Rule 2 - Quality Recordings

Identify and use audiophile-quality recordings

A high-quality recording enables an audiophile to experience a virtual musical performance as interpreted by the mixing engineer and mastered as the artist intended.

Garbage in - Garbage out

Audiophiles are particular about quality audio components to provide high-resolution audio; therefore, we must also ensure that the software is of equal importance otherwise the famous adage would apply i.e. garbage in garbage out. It would be worse because a high-resolution (transparent) system would expose the flaws in a poor recording and render an unpleasant musical experience. The combination of a high-resolution system with a quality recording aka audiophile quality and in digital speak “Hi-Res Audio” will inevitably draw the listener much closer to the music. It is pertinent to note that we are evaluating recordings based on the mastery of the recording, mixing, and mastering engineers in the sum of its parts to include the production of the respective media, in the case of analog from the cutting into the lathe, and plating process, to the stamper and the final pressing including the composition material to produce the record. We are not evaluating the prowess of the artist or group performance in any shape or form. Therefore, the discussion for quality recordings must first begin with the recording process and its eventual production into media. 

Note: Recording engineers are not in the business of accurately translating a live performance onto a recording medium, such as analog or digital. This is not possible because no microphone or recording technique can capture the full dynamics and the expansive soundstage of live music in an assembly of musicians. They are instead creating the most pleasing illusion of what that performance might sound like when it was first recorded notwithstanding which at the best possible seat in the house.

Recording Challenges

Our ears are weak in deciphering where one sound ends and another similar one begins, even across the audible frequency spectrum.  It’s a psychoacoustic phenomenon; our forgiving ears (or easily deceived) simply won't distinguish between two separate auditory events and will 'read' the sound like one big, textured sound when separated by a very short delay and are of similar volumes and waveform. Enter the Haas effect, which is a study that suggests our ears interpret the relationship between originating sounds and their 'early reflections' within a space. They conclude that as long as early reflections were heard less than 35ms after and at a level no greater than 10dB louder than the original, the two discreet sounds were interpreted as one sound. Nevertheless, masking occurs when two or more sounds occupy the same frequencies: in the ensuing fight, generally, the louder of the two will either partially or completely obscure the other, which seems to literally 'disappear' from the mix. This is an undesirable 'phenomenon', and it's one of the main challenges that recording engineers are aware of throughout the whole writing - recording - mixing, and mastering process.

Music Producer

Unlike the recording, mixing, and mastering engineer, the producer has limited control over the quality of recordings. The producer works directly with the artist, to mold the performance and the musical arrangements together until the final recording. The producer would try to find the meaning behind the artist's intentions during the pre-production stage. It's like an architect helping someone to build their dream house taking into consideration the time, budget, and resources. The goal, therefore, is to capture the best performance from an artist with available resources and constraints that may exist. Test pressings/recordings are often given to the artist/producer for validation before going into full production.

Studio/recording venue and recording equipment

The studio or a ‘live’ venue where the performance was first recorded would contribute to the overall sound quality by providing its ambient field (background noise and boundary reflections). Other artifacts that would contribute to the overall recording quality would be the quality of musical instruments used, the type and quality of the audio interface, and the number and quality of microphones placed to capture the sound.

Recording Engineer

The physical layout of the musicians in the recording venue and the strategic placement of microphones would contribute immensely to recording quality which is dependent on the experience and skill of the recording engineer. Here technical skills and keen ears are used to translate the ideas of an artist and producer into an actual physical recording. At times they may use expedient means (the design and positioning of microphones relative to the instruments/musicians or the modification of instruments) to capture the sounds that the artist or producer desires. The quality of the recording console and its ancillary equipment used to channel the sound for storage (analog magnetic tape or digital data file) now becomes the source recording that determines the overall sound quality. These first source recordings are preserved for the mixing and mastering stage in which a master copy is then produced including safety and production copies, the latter for export to different countries. The number of generations that are subsequently copied and the times each generation is used and how well they are stored and preserved will also determine the quality of these recordings for future applications. However, analog magnetic tape masters may also be archived in the digital format and subsequently used to cut vinyl, however in the purist world of audiophilia this would cause some deterioration (compression) of the source material which is not a desirable practice for absolute sound quality. However, digital masters are better preserved than analog masters, where each use of an analog master and environmental conditions for storage must be well managed. 

