Vote

So do a review explosion and clue us in to some of your most recent faves.
AND do a separate column with tasty tidbits like an RL Led Zeppelin II recommendation of a timtom London Calling or the TML Sticky Fingers. You get the idea (even though I know you are busy...)

Paul

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YHimia_Fxzs

James, Dublin, Ireland

I just don't pay above the odds for an LP. I have never lost sight of the fact that it is ONLY an LP NOT the Holy Grail!

In saying that if I did pay the mad prices being asked for an LP, my collection would be much more manageable.

I love reading all your reviews of all the different types of vinyl product available... 200gram audiophile, half-speed, half-speed 45rpm, One-Steps, the list is endless.

Keep up the good work Michael, you are one of the good guys in this crazy world we live in.

James, Dublin, Ireland

#2 appears to be MOFI as vocals are forward and midrange instruments better definition and clarity.
#1 has a softer pure sound vocal, mid is not as detailed, more background.
What better to stimulate the mind on a mid winter day!

Couple of comments on each:

File 1:
- Sounds like a high frequency limiter has been used to remove some tape noise
- CK's voice is not as transparent (prob because of the above) - this is not a great recording to begin with anyway
- The bass is slightly bloated to my taste, especially the drums starting at 3m or so

File 2:
- Louder than '1' by about 0.5dB (measured using MusicScope)
- Sounds like no high frequency limiting so slightly more tape noise
- CK's voice is more complete and more charming than '1', probably because of the higher freq output
- Bass is more controlled, especially the drums starting at around 3m

Overall, I think I prefer File 2.

I got a relatively bad MoFi repress recently. Side B had scratches which you could clearly see, which I think must have been the result of handling with a dirty glove. Very disappointing but I kept the record because I don't have another vinyl copy.

My first reaction is that I like File 2 better. First impressions:

file 1
guitar is tinkly, like a toy; WTF is that?
vocal ok
piano ok
bass ok
drum goes "poomph" like a fart
background vocals good separation
flute ok

file 2:
guitar still tinkly but now has tone and it's being played by fingers
vocal now belongs to a human
piano not as lost in the mix
i can now almost count the number of background singers
drums still go "poomph"
bass guitar about the same
i think that kick drum is deeper, now?
flute now back somewhat in the mix

Looking over my responses, File 2 points to higher definition. I'm not sure Tapestry is a great recording to begin with. Both versions have a very hifi quality about them. The guitar and drums remain pretty nasty overall.

To my ears off my laptop speakers I prefer file 2. File 1 seemed too bright and edgy for my taste.

As to the reviewing of MOFI titles and equipment; I would think it would be in their best interest to get reviews from AP.

I am listening of my desktop rig which consists of shitty JBL LSR308 monitors through a Asus Xonar Soundcard.

I don't think the production behind this record sounds good in general, I have never listened to it but based on those two files it doesn't impress. That could be my shitty desktop rig.

Knowing how MOFI master these days Track 2 would be my guess. I prefer track 2 also. It's got a little more drive than the first track. Everything is pushed a little further forward which during a quick A/B makes it seem more exciting and engaging. The drums have more kick and the guitar has more bite. Unsure if it would be fatiguing on a proper hi-fi rig. I don't think it would but I'd have to hear it for myself.

I hear more attack and emediacy on fil-2.
If pushed i would go for file-2.

Best regards Asger

So, do I get this right? "thanks to a reader's generosity" you obtained a copy of this album, and then you decided to make an illegal copy of track 2 (side 1), and now you are making it available for download on the internet. You've made it pretty clear you did not ask/get permission to do this. In most western countries, this is copyright infringement, if you ask me.

Though I find this kind of comparison interesting - I compared it to my non-audiophile Sony release which I bought from Aldi, Belgium, last Christmas - you're stepping on toes when you do this without permission. Just my 2 cents.

Although file 1 is probably the MOFI One Step version.

File 1 has absolutely zero groove noise/tape hiss which is nice to have but not essential. On the other hand the stereo mix in this recording is a bit "in your face" to my ears, and there is so much attention given to resolution and detail in file 1 that the recording ends up sounding more processed, albeit the overall timbre being more correct.

File 2 has more tape hiss which is probably how the original tape sounds like. Everything sounds more integrated and harmonious, but also more polite, which is usually my preference but not in this case. Carole's vocals however sound a bit more forward and the piano is better centered, both things sound more correct to me and ultimately make me prefer file 2.

I'd live happily with both.

Mr. Fremer, your posts have been increasingly sloppy over the past few years. Numerous corrections. This last one is outright embarrassing. You did not remember you received plenty more MoFi promotional copies? Seriously. I am giving you a pass on senility, for now. What a fiasco.