Steve, have you ever compared the 45rpm L.P.s to that SACD and if so, which sounded better? And if not, would you whenever you get time?
Better is a relative term. I like the SACD because it sounds unmastered. It NEEDS mastering, it has no friggin' midrange on many songs. I'm grateful to have it this way though. As that old commercial used to say: "Mother, please, I'd rather do it myself!" Never heard the 45.
And perhaps the stereo program on the stereo/multi SACD was re-remastered. It seems like a lot of people are jumping to conclusions that the two discs must sound identical if the latter version wasn't remixed. I'm surprised to find so many people here who are ignoring the fact that a different mastering job can make a difference, even if done by the same person from the same mix (for example, some of the DCC silvers and golds). Does anyone know whether Bob Irwin or Vic Anesini has reported that the stereo programs on the two different SACDs are derived from the same mastering?
Jamie's got great ears, and he's a professional to boot with plenty of opportunity for close, careful comparisons. He has both versions, and he says they sound identical. Good enough for me--I don't see any jumping to conclusions here.
Even Jamie thought they were "different" at first. He even described the "differences" http://www.stevehoffman.tv/forums/showpost.php?p=810010&postcount=64 The power of suggestion is very persuasive.
Steve you should have said this in the first place. The mastering really isn't good, it needs midrange and you have the eq to do it. This can be misleading for those of us who can't remaster this on our own. At first, I thought you said this disc sounds good as it stands.
IMHO if the original master tape(s) recordings has mid range suck out then it should be left that way. Maybe that was the original intent (although I wouldn't begin to understand why) and if that is the case it shouldn't be futzed with and left to the end user for any alteration. I have the SACD with both the 2 channel and multi. I only listen to the 2 channel and have always found it really enjoyable.
Excuse my guys, but I'm a little bit confused, there are two SACD versions of Tapestry? And the Silver one is the best? Can you explain the difference? Thanks.
This album is essentially UNMASTERED. Just like all of the silver MoFi CD's and many of the MoFi UDI's, WEA "Targets", JPN ABBEY ROAD, JPN Beach Boys PASTMASTERS and other early CD's. Unmastered, let the chips fall where they may. So, an album has a bit of a hole in the midrange, so this or that album has too much or not enough bass, so an album has too much dynamic range? These things mean that the music was untampered with in transferring to digital. Essentially, to me, this means that you pay a paltry 20 bucks to have someone in a vault pull the master reels of an album out and make you a flat transfer. You have in your hand an exact copy of the master tape, warts and all. Where else on earth could this happen? Not any more, most everything is MASTERED now. This Carole King SACD for whatever reason (like the old Bob Dylan "John Wesley Harding" CD) emerged "mastering free", like the first series of Roger Nichols STEELY DAN CD's on MCA. Would I do it this way? Uh, no. I'd fix some of the little things by filling in midrange holes (caused by mixing on horn speakers with too much midrange) and do other "diamond polishing" things to bring out the best. Rarely I just "let it go" (DCC PET SOUNDS CD, for example). Other mastering engineers would go over the top and do more than necessary. That, I cannot stand. I want to hear the master tape, and most people who hang out here want to as well. The midrange softness drives you crazy? Buy a 50 dollar graphic EQ on eBay and boost the 4k range. But probably on no other disc of this album in your lifetime will you be able to play TAPESTRY and say to your friends, "This is exactly what the master tape sounds like". To me that is everything. Sorry if you don't see it that way, but I always assume that in place of overmastering, this is the preferred alternative for all of the SH Forum members here. Guess I'm wrong... I must say I'm really surprised though.
Can we follow this up on this new thread? http://www.stevehoffman.tv/forums/showthread.php?t=72642 Thanks.
If people didn't know, the stereo/multichannel Tapestry SACD from Sony was reissued a couple years ago in Japan. Tapestry [Cardboard Sleeve (mini LP)] [Limited Release] Carole King SACD
I have both the original SACD and the MoFi SACD. The MoFi is the best, it’s the definitive version for me.
Glad this thread is open again. I’m wondering how the recent Mofis of Tapestry stack up against the 2013 Mofi and also the original SACD.
I'm sure it sounds fantastic, but I will settle on my original vinyl pressing. I do love how the SACDs bring detail out from the woodwork.
I don’t know if there was ever a final consensus on how many stereo masterings there are of the Sony SACD, but I finally got the dual layer disc. I only listen to the stereo layer. I played it for the first time last night and to use an old audio cliche it gave me goosebumps. It really was “spine tingling” as Steve says. I already had Vic’s Legacy CD and I didn’t think I’d ever need another version of this album. But I was listening to the Redbook and I realized that I will always return to this music, so I nabbed a used copy of the SACD at a good price. I’m glad I did. When I put it on I listened to it all the way through. It was totally engaging. This one presents the recording wart and all, but it sure brings you closer to the music. Great work by Vic and Sony. A Masterpiece by Carole King.