Note: Hoping that the following information may somehow get to the ears of commercial recording engineers for the benefit of audiophiles. Minimal 'miking' techniques are desirable except for the drum set where the parts should be individually 'miked' for absolute clarity. Most recordings with drums are poorly recorded where the snare, toms, or even the cymbal or high-hat are not easily differentiated. Certain vulnerable vocalists should consider using Pop filters and better quality microphones to mitigate the 's' sibilance and those percussive 'P' and 'B' sounds that cause annoying low-frequency bumps.  Finally, get some perspective on the drum set if used and not let its parts eventually float all over the soundstage including the piano keys. Excessive treble boosts in the 8 to 16 kHz range or recording with lots of cymbals (sizzle heard on the tape) and those ‘S’ sibilants on the vocals will be vulnerable to a treble limiter that will chop the treble and render the recording dark when cutting on the lathe. EQ, reverb, limiter, or compression should be sparingly used if at all.

Mixing Engineer

 The mixing engineer would listen to these source recordings in a recording studio using their monitoring equipment. Suffice it to say the quality of the audio monitoring system in the studio does not contribute to sound quality in the recording mix because the equipment's only purpose is to get a translation of the recording. Nevertheless, any initiative to improve the quality of translation (equipment) is desirable in enabling the mixing engineer to make better creative and technical choices during the mixdown. When translating, the mixing engineer ‘compensates’ based on his hearing to equalize the tonal balance as he interprets it. They would create an illusion of stereo width by tweaking the levels of each channel, to maintain the right balance in the mix and the desired general left-right balance within the stereo spectrum. They do this by duplicating recorded sounds and delaying desired sound elements about 10-35ms, panning the signal to a ‘space’ that they desire. Good mixing engineers would leave the busy center completely clear to avoid masking other instruments and usually for the lead singer's voice or lead instrument the latter if it’s solely an instrumental track. Good mixing engineers would have instruments spread across the stage from left to right and not coming directly from the respective loudspeakers i.e. hard-panned to the left and right channels or biased from only one side like most early and present-day pop recordings.

 Mixing Engineers would also manipulate the ears' non-linear response to different frequencies and volumes to create an enhanced impression of loudness and punch in a mix, even when the actual listening level is low. And to make things appear further away, instead of boosting, a mixing engineer would roll off the extreme highs and lows. This will create a sense of front-to-back depth in a mix, pushing certain supporting instruments into the imaginary distance and keeping the foreground clear for the lead elements. Mixing engineers essentially 'hack' the hearing system by artificially recreating certain responses to provide a powerful and clear musical experience. This process differentiates good mixing engineers from mediocre ones hence establishing their reputations. Therefore, it would be naïve to believe that a recording would be presented as an accurate representation of an original performance.

 Note: Hoping that the following suggestions may somehow get to the ears of commercial mixing engineers for the benefit of audiophiles. Keep the lead vocal or lead instrument (latter if instrumental) fixed (mono) in the Centre stage with no other instruments unless they are also playing an instrument and in such instances layer the instrument in front of the musician and not on the musician's right or left side keeping some perspective of its size around the musician. Don't pan any instrument to the left, right, or at both loudspeakers - loudspeakers should ideally "disappear" and the instruments should not be 'appearing' at either or both loudspeakers. There should be layers of all instruments from right to left and from front to back and not biased to only one side. I understand this may require more work and skill but it would pay off because if the artist fails in the consumer marketplace at least you will still have the audiophile community buying your recorded work despite the dismal musical performance. Moreover, you will develop a reputation for quality recordings and draw reputable artists/producers hence commanding higher service fees. Notably, a good mix-down would positively contribute to the mastering process potentially enabling it to be an A+ recording. I believe a good mix is a prerequisite for a recording to be graded audiophile-quality.

