (even with EAC 0.95 pb3 - detect TOC manually)


Martin

 

I like my JPN for U.S. Almost as good as the SACD.

 

Interesting the Japan for Europe with the 35DP matrix is different than the Japan for US with 35DP matrix. This could be as complicated as The Stranger after all...

 

I ran the others through EAC 0.95 pb3 w/detect TOC manually.
The Japan for US has it. No real surprise, as it is supposed to be digitally identical to the 35DP-1, IIRC even manufactured at approximately the same time at the same plants.

Still hoping someone will post the 35DP-1 EAC peak values and other info....

 

That's a great signature ricks.

 

So, of the ones posted so far, which mastering sounds better?

Japan for US
or
Japan for Europe (and the others)

 

Hi Roland,

Have listened only to a couple of tracks on the Japan for US CD which I found totally by surprise in local used CD shop on Monday. I've done no compare yet, but what I have heard on the Japan for US sounds nice. I hope to do a blind a/b/c with the Japan for US, early US DADC and the SACD (2 channel layer) in the near future.

Rock

 

My dad has a Europe for Europe CD. It sucks. The 1999 remaster is a lot better. I haven't heard the SACD though.

 

SACD is excellent. I do not like the 1997 remaster way to bright and loud, I find it to be a harsh listen. From what I've listened to so far the Japan for US is nice.

 

My Japan for Europe has the exact same matrix code as the one listed in the table below: 35DP-1 151A2

I think it sounds nice, but I haven't done any comparisons to other versions.

 

My boyfriend's Mum has an old(ish) Australia for Australia copy which my boyfriend played for me last week. It's pre-1998 and made by Sony Music Australia. I will have to get back to you on the exact details (Cat/Serial No's) but I can tell you right now: OH MY GOD! THE CLARITY! I swear it was the first time in my life that I "tuned in" to the song "Honesty"* instead of tuning out! It was the first time I could understand the high vocals at the end of "My Life"! *Note: Up until now I'd only ever heared that song on the "Essential" CD

Two weeks ago I played my (2nd hand) LP copy for the first time since getting it. Australian pressed Cat: SBP 237232 (FC 35609). Matrix: MX187189/MX187190. Both matrix numbers were stamped rather than written plus were prefixed with a triangle which pointed towards the label. Flimsy vinyl. Visually it'd be graded as EX. It sounded like absolute utter crap! I am tempted to throw it out! So not only was the CD clear, compared to my current LP copy it was like a completely different album! A week on and I am still going on about it!

Anyway, the CD in EAC (prior to being returned) revealed the following peak levels:

Track 1 - Peak level 85.0 %
Track 2 - Peak level 74.9 %
Track 3 - Peak level 84.5 %
Track 4 - Peak level 80.0 %
Track 5 - Peak level 71.4 %
Track 6 - Peak level 58.9 %
Track 7 - Peak level 62.3 %
Track 8 - Peak level 72.8 %
Track 9 - Peak level 59.2 %

As for length of CD.....

TOC of the extracted CD

Track | Start | Length | Start sector | End sector
---------------------------------------------------------
1 | 0:00.00 | 4:03.37 | 0 | 18261
2 | 4:03.37 | 3:53.38 | 18262 | 35774
3 | 7:57.00 | 4:44.00 | 35775 | 57074
4 | 12:41.00 | 5:12.62 | 57075 | 80536
5 | 17:53.62 | 4:41.73 | 80537 | 101684
6 | 22:35.60 | 4:41.60 | 101685 | 122819
7 | 27:17.45 | 4:08.55 | 122820 | 141474
8 | 31:26.25 | 6:36.12 | 141475 | 171186
9 | 38:02.37 | 2:26.38 | 171187 | 182174

Pre-emphasis unknown but likely no.

 

The original CD to me is far better than the remaster. It's clear, relaxed, analogue with decent dynamics. Not to say the remaster is bad (although the mastersound is awful), it just is not as good. I still have to compare the 2 original masterings (would that make 1 of them the 1st true remaster?) when I do I'll post my thoughts.

