Steve - you are keeping so busy with these interviews. Really good job. I love listing to George on these sessions.

George is now the most accessible technical subject matter expert in the VC, excellent roundtable here...always learn from these!

Thank you Steve and George! Great job look forward to next week w Discogs!! See you then I hope.

Great conservation! I learned a lot here. It is good to know both digital and analog can sound great. I loved hearing about the technical history of the many recordings you discussed. Thanks

There is nothing wrong with vinyl cut from digital. Infact, it often sounds better than its digital counterpart due to superior mastering. Saying it is pointless playing an LP cut from digital is a bit like saying playing a CD is pointless if there is an AAA alternative.

Analogues dynamic range is "misrepresented" because they stop the measurements at the noise floor, which the human ear can cipher out noise easily as long as it's not too much noise (aka Morris code) ! You measure analogue below the noise floor, and the dynamic range and frequency response is actually much higher! Ever heard the term " the magic of vinyl?" That means even with the noise (as long as it's not overwhelming )your hearing more information!

I always learn tons from George, the perspective of having to simulate tape characteristics with the advent of Digital machines is really intriguing. I suspect a lot of criticism of SOME early digital recordings (harshness / shrillness etc) was coming from engineers dealing with that Learning curve. Great stream as always Steve;)

Excellent discussion. Steve and George are the voice of reason here. I don't care if the source is analog or digital, as long as it sounds great. Magnetic tape isn't going to last forever. Priceless recordings have to be preserved digitally by great mastering engineers before they deteriorate. And with rare exceptions, the vast amount of music beginning several decades ago, are all digital recordings. I have heard absolutely horrid vinyl reissues mastered from magnetic tape. Today's high bit rate digital recording is not the 1980's 16 bit digital recording.

Another great show Steve. Always great when George is on too. I recently bought an OG UK Neil Young Harvest (that sounds amazing and is VG++ on both the vinyl and the sleeves) after spending months not being able to pull the trigger on the new AAA cut. £25 for the OG (done when the tapes were new) and £50 for the new one (50 year old tapes). Glad i opted for the OG. The age of the tapes does make me wonder about some o f the new cuts, no matter how well they are done.

George is a legend in the VC lunchbox and it’s always great to hear his input and more so, his realistic views. Great work you guys.

George is truly a treasure! Absolutely love hearing his insights

Also, the other day I dragged out the CBS Mastersound 1/2 speed pressing of Abraxas, and my friend it sounded frigg'n *AWESOME!* I compared it to the recent pressing that I believe is from Chris Bellman, the the CBS blew it outta the stratosphere. It sounded SO damn good, I'm not thinking at all that I am missing out on the MFSL 1-Step. Extremely vibrant and dynamic! I think that one and the Wish You Were Here that you showed are the two most highly praised of that series.

The idea of AAA or AAAA (for vinyl) or AAD or AAAD (for digital) was that it was supposed to preserve the analog sound as much as possible, depending on the format. With the half-speed mastering put into the mix, not to mention the condition of the analog tapes, you'll have to pick this one up in the next video.

From a sound perspective digital can be just as good as analog if done properly. However, AAA especially when master tapes are used will always sell better from a marketing perspective. Because there is no transfer and there is no questioning wether the digital transfer was done properly. Mofi kind of excluded from this since we know they are doing DSD 256.

Oh, just to add too... Most of the MOV pressings are from a digital source, but usually they do an F'n GREAT job!

A few of LPs I have from digital sources that sound great to me are 'Tommy' and 'Brothers in Arms' both done at half speed by Miles Showell, also Aqualung and In The Court of the Crimson King remaster/remixes by Steven Wilson!

hey Steve, just a word about discogs that was probably just semantics. afik, discogs itself doesn't sell records, records are sold ON discogs. it's a minor quibble but one that could lead further misunderstanding about those who are always complaining about discogs. when I first discovered them, it was a goldmine find but then they mushroomed to unfathomable size and available detail. what a JOB those guys must have. today's episode here was invaluable and I really like the one on one format vs six panel members, not that those are totally undesirable, they are and useful too but 1-on-1 is primo. ...hifitommy

Please start having your guests name each album and not just wave them around if you're gonna be on platforms like Spotify.

