Couldn't agree more!

Thanks Nick, I’m glad you got and are enjoying your UHQR.

Glad you found it interesting!

I agree: if AP had done all the Bob Marley albums as UHQR releases I'd almost certainly buy them... They were definitely worth the couple of hours battling the website to get the order in!

I totally agree @High Medic

Hi Austin, I'm really glad that you managed to get a Rastaman Vibration UHQR. It is simply sublime isn't it? Thanks for your feedback, always welcome!

LOL I hope the Marley family are reading this and take your advice! 😁 Shame about your eBay Exodus. Hope you get a good copy soon. And I hope your dad absolutely loves his UHQR! He’s got a hell of a son! 👍

@@DaveDenyer Thank you!

Hi Mike, thanks. I'll certainly consider doing a review, or 'hifi system update' to include the Grand Master, although it's not staying (sadly)...

Cool, well that's at least two of them in existence then! :-)

Thanks Leonardo. Enjoy your UHQR, it really is that good!

Thanks George, I’ve the Love Supreme Ultra Tape so nothing else matters 😁

LOL I appreciate your boldness, but don’t think I could ever part with it. You’ll have to speak to my wife when I’m dead! 😂

@@DaveDenyer LOL! Wow! Thank you very much for even kindly considering to reply. 😉 While my bold offer stands of course I totally understand. 😉 Good Health, Enjoy and Cheers! 🍻

Thanks Ken from Hawaii.

Hi DMD, I didn't (haven't yet) got the De La Soul... It's not really my core musical taste although I do still remain very tempted. If you saw my LP "in-pile" you'd laugh. I've bought perhaps fifty LPs in the last few months and not got around the listening to perhaps 40 of them... The new cartridge is sublime, although I'm trying not to get too attached as it is only on loan and way outside of my budget. Very, very interesting to have the opportunity to get to try it at home in my system for an extended time (one of the beauties of my 'day-job').

Hi Optimize, first of all, thanks for such a thorough considered response. OK: I note that you can make VTA / SRA (the two being somewhat linked) adjustments on the fly. I used to be able to do that having owned quite recently a couple of Clearaudio Universal tonearms fitted with VTA lifters (and various other VTA adjustable arms before then... I found that making the most minute adjustments was beneficial to sound quality and loved the ability to really hone in on the perfect VTA / SRA... In practise though I settled on two approximate settings, one for my usual 70s LPs - I'd usually do my final cartridge / tonearm set-up using a handful of early 70s LPs, and then a different setting for 80s LPs. By lowering the arm height those 80s LPs can sound a lot better than if played with an arm set up for the average 1972 cut. However even then, I rarely made LP by LP adjustments, although a tiny tweak was possible and I found I could do that quite easily to find that optimum spot. To be honest, I think the small differences I'm hearing here could be down to the fact I didn't adjust arm height for the 200g UHQR... Of course, it's not just LP thickness but the cutting angle... I this regard I quite strongly disagree with the recent theories from WAM. I did know Wally Malevicz (RIP), I had dinner with him only a few weeks before his passing... 😞 I do use a some of the Wally Tools - the Wally Skater is indispensable IMHO but don't agree with everything the new WAM regime says. Simply, I can hear even minute differences in arm height. As fas as VTA goes, this obviously also links to SRA but also to the relative position of the magnet / coil assembly. Quite simply that is critical to optimise and tracking force plays a huge part here. Worth noting that a small change in tracking force will have a larger effect on SRA/VTA than adjusting arm height. That's just down to geometry: the arm being many many times longer than the cantilever... Anyway, when I changed to the Schick and subsequently the Glanz I had to accept giving up this ability, and frankly although I know it is an issue I can't be bothered with it: one has to draw a line somewhere and get on with playing records rather than endlessly fine tuning the system. Having said all that, the notion of a flat profile does sense to me. Classic got the idea from Blue Note who used it in the 50s and those records sound great. Could it be the changing 'arm height', could it be changing LP thickness at the different positions across the playing surface (not from the perspective of geometry but of resonance within the vinyl), could it be because the flatter underside mates better with the turntable platter? Who knows... Like so many things in audio, one can hear a change / difference / effect that defies or at least challenges scientific explanation. Just because it can't be explained doesn't mean it doesn't exist. I am definitely an advocate of the notion that we don't know everything. And that just because we don't understand something, it doesn't mean it doesn't exist...