What audiophiles don't appreciate - Hard panned to left or right loudspeakers, and the lead vocals is off center

Mastering Engineer

The final product quality is dependent on the skill and experience of the mastering engineer where some have even developed cult-like status. This is the final stage of the recording process during which final enhancements are added to the music at the mastering lab for new masters to better project what the artist is trying to achieve. For new or remastering projects, among other things, they can lower the noise floor from the previous mix-down, add ‘sheen’ to the highs or make it ‘silkier’ and add ‘muscle’ to the lows (meat to the bones) or make it a little punchy. They can highlight the phantom center or sides, or take what little sibilance away from the vocals. They can also add a little reverb to add a sense of space (ambiance) if the initial recording is dry. They usually try not to touch the EQ to maintain phase integrity but make only slight ‘touches’, highlighting in very small increments (< ½ dB) like sprinkling icing on a cake.

 However, they may be pressured by the artist/producer to artificially increase the ‘loudness’ level. This is the dilemma that most mastering engineers face compromising the integrity of the final product. Producers and artists want this ‘loudness’ to make the music stand out when aired on the radio or during casual listening like most pop recordings. They believe that the psychoacoustic phenomenon (akin to a loudness control switch) will grab the listener’s attention and enable impulse buying or help solidify their fan base. Mastering engineers would also make available several mastering versions to meet the technical requirements for radio broadcasting, streaming services, and producing media like CDs or vinyl.  Suffice it to say, a mastering engineer cannot make a badly recorded track sound good or a poor mixdown better, they can only optimize what was already done i.e., they cannot change the character of a given track. However, they can help to make an already good recording (e.g., B+ mix) even better (e.g., A+ master) i.e., audiophile or reference quality.

 Therefore, I reiterate there is no recording that would rightly be described as 'the original performance' to which the recording might have been faithful, especially those recordings made by multi-tracks; i.e., pieces of the final recording are recorded to different tracks on a tape, edited, altered, and then 'mixed' and mastered. Therefore, we cannot refer to the live event when evaluating an audio system or recording. However, we can be at the 'best seat' in the concert hall or at a live event when listening to a recording at home. We can further differentiate between good recordings from bad ones since our brain is attempting to construct a coherent representation of the recording space from the sound emerging between our loudspeakers. This is where we apply critical listening (read Scaffold/Rule 1: Hearing and Listening) to understand the nuance in a recording which is an audiophile construct.

 Note: Hoping that the following suggestions may somehow get to the ears of commercial mastering engineers for the benefit of audiophiles. Do use a touch of reverb if the music has a dry background and not too much reverb on the vocalist, as we want to hear the original voice, moreover, we don't want it to appear too 'karaoke-ish' if there is such a word. Try to get as much of those annoying sibilance (S) out of the mix if possible. Try to convince your artist or producer to stay away from the loudness wars as it would only create the potential for distortion on the tonal balance and quickly introduce listener fatigue. Even if the artist fails in the consumer marketplace at least you will still have the audiophile community buying your recordings. Moreover, you will develop a reputation for good mastering, and draw reputable artists/producers hence commanding higher service fees.

What audiophiles don't appreciate - Adding too much reverb, succumbing to the 'loudness wars'

Digital mastering process

The process begins at the DAW (Digital Audio Workstation) where the analog mix is processed by creating a full 96Khz sampling and a 24 to 32 floating-bit depth. The mix with the aid of plug-ins is managed first by subtractive equalization. They sort of lower the undesirable frequencies in the mix and the low-frequency response up to 130Hz to keep the mid to low bass mono to ensure playability across a variety of loudspeaker systems. They may attenuate undesired dynamics through multi-band compression with the aid of a VU meter (-10dB) or LUFS meter (-14dB) by monitoring the dynamic range. This would help create the loudness for proper gain staging and dynamic control where levels are pushed to the right before peaking to preserve the dynamics without the use of a brick-wall limiter. Low-level comprehension is also considered to bring out the hidden details (nuance) that would have been lost in the mix. They separate the quietest aspects of the mix from the louder elements, compressing them and then amplifying them to contribute to the overall tonality and clarity of the master. Equalization is also used to increase the amplitude and or dynamic range of certain frequencies, being careful to keep a strong center presence that would translate well across a variety of loudspeakers.

