The MOFI is not a Silver Series edition. It's a Gain 2 release and is wonderful.
I also have the Classic Records reissue, but haven't compared the two. I know that Mercury has just re-released this title also.
Japanese 1976 reissue is the best sounding record.
I have the Classic and Pink Rim early pressing. Will have to check Discogs for specifics on the latter. I haven't compared, but would be quite surprised of the Classic is as good. But in fairness, I will have to do the comparison.
I have an early pink label Capricorn, I would have to check who mastered. It is a good sounding record, despite the challenges of the recording. Just checked a piece I wrote, Dennis King and George Piros both mastered these, I have one which is a mutt, and some sides are DK in the deadwax, some GP. Both sound good. The "hot" one is usually the Monarch, more punchy in my experience. I haven't heard the Japanese pressing that CZ referred to, I assume in reaching his conclusion, he compared with the early pink label Capricorn. The challenge with these early US pressings is almost always condition. Good luck.
I'll try to find the Japanese pressing, but will probably purchase the new Mercury and Mofi releases...late at night when no one is watching😊
Regarding vintage Japanese pressing, I have some concerns but I'll open another thread for that.
whart, I only compare clean and undamaged vinyls.
I also had various European vinyls.
In 90's I was purchasing whole entire collections from all over Europe including UK shipped to me overseas.
Good luck finding Japanese pressing. If you hunt it on internet within $50 shipped, you'll be lucky. Also it's great investment for great release and album.
I resisted the 180g Mercury reissues until the DMM sticker pulled me in. Eat a Peach. Compared to my well preserved Capricorn beige label, the Mercury sounds cleaner, more organized, warm and inviting. The bad news is that the Mercury is a substandard pressing with surface noise in spots that won’t resolve after long ultrasonic baths and lots of mold shedding into that bath. Based on the high quality of recent MoFi I would go for those.
I heard from MoFi and they confirm that Fillmore East is produced from analog tapes, so I ordered it along with MoFi's Kind of Blue and Analog Production's Phoebe Snow. Can't wait, but gawd these thing are expensive.
I think I remembered MF saying the MOFI "Kind Of Blue" was "Kind Of Blah".
Can we add best CD or SACD versions as well?
mofi: My bad. Thanks.
I just compared my (only two copies) of this lp with one song from each at the same volume.
I have the aforementioned "beige" label and the Classic re-issue.
The difference between the two is stark!
The Classic: more perceived energy, spacious soundstage, better defined bass. It sounds more like a live show. The "beige", I will sell as soon as possible.
Mofi, By the way, with all of the music we all try to buy/listen to... when I see a review entitled "Kind Of Blah" for any lp, I just skip over it.
It did capture my attention. Therefore I decided it wasn't worth my time to read.
Astro- I have the Classic remaster as well as an early pink label Capricorn that I compared quite a while ago. My recollection is that the Classic has more "hi-fi" attributes- detail and more open in the midrange, as you mentioned, but that the early pink label Capricorn was more cohesive, of a piece. I probably have a beige Capricorn around somewhere (unless I got rid of it). I can try to re-compare. I think some of this is listener preference and system bias- i.e., the sonic character of the mastering may better match what you like or complement the character of the system it is played on. Overall, I don't think this recording is a great sounding record, much as I love the music. (I played the hell out of a copy back when it was originally released- have no idea where that old copy is). And these--the less stellar recordings, sonically, -- are often the records that make me search for better sounding copies.
whart, I think it (is) important to evaluate in one's (current) system, instead of trying to remember the past. This is why I remarked here to begin with.
You're acknowledgement of "hi-fi" attributes kind of turns me sour in some ways. (Again), this just may be a difference in how we hear things and try to explain them).
The soundstage presentation I heard was a "night & day" differencein my above comparison. I might have failed in making this more clear. This is one thing you did not write about.
All in all, I think we may not be that far off , just a matter of differing systems and our own way of explaining what we hear.
..In a previous system/room configuration in which I had last listened to the Classic re-issue, I was not impressed.
I'm glad to have not sold it. I would certainly buy an original pink Capricorn if I found one for sure.
