Zeppelin Vinyl Reissues

[psus2h]

Dude. Zep fkn rocks. These should be fun to pick up and worth the cost.

[filthyrich]

Cant we just get that absurd road box reissued by the company that went out of business (Vague, I know)  It was 45 RPMs, all single sided LPs.  Allegedly they sound incredible. 

 

Found it. Apparently all you have to do is sell your car and it's yours!

http://collectorsfrenzy.com/details/350911305896/Led_Zeppelin__Classic_Records_45rpm_200g_in_Original_Box_Sealed

[RowBearToe]

wow, that's outrageous

[mrrom92]

Well, not as outrageous, but classic records also did standard 33 rpm issues around the same time and they're about as close to the master tapes as you'll get besides the road case set.

(this isn't exactly the best thing for Zeppelin by the way)

The classic records 33 of of LZIII is stellar and probably the best one of the whole bunch. Highest recommendations. 1 and iv are also very good but 1st pressings are very close if not just as good or better. The only way to hear II is with the RL but it's not exactly what is on the tape, if you want that, the classic will serve you well.

There is NO reason whatsoever to have zeppelin records cut from digital intermediates. Nobody ever grew up listening to digitally processed Zeppelin, and neither should you.

[caninesapien]

I picked up a pretty nice copy of Animals back in the '90s for about $8. Not the quietest record ever, but considering how tough it is to find now, I'll take it. 

 

Our store actually gets Floyd in fairly regularly... I snagged Meddle and Momentary Lapse there, but Animals, Final Cut, Ummagumma, and More also come in from time to time (along with the big 3). Piper is still pretty rare. Of course, finding a super-clean copy is always the trick... But there ARE lots of copies out there, so find a good used record store and check back often.

 

Is Animals that hard to find? I see it all the time. I have an early press, very very clean, cost me about £12.

[mcpherson123]

Is Animals that hard to find? I see it all the time. I have an early press, very very clean, cost me about £12.

Maybe in NC, its hard to come across a copy of Animals but in Chicago, out of the 7 biggest independent record stores in the area, its not difficult on any given day.

 

Not to mention eBay. I haven't looked in a while but I'm sure its obtainable.

[hezagenius]

Fuck me.  I guess it shouldn't be a surprise, but I was holding out hope.

 

http://www.analogplanet.com/content/communication-breakdown-led-zep-catalog-cut-digital

[AlexH.]

Again, it will sound the same, you will never know, to my knowledge there's never been a double-blind test that has conclusively found that anyone can hear the difference between an analog and digital source. That article calls it a "travesty". Jesus Christ. These reissues are being overseen by Page, pressed at Pallas, coming on the heels of the high standards set by The Beatles' catalog reissues, post-"loudness war" awareness, with the eyes of every insufferable audiophile message board on them. I think they'll sound okay.

 

This is why labels should just never divulge any technical specs, because nerds will always find a way to complain about things they can't perceive.

[mcpherson123]

I still believe that the process of transferring the original tapes to digital will produce a loss. Scientifically, isn't that an inevitability? The problem is that even for $24.99 we should be getting a product that is the authentic article. Maybe I can't hear the difference. Maybe I can. Either way, when you are cutting vinyl, only the original masters should be used. Whether they are digital or analog. Anything else is just cheap corner cut. Its very sad that they did not find it cost effective to cut from tape. They've got CEO's to overpay.

 

 

This is why labels should just never divulge any technical specs, because nerds will always find a way to complain about things they can't perceive.

 

I could not possibly disagree with you more. We should always know. We are the consumers forking over the money. Without us they have nothing. If a record is cut from a CD, I'm not buying it. And I should be given the knowledge to make that informed decision to vote with my money. Its about the integrity of business practices and the integrity of the product.

[mrrom92]

I still believe that the process of transferring the original tapes to digital will produce a loss. Scientifically, isn't that an inevitability? The problem is that even for $24.99 we should be getting a product that is the authentic article. Maybe I can't hear the difference. Maybe I can. Either way, when you are cutting vinyl, only the original masters should be used. Whether they are digital or analog. Anything else is just cheap corner cut. Its very sad that they did not find it cost effective to cut from tape. They've got CEO's to overpay.

I could not possibly disagree with you more. We should always know. We are the consumers forking over the money. Without us they have nothing. If a record is cut from a CD, I'm not buying it. And I should be given the knowledge to make that informed decision to vote with my money. Its about the integrity of business practices and the integrity of the product.

This, all of this times a million.

Raise your standards folks.

[mcpherson123]

^ Thank you!

[caninesapien]

Still waiting for a vinyl release of How The West Was Won.

[russtcb]

Still waiting for a vinyl release of How The West Was Won.

 

Me too!

 

I would love for How The West Was Won and Is There Anybody Out There (Floyd) to see vinyl releases eventually.

[caninesapien]

Me too!

 

I would love for How The West Was Won and Is There Anybody Out There (Floyd) to see vinyl releases eventually.

Same with Is There Anybody Out There? I have the CD and have seen an unofficial picture disc version but I think it's just one of the CDs instead of the total show.

