Loved this video, truth! The online VC is a great resource but undoubtedly it can result in a herd mentality from time to time, with people gravitating towards certain ‘must have’ releases that might not be all they are cracked up to be, or might not be right for them. Sometimes the reverse is true and a brilliant release somehow gets overlooked (a recent example might be the live Pink Floyd Dark Side of the Moon, a wonderful companion to the original album with gorgeous bespoke artwork and posters for a bargain price, just a quality release and most of what I heard was Floyd completists missing the point and complaining it wasn’t a complete show!). Greetings from London.
I have never heard anyone claiming that " A Love Supreme: Live In Seattle" is an audiophile record. The hype around that album was that it was a live recording of Love Supreme not about the sound quality. It is one of very few live recordings of Love Supreme. It has been clear from the beginning that it is private recording by Joe Brazil at The Penthouse, Seattle, WA on October 2, 1965. And it sounds like a pirate/private recording. I often think of it as a not great recording of Elvin Jones drumming with the rest of the band in the background.
The thing i love about Random access memories is that some tracks are recorded analog and some digitally and you can definitely hear it. Imo its a great sounding record and one that you can use to demonstrate the difference between analog and digital recordings. (Spoiler....the analog sounds better)
Where in Canada are you located? Calgary or something? You often talk down records in Canada, but being from Toronto and collecting all over the world, I highly rate Toronto for record stores, digging and prices (compared to here in Australia).
Hi, thanks for the video. Just my opinion and not meant harshly but you are not really talking about strictly "audiophile sound" here. There are several reasons why you are not liking these records. Sure sound is one, but with the Ellington for example it is the music you are talking about, not sound. That album is known for great sound quality for a very good reason. Where it was recorded, how it was recorded etc. Its a staple and poster child for what a great "sounding" jazz album is. If one doesn't like the music thats a completely different ball of wax. My suggestion to anyone buying any recording: It literally costs zero to stream most albums on youtube in order to find out if you actually like the music. Because why even think about purchasing an album if you haven't even heard it. Especially a $50.00-$100.00 investment. As far as Pet Sounds (or any feedback as far as an lp) stay far away from places like Reditt, Discogs, random Instgram posts from random folks that may or may not know what they are talking about. No, Pet Sounds was not a well recorded album. Again, one needs to first listen to the album to see if they even like the album. It isn't for everyone and the way the album was recorded is not going to sound like a modern recording. Thank goodness. What Pet Sounds in mono is suppose to do is to take you on a teenage dream of a kid in his teens on the edge of leaving home and leaving childhoos behind. A dreamscape. All the subtlety of that and the instrumentation is found in the mono. The stereo is a "better" representation of the fidelity but also takes the dreamy state and nuances of the mix away. We are not really meant to hear those reindeer bells and banjo stick out, they are placed in the mono as to be in the back of our minds? (make sense?) Two different mixes. Its never going to sound like a well recorded James Taylor album. Nor should it. What Chad at AS did was to get the best fidelity possible out of the mono and stereo version. But again, one needs to stream this album to even see if they like the music. Cant go with hype. With Pet Sounds what we are talking about is differences in the mix. Its ok to like the stereo mix best. But that is not the way Brian Wilson intended the album to be heard and for the reasons I mentioned. Knowing what an artist was going for can help us understand the sound we are listening to and for. Ill stop with those two examples. But yeah you are talking about many different things here. First if you do not like the music who cares about sound quality, second it is the mix you are speaking of and then of course you are referencing sound quality aspects. My suggestion when choosing an album: Obviously listen to the album first. Stream it. Buy a cheap old cd of it. Listen in some form before throwing down big money. Its music first. Secondly, Id suggest if there is more than one mix (as with mid 50s to mid to late 60s recordings) find out which mix you like better. Or has a history of sounding best. What do I mean by best mix? Which mix serves the music best. Is one mix distorted or too hot with an instrument with the mono? Does the mix sound all wonky with instruments panned too hard and weirdly placed with the stereo? etc etc. Compare. Again, youtube will many times have both mono and stereo mixes. Thirdly, what do you mean by "sounds bad" or "sounds better"? And compared to what? May be that the recording itself just sounds that way. No mastering is going to save an brickwall mixed Oasis album. Again, do you like the music of say Oasis? Well, it is only going to sound so good. It becomes a relative situation then. Which polished turd sounds best scenario. Thanks again for the video! Don't mean to come across as a stuffy audiophile, just one dudes opinion and meant to be helpful in yours and others journey.
