Half-Speed Masters - are they worth double dipping?
I have pretty much read all that being said online, what is your personal experiences with half-speed mastered records. I see a growing trend in lot of re-issues now being sold with half-speed mastering.
The two records I am interested in are,
Ed Sheeran’s X -10 Anniversary and Police - 30th Anniversary Greatest Hits.
One good thing is, they are reasonably priced and under $50 :-)
Thank you for the feedback. I guess, it would come down to each recording so I will order the Police - Greatest Hits (thanks @willy-t ). As far as R2R, I don’t see much sense in copying Vinyl on to R2R. Both R2R and TT offer very different and unique tactile playback experience. |
Whether "half-speed" or "45 rpm", the answer is the same. "It depends." I have some "45s" that sound like you are in the recording studio with the musicians. I have others that are inferior to or at least no better than their "33" counterpart. Ditto "half-speed." I will say the best "45's" are superior to the best "half-speeds", at least in my experience. But you have to listen to each in order to know what is worth buying. Much of this is gimmickry and marketing, as you find with the current trend of "180-gram" vinyl. A crappy recording cheaply stamped on a thicker piece of plastic just a thicker piece of crap. Until you listen, you don't know if you are getting the wonderful quality of vinyl or a cheap copy of somebody's CD. |
The half-speed-mastered LPs I have from the '80s (MFSL and CBS Mastersound) do sound better than the conventional LPs. Of course, the MFSL were also pressed with virgin JVC vinyl and made from the original master tapes, so that also helped. If anything, I thought the bass was fuller on the MFSL than on the conventional LPs, so I'm surprised at the comments that bass is negatively affected. I wonder if this is just a relative perception because higher frequencies are enhanced, which may result in weaker-sounding bass. |
I don't like being assigned homework, but you could check two of my favorites - Boston's first and S&G's Bookends. But that's not the best way to read the database, because when a CD does show as having better DR, it's often a special Japanese pressing, SBM or some other release that got extra attention over the common CD you'll get from Amazon. Even then, when compared to a similarly special LP pressing (such as from MFSL or Abbey Road) or an original pressing, the CD often doesn't compare favorably.
The best research is work you've done yourself. You can measure dynamic range yourself using your favorite recordings. If you do, you'll probably be surprised.
I couldn't disagree more. Remasterings are almost always lower DR. Loudness wars. |
+1 @8th-note
i don’t know where the ridiculous notion started that vinyl has a greater dynamic range than digital. Numerous studies show otherwise. And how in the world would vinyl extend the dynamic range of a digital file when it is embedded in a slab of petroleum? |