Astro - no disrespect intended to you by my use of the word "hi-fi" to describe the Classic. Yes, I am basing what I said on memory, but heard over my own system at the time with the copies to hand. I did, in fairness, acknowledge that some of this may not only be system dependent, but based on listener preference. For example, "soundstage" to me is an attribute- often used by audiophiles to describe one facet of the sound. But it is only one facet, depending on your priorities and preferences. I have no monopoly on choosing what is "right" or "best"--in fact, my point is that different copies have different strengths and weaknesses. And, I have many Classics that I bought at the time of release. Every one sounds different than the earlier "standard issue" copies (and among those, there are many differences depending on the cut, the country of origin, etc.) . But, I'm not making a blanket indictment of the Classics. To be sure, Mike Hobson had great taste and went to the limit to deliver some of the best remasters at the time. And, it was nice to get fresh, unmolested copies of some of the more pricey collectibles for a reasonable price. But, the choice between copies/pressings/remasters is, to me, often one of preference rather than demonstrably "better" or "worse." My apologies for using a descriptor that seemed like an insult.
whart, I appreciate your response. I was hoping that any additional response would incorporate your (current) system evaluation of your copies.
You seem to have focused on my Classic copy as the (only) source of your response?
To me "soundstage" is not an attribute. It is a (real) part of the experience, of the event, of the actual live recording that (should) be conveyed through a good pressing.
I don't find that "soundstage" is just, as you put it, "one facet of the sound". It is THE constant, the one main part of a recording that should be readily apparent and noticeable to any listener. It is, IMO, a most important part of the home audio enthusiast experience! You seen to miss this point in this instance and in other reviews you've posted.
I think you focused on things that weren't my (focus).
Astro- Happy to go back and make the comparison anew. It’s just not something I can do instantly.
PS: my system hasn’t changed that much since I made that comparison, same amps, speakers, table,cables, same brand/model of phono cartridge- just the later "better" iteration, though I did probably have a different phono stage (which change in my estimation, now makes things more involving). So, it is a fair comment about listening with the current system, rather than based on memory.
PPS: Also happy to address your comments about soundstage and its importance separately. I don’t want to derail this thread.
whart, I don't know how you can derail this thread by answering the questions/concerns I had, and still, did not address them?
I made my comparison in (real time) earlier! It did not happen instantly, it just became my focus in order to respond in real time to this thread and to make my point more relevant. It took less than 15 minutes.
I have a hard time seeing how that same (real time) comparison is something you cannot handle as well?
astro- not to belabor this, because i think at this point you are trying to take me to task for something, but the issues you present are:
1. What does the Classic remaster of this record sound like, compared to an earlier pressing, in particular a pink Capricorn that I described. This will take me time to do. If you need me to explain why, it takes a minimum of 45 minutes for my amps to warm up. We are in the midst of electrical storms here, and I pull power to my gear, so I can't just run upstairs and make the comparison in "real time." I will do so when time and circumstances permit, as I offered to do.
2. You also take issue with my comments about soundstage, in connection not only with this Allman Bros album, but in other postings I made. I said I am happy to address the topic of soundstage separately. If you are familiar with my site, just go to the about page and scroll to the bottom, where there is a link to "system notes." I pretty much summarize what my biases are, and where I think the relative importance of soundstage fits in my overall worldview.
whart, I was posting in real time. I made this a REAL thing because of the nature of this thread as I perceived it.
I believe my way of responding to the thread's nature was (the best I could do).
I don't think you approached it in the same (thoughtful) way.
If in the future, you decide to respond to a thread that (by it's very nature), requires a "real time" response, We'll look upon it with respect. Until then, excuses will not suffice.
What I remember about this great recording is I had to take my original copy back three times because it skipped on the exact same spot on all 3 copies. Bad pressing and I remember getting a refund because I told the guy at the counter my Dad was getting tired of driving me to exchange it. My go to copy is a DBX encoded Natilus 1/2 speed copy.
jafant, check at the Steve Hoffman music forums for a discussion of the cds, etc.
Get the original used at $10.00 better than those.
Can you sell me near-mint original for $10 if you have?