Yes I agree with nearly all of your post. My mantra is "it's not about the format, it's about the music". The "vinyl is cool" obsession is at its peak now. To the extent that some people are forgetting about the music itself and spending money on LPs which are NOT rare, nor are they necessarily great albums. I'll refrain from giving examples. I love Duke Ellington by the way. I have about 60 albums, maybe 30% vinyl, 70% CD?
$18 version of Mastodon's 'Crack the Skye' 🥲 Now I know I need the double 45 mastered at Bernie Grundman Studios. Too bad it's a sold-out limited edition and going for like $200 on the second-hand market.
Simply Red... the first three albums ever released on any format sound great but every album after that sounds very mediocre. Deacon Blue... on cassette their albums sound great. On vinyl or CD they sound really harsh with too much top end. An artist called Electronic... their first album sounds good on headphones but on speakers you cannot hear the bass at all. The band Texas... their first album is boosted in the mid range too much which sounds harsh. I corrected this by cutting the mid with the tone controls and it sounds much better.
All "Pet Sounds" are the wrong record mate. It's a seriously dated album that a few of us noticed (about 40 years ago!) is about as hip as Benny Goodman was in 1995. Same maths. It's not that it's 60 years old, it's just that it's so twee, so naff. There are many many records from the 30s and 40s that can really put things into perspective. They still sound amazing. Never forget: It's not about the format, it's about the music.
Loved this video, truth! The online VC is a great resource but undoubtedly it can result in a herd mentality from time to time, with people gravitating towards certain ‘must have’ releases that might not be all they are cracked up to be, or might not be right for them. Sometimes the reverse is true and a brilliant release somehow gets overlooked (a recent example might be the live Pink Floyd Dark Side of the Moon, a wonderful companion to the original album with gorgeous bespoke artwork and posters for a bargain price, just a quality release and most of what I heard was Floyd completists missing the point and complaining it wasn’t a complete show!). Greetings from London.
I have never heard anyone claiming that " A Love Supreme: Live In Seattle" is an audiophile record. The hype around that album was that it was a live recording of Love Supreme not about the sound quality. It is one of very few live recordings of Love Supreme. It has been clear from the beginning that it is private recording by Joe Brazil at The Penthouse, Seattle, WA on October 2, 1965. And it sounds like a pirate/private recording. I often think of it as a not great recording of Elvin Jones drumming with the rest of the band in the background.
Really great video - my favourite of yours. Laughed with agreement all the way through
Thanks! Really appreciate it, Jason!
The thing i love about Random access memories is that some tracks are recorded analog and some digitally and you can definitely hear it.
Imo its a great sounding record and one that you can use to demonstrate the difference between analog and digital recordings.
(Spoiler....the analog sounds better)
Agreed. I own the 2013 pressing, the first one I believe, and it sounds really great.
Where in Canada are you located? Calgary or something? You often talk down records in Canada, but being from Toronto and collecting all over the world, I highly rate Toronto for record stores, digging and prices (compared to here in Australia).
Hi, thanks for the video. Just my opinion and not meant harshly but you are not really talking about strictly "audiophile sound" here. There are several reasons why you are not liking these records. Sure sound is one, but with the Ellington for example it is the music you are talking about, not sound. That album is known for great sound quality for a very good reason. Where it was recorded, how it was recorded etc. Its a staple and poster child for what a great "sounding" jazz album is. If one doesn't like the music thats a completely different ball of wax.
My suggestion to anyone buying any recording:
It literally costs zero to stream most albums on youtube in order to find out if you actually like the music. Because why even think about purchasing an album if you haven't even heard it. Especially a $50.00-$100.00 investment.