BTW- check out the 6 part TV series “McCartney 3,2,1” for some deep introspection of the Beatles work.

I have LONG said....hold us (engineers) accountable for RESULTS....don't prescribe technique/tools. At the end of the day--it's really all we listeners want--the best sound we can get. But, when the listener ties the engineer/label's hands--by insisting on specific process details, that's not in service of getting better sound. Anyway-enjoyed the discussion. Next up, let me suggest "why do audiophiles hate DMM so much, but love 'One Step'?"

Hi Steve, good informative show today, enjoyed it! Mofi rehashing aside, Im glad to see your stance has changed concerning 4XDSD vs AAA. I can remember back when this was not the case. 4XDSD does not taint the sound, thus be it proclaimed, Amen. However… Super important point that Mr Borden made at the last though when asked: “…has digital has gotten so good that we basically cannot hear the difference between digital and the source…?” It only possible to “hear” digital when its done poorly (low sample rates, bad converters, poor initial/archived sources etc) BUT that is not digital one is hearing it is caused artifacts and poor EXECUTION of digital. Blame the execution, poor quality machines and inept operators, not digital. Yet folks are too ready to blame “digital” for what they are hearing that is bad. Also, something that stuck in my head with the streams I was a part of is: What is done in the mastering weighs much more into it than whether its AAA or digital transfers. And how it was recorded even more so. That last part is important to latch on to. As for the CBS Half-Speeds. A little history is helpful. Maybe you know this... But this CBS campaign started because they saw MFSL, Nautilus and other audiophile labels starting up. They wanted to jump on the bandwagon playing “audiophile”. Unfortunately, they didnt do a good job and mucked up the process by not compensating for the RIAA eq curve. So, for the most part, the eq is really weird. Certain pressings, such as "Wish You Were Here" came corrected. But really even that one is good but not great compared to the best UK original. Thankfully Toto Africa originals are still pretty cheap and plentiful, might want to buy one and A/B it. My advice is to pick up a TML Doug Sax and I think you will be surprised at what that lp is suppose to sound like. I think what fools us into thinking “Well, this sounds great” concerning albums such as Africa and say Tracy Chapman’s first album is because the album itself was well recorded. Same thing with INXS “Kick”. Heart “Dreamboat Annie” sounds great firstly because it was recorded great. Its kind of the DSOTM “effect”. One has to really work to find a horrible sounding version of DSOTM. Same thing with other well recorded albums mentioned above. How something is recorded before mastering matters even more so than the mastering, again as your guest has stated many times. The actual recording of the album plays the biggest part. Best of the best of the best… ……it then becomes a situation where we don’t know how short a version comes until we compare it to the best. “As long as it sounds good it doesn’t matter” Well, that can be true but.. It may sound eletist but sometimes you dont know until you’ve compared. And more importantly how to listen and what to listen for. “ Good” can be revealed as “ok” if one knows what to listen for. It isn’t something made up that many of the audiophile versions do not sound as good as originals or older reissues. Its not simply the Mofigate effect (though I agree many are returning Mofis out of principle) If one knows what to listen to then the sound of the Mofi Ronstadts, Little Feat’s, The Cars first becomes very apparent they are lacking. What happened with these? I dont know. But the masterings sucks grapes. The Muddy Waters Mofi One Step simply is inferior sounding to the AP as far as stereo goes. But here is the thing: They both are inferior to the mono orginal or even the Chess mono reissue. Goes back to: “What are you listening for, comparing to and how?” And also, who cares about fidelity if the mix is inferior? Though I am exaggerating a bit here, the stereo mix of Folksinger isnt bad just somewhat inferior to the mono. But the point is where we foundationally start in the process of listening is important. The Monk is really nice, I agree. As are a few of the Mofi’s. So its not about knocking Mofi. And that goes for all the audiophile labels imo. Case by case as one wise man said. I just simply go back to if ones foundation in what and how they are listening is off then the journey will usually be off and end up with inferior pressings. I know, no one likes to hear all this though. I get it. That is a part of this hobby though, learning and evolving to understand and applying new knowledge and change. Think about it. Why are we purchasing all these reissues if we are not searching for the best or at least as good? If that doesn’t matter then thats ok. Doesn’t make much sense to spend $60.00-$150.00 though if “ok” is good enough. Think about this also perhaps… We know that the Tracy Chapman album was recorded well. That is really what we mean when we say “It sounds fantastic” concerning that album. My question is this: What if a good mastering engineer could remaster this album and use conventional cutting instead of DMM? Think about how much even better it might could sound. Point? Its a well recorded album that as good as it sounds, may actually have potentional to sound even better than the DMM. Isnt that what we want in a reissue? Or at least AS good as the original? Just a thought. And I agree, just do a great mastering job on the Chapman in a nice gatefold. Save the lumber and fancy boxes.