It is ironic that an absolute digital recording is sterile and lacks the warmth or full sound when compared to analog consoles that inherently have mild distortions and harmonics in the mix producing a fuller and warmer recording. Digital recording engineers may introduce distortion and harmonic generation by a process of analog emulation (saturation) and tube emulation (even harmonic generation) that is commonly used to achieve a full and warm recording. The final consideration when completing a master file is a process called dithering before exporting the file for a variety of media use. This is necessary because when decreasing the sampling (especially the bit depth) from 96Khz, 24bits to 44.1Khz, 16bits that would inevitably introduce quantization distortion which does not sound good. The dithering process simply adds noise to mask the distortions which are likened to how loud sounds would mask quieter sounds.

The pros and cons of analog and digital mastering

Analog Mastering

Typically colors the sound in a pleasing way because the frequency response lends itself to a warmer overall tone with harmonics generated, however, the transients are slightly softened. Unlike digital mastering, analog mastering is best for genres that require extra character. However, you cannot recall an analog master but needs to be manually recreated using the same hardware used for the original session notwithstanding the expense of getting the full complement of the analog mastering setup.

Digital Mastering

Typically very clean with transients well preserved, with little to no harmonic generation. Great for EDM, Metal, and some electronic genres. A digital master can be easily recalled by simply opening its session file. This makes it a viable option for any independent artist desiring to edit or remaster audio. Further, less software is needed to master the music which is readily available with stock plugins. You can equalize, compress, expand, widen or narrow, distort, and limit your track. Because digital is generally a compression format, it is therefore not sonically better than analog if all things are considered equal. However, many audiophiles believe that when a digital file is cut in a lathe to produce vinyl records it would relatively sound better because of the "added distortion" in the mixing and mastering process.

The following illustration provides a snapshot of the modern-day recording process that offers some perspective on pre and post-music production for music consumption.

Sonic characteristics of an audiophile-quality recording aka reference recordings

A reference recording would exhibit certain qualities a typical audiophile would desire to use as a standard bearer when audio components and their ancillary equipment are being evaluated. We begin this discussion by identifying recordings that showcase certain elements of a sonic character that stands out. We dutifully become familiar with those nuances which are stored as muscle memory to be used on demand during the evaluation process.

The recording should create an illusion of a live event where each performer can showcase their brilliance in their space within the recording mix. So, how do we choose recordings for component and or for system evaluation? The following are characteristics of quality recordings that are much dependent on the prowess of the Mixing and Mastering Engineer that would pan instruments and vocalists to create a practical soundstage for the former and the latter add the necessary spices to the mix such as elevating a B-plus mix to an A-plus mix. 

We first look for ‘open’ recordings, with musicians spread across the soundstage from left to right and from front to back. This is a strong indicator of a reference quality recording which is solely dependent on the mixing engineer. There is a practical distance between them. Backup singers should ideally be paraded to the left or right stage and appear to be slightly behind the main vocalist. We should be able to evaluate the distance of the lateral spread. Instruments should not 'appear' directly from either loudspeaker, i.e. hard-panned to the left or right loudspeakers like those recordings of yore. 

A sense of depth (number of layers that we can perceive) is provided such as the upright bass, bass guitar, or kick drum slightly behind the vocalist or lead instrument on either the left or right stage, and yet another layer of depth is noted behind the bass lines for the tympani, Kodo drum, or chorus line if any.

A sense of relative height is provided such as the kick drum at the lower floor level and the high hats at the top with other percussion instruments if any. Though this is a challenging feat to record, nevertheless possible with a masterful mixing engineer. What’s dreadful is hearing the components of the drum set or piano keys appear all over the soundstage.

We should be able to evaluate the spatial imaging of the individual performers on the virtual stage. The lead vocal or lead instrument (if instrumental) should be palpable and take center stage unless it is a live event recording. Nothing should be in front or behind, and the space around them is void unless the vocalist is playing a musical instrument, the latter in front of the vocalist and not on the sides. We look for their relative life-size, and shades of darkness (air) around them. Here, perspective is important, it should not be forward or recess but just behind the loudspeakers’ firing line. The vocalist should relatively be sibilance-free, and there should not be evidence of strong reverb being used on the vocalist for us to better appreciate their voice, but for a hint of support if needed for the vocalist. A tad of reverb should be added into the mix to provide an ambient field for a sense of space such as a live event. The brass instruments should have their bite, drums their slam, and instruments such as Cymbal, Triangle, Tambourine, Maracas, Chimes, etc., a sense of airiness.