@@DaveDenyer Thanks for the reply! Yes the SRA and VTA is the "same" thing just they measure the angels against different points. That were why I didn't mention VTA. (Same in that regard that altering any of them we alter the angle for the diamond and it's angle in the groove) Ok then we are two that don't actively fiddle with SRA adjustments between two LPs. I don't say that it doesn't matter and I can't hear any difference in SRA. Surely it has a sound quality impact but not that much so that I bother to compensate between different record thicknesses. Despite I could do that and return easy back to previous height on the micrometer scale. So in PRACTICE we both act as the current WAM recommendations regarding not bother adjusting SRA between playing different LPs.😉 We need to hold our horses somewhat in my opinion. Just because Blue Note releases in the 50s, sounds good doesn't mean that it IS a contribution of that they used flat record profile. (Or why do they not sound as good today as they did "in the 50s" despite better materials and equipment today..) As we know that there is SO many variables and unknowns here regarding all the production steps of making a LP. I mean we need to isolate one change and comparing that single or as few changes as possible. So when you do this video comparison we can conclude that as you say clarity vinyl has lower noise floor by having lower background noise. But the magic of that flat profile did not make that the new pressing sounded better than your test pressing despite it is most probably of the same master tape in this case (one variable somewhat removed still tape age unknown generation of master tape, were it baked and so on). The test pressing still sounded a tad better despite the flat profile and newest and better vinyl formula! (Then we have to consider stamper wear if the test pressing were maybe 1 of 10 and UHQR were noXX) Then we can start to ask us IF the flat profile has any contribution to the sound quality at all then.. 🤔 Because that we have so many unknowns and we have a hard time to determine if flat profile is beneficial at all doesn't mean that it should automatically be so, when it sounded good (?) In the 50s pressings. 🤔 For example in the 50s maybe blue note had one or many of the influencing variables in place: * Specific person that made all cuts * Specific person that made all plating * Good combination or synergy in their tube choices for their equipment (amplifier to lathe, tape machines and so on). * Relevant modifications on the above equipment including recording equipment .. and so on and on.. With that said those factors together could yield to be 100% of what really made those pressings in the 50s to sound good. And theoretical the flat profile contributed with 0% of that presiveble sound quality.😞 That we HOPE and think that it MIGHT maybe because we can't control all variables that influence sound quality to determine IF flat profile have any sound quality contribution at all. Doesn't mean that it has. Just that we don't actually really know.. But yes it will not harm anything to have a flat profile. And if all records had it then we had a variable less to "think/worry" about. 🤔😅 The only benefit that we can practically (but it is more theoretical when we don't bother today) have, is that it is flat and therefore the SRA is at the same angle true out the whole playable surface. And you could fine fine adjust for just THAT record if it is flat. So a outer Clamp or a air force one suction TT is probably needed to keep the flat surface to stay flat and no chance of wobble at all when that defeat our efforts. But maybe someone can go that extra mile if we rip/digitize the record and want the best preconditions as possible at that time. Otherwise that will not happen as we have already determine above. When we talk about rather small differences in height.👍 Sorry, I usually overcomplicating and go into details and what to learn what matters and not. Regarding getting as good sound quality as possible. And I hope I don't bored someone with my rant! Take care! 🥰

Good question: I’m relying on memory here Ian, but let’s say a good OG would be 8 compared to these. For the twenty ofd years I’ve had it the test pressing has really stood out…

Haha, no, definitely in the UK; it's raining today. ! Glad you like the review.

Hi Jomo, I haven’t heard them. They sound interesting. Thanks for putting them on my radar.

Hi Nicholas, you could well be right: certainly the "2%" I hear could possibly be down the the master tapes having aged and any compensation in the new mastering.

@@DaveDenyer I reviewed a hits set a few years ago and though it was digital, had a different issue I cannot go into here, but add the complaints on the new EXODUS set and there may be some glitches with the masters in the Marley catalog.

Glad you enjoyed the review: I bought my Bob Marley UHQRs direct from Acoustic Sounds, other titles I buy from www.thevinyladventure.com/product-category/music/format/uhqr-vinyl/

Well I trust the guys who made it. Sterling Sound wasn’t it?

Hi @voicesofvinyl, my favourite inner sleeves are by MA Recordings.

Good luck in your hunt Richard.

Nice!