I'm very torn about the upcoming Candy-O album. I also have a 1st US pressing which sounds awesome, but the great job that Rhino did with the first album is VERY tempting!

No way a 16 bit Redbook CD sound as good as the "Ludwig" LP cut! Although I can't truly say since I haven't heard the 84 CD! In the early 80s CDs had no depth to them (although they have improved significantly since then I must admit, improved DAC technology)!😊

I believe the 2014 Beatles Red and Blue came from the original compilation tapes.

Hi Steve, I am in the UK and would have loved to join in live yesterday but not possible. I just want to say that I don't think neither you nor Mazzy can lay claim to the term Blobby Bass. Surely it belongs to MISTER BLOBBY who was a star TV character here in the UK a few years ago. Please look him up and beware because Mr Blobby can get very angry! Great show by you and George and really interesting. A couple of thoughts about your comments on Beatles CDs. My cds of Abbey Road and Magical Mystery Tour (87) have SPARS codes AAD and my Rubber Soul and Revolver (92?) have ADD codes. Please let George know that I have a -5/-5 Rubber Soul and it does sound fantastic. I have absolutely no idea where I got it. Probably in a job lot at an auction when I wanted something else. Please tell George that I will look out for a copy for him.

I remember the one step Abraxas selling out in pre-orders

Miles has said in interviews (I am sure with you) that he does not use DSD because he cannot use plugins and work on the digital copy in the same way as George says here.

GREAT discussion. Thank you! Mr. Pete-------> aging hippie

A much needed video for the “all digital is bad” crowd out there

If you know you know A vs D is all about how resolving your system and ears are. If you have a great analog system, the difference is blatantly obvious. If you don't, consider yourself lucky......almost,end of story. The latest digital is slowly creeping into analog spaciousness. Not quite there yet, but getting earily close IMHO.

you should've had Fremer on this show Steve

I sold a -5 -5 mono ‘Rubber Soul’ Hazel Yardwood cut in very good+ condition for $284. MR Stickermania

Sony made a pro Beta format (called SP) VHS did not offer, but until HiFi FM sound came to both formats, Beta had the poorer analog magnetic sound stripe on its tape. when both companies tried to offer better picture quality versions of their formats, the movie studios did not look it and they did not take off, but Super VHS (aka S-VHS) did give us the innovation of S-Video plugs that long outlasted the tapes and Extended Definition Beta (aka ED Beta) was so good, Sony had to pull the plug because TV stations bought up the cheaper consumer,er tapes and machines. Sony lost some big money when the higher priced pro versions did not sell. They also both tried HD and digital video, but that did not save them either. VHS became the standard because when Sony would not license Beta, they thought they could take over the home video market the way they already had the professional TV market, but were very wrong. Funny how Sony's U-Matic is still out there in parts and places. Though I love AJA and NIGHTFLY, CASINO ROYALE (1967) is still being used to test systems for studio recordings and live venues after all these years too, believe it or not.