Rick

 

Australian old CD issue
Catalogue: CDCBS 83181
Serial: (Unknown - rats!)

Label states "Manufactured in Australia by Sony Music Australia Limited" but in the rim it states "Manufactured by DADC Austria". Also on the rim CDCBS-83181, long gap (would hold about three digits) then 11

The back cover appears to be "old stock" as the copyright bit states "Made in Japan by CBS/Sony/Distribution CBS Records" and that the cover is "Printed in Holland". It has under the CBS logo "(CK 35609)" then "CDCBS 83181" then "DIDP-1" and, finally, in a box, "CB 801". Down the bottom opposite the copyright details, is "01-083181-10" whilst the barcode is 9 399708 218120.

Time matches the rest at 40:29. I don't know if the disc has pre-emphasis or not, but I don't think it would as it was made after 1990. In Australia, CBS didn't start having "Columbia" on the labels until 1991.

I have never seen so many numbers on a CD in my life! How do you find the serial number?

 

Who would need these crappy early pressings when there a SACD on the market? I had all the early Billy Joel CDs and they all sounded like mud. The Ted Jensen remaster is not perfect but it's 10 times better, not to mention the SACD.

 

Perfect example of a threadcrap.

 

Why? I simply the disagree with the assumption that long OOP and hard to find original CDs are much better and are worth seeking out...In this particular case they are not.

 

Maybe the SACD is better, but not all of us are willing/able to purchase an SACD player. I prefer LP's over CD's any day but in this case my LP sounds like mud under water, so I'm quite happy with the CD that I have access to

 

You are saying that comparing those older masterings is useless because in your opinion, the remaster (despite the very apparent compression) and the SACD (despite being on another medium) are superior.

 

Given the state of SACD today, I fully understand that point of view. I bought into SACD in 2000 and now have several players and over 200 SACDs. It's a great format. However, if I did not have it now, I doubt that I would ever get it. My CD collection continues to grow, and I'd probably just stick with CD. I rarely buy an SACD these days anyway.

Back to 52nd Street. I am continually amazed by how many early masterings there are of a given title.

 

I've got a silver and a gold 35DP-1, so I can measure a few tracks tonight. I don't want to do it all because it takes up so much disc space. Is there a way to get the peak values without copying the file?

 

I'm not sure I understand your question, but if you run the Test Track feature, it just creates a small log file (text file). You are not burning the CD to your hard drive.

 

Anton,

The title of this thread is 52nd Street Different Masterings the purpose is to identify as many different original masterings as possible. The type of comment you left in your post you was not asked for nor appreciated. Yes the SACD is excellent, but it is irrelevant. Whether you like old original CDs or not is totally irrelevant as are narrow, close minded (and incorrect*) comments like yours which belong in threads about sound-quality and not in this one.

Just for the record I think the Jensen 1998 remaster totally sucks moose balls, but as I said comments/opinions like that have no place in this thread.

*=Huh? WTF? used original 52nd Streets are some of the easy CD's on the planet to find on eBay, Amazon Marketplace and in used shops

Mods (Gorts) please remove this post as well as #16, #17 and #18 from this thread. Thanks!.

Rick

 

Hi Kat,

There some great souding titles out there like The Stranger, 52nd Street, Time Out, Escape, Tapestry, She's So Unusual, and the entire Creedence studio catalog, that were mastered before Digital Compression was possible Technology-wise in the DSD stream. However you are 100% correct, if I did not already have 2 SACD capable players, I would not consider even investing in what is sadly a dead format.

Luckily there are some decent sounding early masterings of 52nd Street that according to some like Jamie Tate were made from the original tapes. So that old CD of yours in all likelihood will be the best it ever sounds on the CD medium. Although it's possible you may prefer the 35DP-1 matrix version better. I've not yet a/b's mine to the DADC mastering.

The Matrix (serial) information is located near the plastic hole of the CD on the inner ring. You may have to flip the CD over to view it.

Thanks for the other info I will add it to the chart later today.

Rick