As far as Pet Sounds (or any feedback as far as an lp) stay far away from places like Reditt, Discogs, random Instgram posts from random folks that may or may not know what they are talking about. No, Pet Sounds was not a well recorded album. Again, one needs to first listen to the album to see if they even like the album. It isn't for everyone and the way the album was recorded is not going to sound like a modern recording. Thank goodness.
What Pet Sounds in mono is suppose to do is to take you on a teenage dream of a kid in his teens on the edge of leaving home and leaving childhoos behind. A dreamscape. All the subtlety of that and the instrumentation is found in the mono. The stereo is a "better" representation of the fidelity but also takes the dreamy state and nuances of the mix away. We are not really meant to hear those reindeer bells and banjo stick out, they are placed in the mono as to be in the back of our minds? (make sense?) Two different mixes. Its never going to sound like a well recorded James Taylor album. Nor should it. What Chad at AS did was to get the best fidelity possible out of the mono and stereo version. But again, one needs to stream this album to even see if they like the music. Cant go with hype.
With Pet Sounds what we are talking about is differences in the mix. Its ok to like the stereo mix best. But that is not the way Brian Wilson intended the album to be heard and for the reasons I mentioned. Knowing what an artist was going for can help us understand the sound we are listening to and for.
Ill stop with those two examples. But yeah you are talking about many different things here. First if you do not like the music who cares about sound quality, second it is the mix you are speaking of and then of course you are referencing sound quality aspects.
My suggestion when choosing an album:
Obviously listen to the album first. Stream it. Buy a cheap old cd of it. Listen in some form before throwing down big money.
Its music first.
Secondly, Id suggest if there is more than one mix (as with mid 50s to mid to late 60s recordings) find out which mix you like better. Or has a history of sounding best.
What do I mean by best mix?
Which mix serves the music best. Is one mix distorted or too hot with an instrument with the mono? Does the mix sound all wonky with instruments panned too hard and weirdly placed with the stereo? etc etc. Compare.
Again, youtube will many times have both mono and stereo mixes.
Thirdly, what do you mean by "sounds bad" or "sounds better"? And compared to what? May be that the recording itself just sounds that way. No mastering is going to save an brickwall mixed Oasis album. Again, do you like the music of say Oasis? Well, it is only going to sound so good. It becomes a relative situation then. Which polished turd sounds best scenario.
Thanks again for the video! Don't mean to come across as a stuffy audiophile, just one dudes opinion and meant to be helpful in yours and others journey.
Yes I agree with nearly all of your post.
My mantra is "it's not about the format, it's about the music".
The "vinyl is cool" obsession is at its peak now. To the extent that some people are forgetting about the music itself and spending money on LPs which are NOT rare, nor are they necessarily great albums. I'll refrain from giving examples.
I love Duke Ellington by the way. I have about 60 albums, maybe 30% vinyl, 70% CD?
$18 version of Mastodon's 'Crack the Skye' 🥲 Now I know I need the double 45 mastered at Bernie Grundman Studios. Too bad it's a sold-out limited edition and going for like $200 on the second-hand market.
Yes! I have a standard press of CTS and its pretty mediocre - would love to stumble upon the double 45!
This is obviously very personal and depending on your setup.
Simply Red... the first three albums ever released on any format sound great but every album after that sounds very mediocre. Deacon Blue... on cassette their albums sound great. On vinyl or CD they sound really harsh with too much top end. An artist called Electronic... their first album sounds good on headphones but on speakers you cannot hear the bass at all. The band Texas... their first album is boosted in the mid range too much which sounds harsh. I corrected this by cutting the mid with the tone controls and it sounds much better.
I'l have to check out those early Simply Red albums! They seem to be quite cheap!
@@howtovinyl The albums that sound really good are "Men and women", "Picture Book", and " A new flame"
you bought the wrong Pet Sounds, pal.
Mono! He needs mono!
All "Pet Sounds" are the wrong record mate.
It's a seriously dated album that a few of us noticed (about 40 years ago!) is about as hip as Benny Goodman was in 1995. Same maths. It's not that it's 60 years old, it's just that it's so twee, so naff.
There are many many records from the 30s and 40s that can really put things into perspective. They still sound amazing.
Never forget: It's not about the format, it's about the music.