AAA is preferable for most vintage recordings - i.e. from the analog era, because all other things being equal it's more faithful to the source recording, in theory at least. Ultimately I'm more interested in the quality of the recording, mixing and mastering (and with vinyl LPs, vinyl quality and pressing quality) than I am in whether it's analog sourced or digitally sourced. Let's face it: there were plenty in the VC who were raving effusively about the quality of MOFI One Steps before they found out about the DSD step.

Yes, it matters A LOT.

Digital from the 80s and early nineties can sound very good. But something happened after that and now you cant finds digital recording or even an analog recording that sounds decent. We have been going in the wrong direction for many years now. Todays recordings and remasters have the tonal color. Clarity. Soundstage focus. And separation of instruments are not there like they used to be. I buy older records and early CDs if I want that magic back.

stereo beatle analog box yes and led zeppelin (please, chad and Jimmy Page)! who and stones again too please!

Are you Canadian?

Beatles Beatles Beatles…”we want AAA!!” Playing the devil’s advocate here a bit….(I admit I want AAA stereo Beatles also) Are we going to go backwards now and betray what we have learned from the Mofi debacle and including this stream? If the digital transfers are done in hi-rez and done correctly then what is really the issue with the stereo Beatles boxset? Have we not learned that digital transfers done right are not the issue? Perhaps it is the eq and other odd choices done on the Beatles stereo remasters that are the problem. Blaming digital is a tough habit to break. Something to ponder. Some of the ‘87 Beatles are the best digital versions. But again, Id have to ask the person that states they are not: “What is it you are listening for, in comparison to and how?” Sure the mono CDs of the 1987 releases were transfered from the mastertapes with misaligned stereo machines. The azimuth issues (especially on PPM album) resulting from that method are not too hot sounding. Also, PPM and WTB cds, literally, have no bass frequencies. Basically you end up with phase issues on the '87 CD. That is the poor sound. Not the converters or AAD etc. so much. Though this was the early years of digital so that could play into the lesser sound quality. But its really that warbly/phasey sound of the bad transfer method that we are hearing that is the issue. Remixes of Help and Rubber Soul by George Martin suck eggs with wonky EQ. Luckily the correct Canadian cds have the original mix and sound fab-tastic. Etc etc etc we could go down the line as to which are the good, the ok and the ugly as far as the ‘87 cds. The point? Opinions are subjective, but objective foundational sound quality parameters that do not change and evidence of bad sound are not. However, MMT and Peppers ‘87’s are definitive for stereo on cd.

It is the lie, and the DSD vs Analogue is a red herring IMHO. I personally drove my records back to Sebastopol and got my $$ back on the spot. Steve is right that the lie was in the management and not the engineers. In terms of “what more do you want them to do”? Get rid of Jim Davis, or he can sell the company to someone else for pennies on the dollar, the same way he bought it.😜

Honest question; what’s the point of buying digitally sourced music on an analogue format? Wouldn’t it be cheaper/more efficient to simply stream, or buy a CD in that case? I personally don’t see the point in buying vinyl cut from digital files, though I think that digital recordings can sound fantastic. Vinyl is inferior to other mediums in so many ways that I don’t see the point in buying it if you don’t care about the source. I collect vinyl because I genuinely love the sound of quality analogue recordings and I’m willing to put up with all the shortcomings for that reason. Without the analogue component I don’t see the point.

jimmy page great musician who doesn't know what sounds good on vinyl

George Borden is such a cool guy . He knows a shitload about what he's talking about but still doesn't feel the need to behave like an a-hole

Digital is essential for state of the art vinyl sourced from analog recordings. The AAA myth is a destructive force in audiophile vinyl and needs to be put to rest so we can get better sounding records.

George, why oh why did you have to contaminate our analogue vinyl with digital? Wasn’t CD, SACD, DVD-A and streaming enough for you? And, MoFi sounded unreal and lacked emotion before they were outed.

Being a tape operator at a studio does not make you "part of the Beatles"

AAA only for me at this point on vinyl. Digital on vinyl is kinda stupid and defeating the point let’s be honest.