 

Just trying to find more information on any boots that contain the How The West Was Won stuff, but looks like there are just audience tapes at the moment. So annoying - I reckon the version of Dazed and Confused on there is the definitive performance. Plus the version of Immigrant Song is so fucking heavy!

[tonyfranciosa]

I still believe that the process of transferring the original tapes to digital will produce a loss. Scientifically, isn't that an inevitability? The problem is that even for $24.99 we should be getting a product that is the authentic article. Maybe I can't hear the difference. Maybe I can. Either way, when you are cutting vinyl, only the original masters should be used. Whether they are digital or analog. Anything else is just cheap corner cut. Its very sad that they did not find it cost effective to cut from tape. They've got CEO's to overpay.

 

 

 

I could not possibly disagree with you more. We should always know. We are the consumers forking over the money. Without us they have nothing. If a record is cut from a CD, I'm not buying it. And I should be given the knowledge to make that informed decision to vote with my money. Its about the integrity of business practices and the integrity of the product.

 

Digital transfer does not equal being cut from a CD though. This isn't Plain Recordings we're talking about.

 

An analog recording transferred to digital domain would in theory be an identical copy. And wouldn't other pieces of equipment be introduced into the chain of analog transfer to vinyl that might alter the sound? You can't just run the tape and press the record.

 

Some people claim that's exactly what happened on the Classic Records pressings of the Zeppelin catalog and a lot folks find them inferior to original pressings (which are also analog, but eq'ed much better).

 

The Stone ABCKO box from a few years ago was digital and it's one of the best sounding sets of music I own. I'm cautiously optimistic that these Zeppelin records will sound very good.

[bobfrombob]

It's going to become more and more rare for music to be reissued from original analog tapes. I don't know anything about the Zeppelin masters but the first album is way over 40 years old.  If that tape hasn't been stored in museum-quality conditions all that time, it's condition would be highly suspect. 

[mcpherson123]

Digital transfer does not equal being cut from a CD though. This isn't Plain Recordings we're talking about.

 

An analog recording transferred to digital domain would in theory be an identical copy. And wouldn't other pieces of equipment be introduced into the chain of analog transfer to vinyl that might alter the sound? You can't just run the tape and press the record.

 

Some people claim that's exactly what happened on the Classic Records pressings of the Zeppelin catalog and a lot folks find them inferior to original pressings (which are also analog, but eq'ed much better).

 

The Stone ABCKO box from a few years ago was digital and it's one of the best sounding sets of music I own. I'm cautiously optimistic that these Zeppelin records will sound very good.

Of course there is other equipment. I'm not a dunce. The point is that the analog rendering of the sound still travels through analog channels. Will there be alterations due to equipment? I'm sure of it. The point is that the original master would have been used to create the lacquer which would be the closest you can get to the original sounds.

 

I don't believe that "An analog recording transferred to digital domain would in theory be an identical copy." How would that be possible? If you have some information or a link to a study that proves this, please feel free to share.

 

There is frequency loss when transferring from one format to another let alone one separate audio frequency domain to another. The point is that this transfer to digital provides an additional buffer from the original tapes to the lacquer. Its just another layer of potential loss which is probably not merely potential but almost guaranteed.

[AlexH.]

According to the Nyquist sampling theorem, if a sample rate is represented by X, then the frequency range it is capable of accurately capturing and reproducing is (X/2) kHz. Current digital recording technology is capable of capturing frequencies at 10x the range of human hearing (some ADCs can do 384kHz sampling rates, which accurately reproduces frequencies up to 192kHz, compared to most adult human hears which roll off around 20kHz or lower). CDs are 16 bit/44.1 kHz, meaning they are capable of perfectly reproducing signals up to 22.05 kHz, or just past the human range of hearing, or "not so bad really". This is all proven acoustic science shit, so it bugs me when people say "well obviously analog is better, because it has to be". Analog is favored by some for a number of reasons, most of them sentimental or at least subjective. For one, from a studio recording perspective, tape is a lot more forgiving than the precise, cold world of digital. Many engineers will track to tape and then dump it into pro tools so they get that nice "analog sound" (which a skilled engineer can achieve with digital if desired) without dealing with the reality that tape is a bitch to mix and edit compared to a digital workstation (especially with time-based effects or automation). Also, many early CD reissues suffered from lackluster mastering compared to their vinyl counterparts, and early digital converters weren't nearly as precise in their infancy as they are now, so many in the audiophile old guard had a poor first impression. Over time this has grown into The Legend of the Dumb Computers that Totally Suck and the Analog Master Race. The reality is that historically, analog jobs have been less prone to bad sound than digital, but this doesn't make digital the inferior medium. I touched on this more in a previous post, but these reissues are going to be done with the greatest of care, and the essential sound and "feel" of these recordings was set in place 40+ years ago. If they fuck that up, the concept of digital mastering is not to blame.

You can read up on the concept of digital sampling on Wikipedia. This article has some more plain-language thoughts under "sampling fallacies and misconceptions"

[mrrom92]

Any analog to digital conversion, regardless of its transparency (fact: there are no truly transparent converters) are, in an absolutely unrealistic best case scenario, just more and more electronics in the signal path. Purity and simplicity is the goal, and that is not being achieved here. There will be losses compared to a well cut all analog LP, and you can debate all day long if you can hear it or not, but if I were the record company, why wouldn't I want to put out the best product I possibly could?

If that tape hasn't been stored in museum-quality conditions all that time, it's condition would be highly suspect.

No.

[AlexH.]

"Purity and simplicity" are purely subjective terms. And less "electronics" in the signal path is not synonymous with better sound, although it is indeed true that no audio equipment is "truly transparent".  But what's troubling is the repeated insistence that it doesn't even matter if you can hear the difference. In my opinion, that's the only fucking thing that matters. Would you upgrade to a new ultra-super-HDTV that reproduces colors beyond what is visible to the human eye? Would you care if food had exotic ingredients that add no nutrition or flavor? Buy a car painted "obsidian" instead of boring ol' "black"? Do you buy Monster Cables? Then who gives a shit whether these albums happen to pass through a computer on their way to the pressing plant if it literally would be impossible for you to perceive the difference?

It reminds me of this, to be honest:

[bobfrombob]

 

Bob Ludwig: Many of the analog tapes from the 1970s-1990s didn’t age well as the lubricant doesn’t last a long time. These tapes will gum up the heads so badly that they will actually come to a halt and not pass through the machine! There is a method of baking the old tapes that literally brings them back to life, although sometimes it does increase the print-through all analog tapes experience where the sound of one layer of the tape is superimposed on the next layer of the wound tape. The Rolling Stones ABKCO tapes were sufficiently old to not suffer from any of these problems and did not need any baking. They were in terrific physical shape. Some of the analog Police tapes did need some baking to restore them. Really old tapes like the Agfa 555 or 525 and BASF tapes play as though they were recorded yesterday. None of this affects my mastering approach.

 

http://www.musictap.net/Interviews/LudwigBobInterview.html

[mrrom92]

"Purity and simplicity" are purely subjective terms. And less "electronics" in the signal path is not synonymous with better sound, although it is indeed true that no audio equipment is "truly transparent". But what's troubling is the repeated insistence that it doesn't even matter if you can hear the difference. In my opinion, that's the only fucking thing that matters. Would you upgrade to a new ultra-super-HDTV that reproduces colors beyond what is visible to the human eye? Would you care if food had exotic ingredients that add no nutrition or flavor? Buy a car painted "obsidian" instead of boring ol' "black"? Do you buy Monster Cables? Then who gives a shit whether these albums happen to pass through a computer on their way to the pressing plant if it literally would be impossible for you to perceive the difference?

It reminds me of this, to be honest:

The new reissues will speak for themselves. There are many representations of these records on all analog LPs cut from the masters. They will make for easy comparison. EQ choices and cutting systems aside, let's see which versions best the other.

[mrrom92]

http://www.musictap.net/Interviews/LudwigBobInterview.html

This is true, however it really only affects certain formulations of tape from a certain period of years. And it's safely fixable as well. (There is evidence that older methods have increased print-through, this is now negligible especially with most studio grade tapes and newer methods)

Tape is incredibly robust, it doesn't really degrade or wear like most people seem to have the impression it does. The first couple Led Zeppelin albums are almost certainly fine. It's unlikely that the tapes for III and IV are affected, and if they are, it's easily and routinely treatable. Sticky shed syndrome is something that would happen under any normal storage conditions. It's just a downside of the manufacture of the tapes from that era. As the article stated, older tapes actually are much easier to deal with and require less babying. Both plastic and acetate types. The only tapes we're at any real danger of losing or becoming unusable are soundmirror "ribbons", anything on scotch 100 or 101, or experimental German stuff from the 30's/40's.

[DigitalZombie]

If these are pressed at Pallas then they're worth every penny. I didn't pay much mind to pressing location until I got the most recent reissue of Nevermind. I'm sure that was mastered off digital, and I just wanted a copy for my collection. It came with a 'Pressed at Pallas' sticker on the shrink and did some research on them. They're absolute perfectionists over there and it's the best sounding record I own.

[AlexH.]

The new reissues will speak for themselves. There are many representations of these records on all analog LPs cut from the masters. They will make for easy comparison. EQ choices and cutting systems aside, let's see which versions best the other.

 

The problem you're going to run into is the massive amount of confirmation bias that comes with the analog v. digital debate; namely, the average audiophile/"analog purist" has sunk (tens of?) thousands of dollars and message board posts into the idea that superior sound is always possible if not perceptible, and analog is the way to go because that's the way it's always been. Barring a double-blind test, no one who's so heavily invested (literally and figuratively) in the idea of analog=superior sound will ever admit that something that was soiled by "digital processing" (as if they're sending it through a Yak-Bak or something) is ever capable of sounding just as good as an all-analog path. It sounds as if you've already made up your mind before the presses have even started.