The overall tonal balance should be neutral, not bass-heavy or shy, nor should it be bright or dark. Each frequency band, i.e. the 10 Octave bands in the audible spectrum should not dominate or be wanting.

The macro and micro dynamics should be felt and heard triggering the right emotions, we should hear the start, stop, and decay of crescendos up to the tail end. On certain recordings, we should be able to easily follow the bass lines and be hypnotized by the rhythm of the beat. On relevant recordings, we should be able to hear subtle nuances, like the discreet cough, breathing, performers shifting position, room ambiance or whispers, etc. which suggest great detailing.

I should also qualify that these recordings must involve organic musical instruments instead of the progressive pop or fusion jazz that relies on synthesizers, drum machines, and computer-generated digitized effects, although they may have a limited purpose in evaluating the soundstage and imaging effects. Some organic musical recordings may use digitized effects sparingly to spice up the mix. Today’s contemporary pop music, unfortunately, utilizes drum machines, synthesizers, or computer-aided sound effects which makes the presentation mechanical, or engineers may use the auto-tuned vocal application to correct out-of-tune parts where it could be sensed by a pair of golden ears. Moreover, it is commonplace for multi-track recordings where each musician is recorded separately at different time zones and or vocals overdubbed, thereby assembling music as one. Unless this is done remarkably well to give an illusion of a live event where all the musicians are playing together, the dynamic character and cohesion of the musical event may be lost. It should ideally be a live venue recording or a live studio recording. This is when the musicians and artists are playing music together where there is a feel and presence of character by the ensemble even if there are faults detected technical or otherwise.

Notably, not all recordings would include all the sonic characteristics laid out because of their particular music genre. Therefore, we should take the time to listen and be tuned (pun not intended) to recording differences between acoustic recordings, studio, live recordings, chamber music, full orchestra symphonies, chorus, and close or open (minimal) microphone scenarios.  As audiophiles, we should constantly identify and keep a set of reference recordings we believe can assist us in our evaluation exercise. However, to realize this, we must first have a high-resolution system that would showcase such recordings in all their glory. 

Audiophile quality recordings

Many recording labels release music that we have termed audiophile-quality recordings. Their albums are produced with judicious attention to detail from the recording mix to the mastering labs using state-of-the-art equipment in the production chain. These labels also release their albums in quality media formats. The following are the 3 main music formats that are commercially available:

1.      Vinyl – records (analog)

2.      Compact disc – CD (digital)

3.      Streaming – cloud (many types of digital file formats – lossy and lossless)

Note: Reel-to-Reel tape source is not discussed here because commercially the hardware and software are not readily available including cassette and digital audio tapes.

The following list in alphabetical order are audiophile quality recording labels, remastering, or re-issues from producers you can trust; however, the list is not exhaustive.

• Analogue Productions - reissues of classic audiophile albums, 180 to 200grams, UHQR, QRP pressings, Clarity Vinyl

• Analog Spark

• Alligator Records

• American Gramophone

• Argo

• ATi reissues

• ATR Records

• Audiofon Records

• Audio Fidelity

• Audioquest Records

• Blind Pig Records

• Blue Note (tone poet audiophile series)

• Columbia (6-eye) or half-speed mastered

• Classic Records – re-issues RCA, LSC, and Verve

• Classic Compact Discs

• Chandos

• Chasing the Dragon

• Chesky Records – RCA re-issues

• Cardas Records

• CTI label

• Concord Jazz

• DCC Compact Classics

• Dorian Recordings

• DMP - 20-bit recordings of Jazz at the original session

• Decca (London)

• East Wind

• ECM (Germany's contemporary jazz and classical albums released)

• Fantasy Jazz

• Flying Fish

• Friday Music - issues classic music/artists, re-released on high-quality 180g vinyl, those mastered by Kevin Gray, Acoustech, RTI pressed

• Groove Note

• GRP

• Harmonia Mundi

• Hi-Q Records

• Hyperion

• Island Records (UK – pink label), until 1989; sold to Polygram, now under UMG

• Intervention Records (Premium vinyl reissues)

• Linn Selekt Records

• M-A recordings (uses acoustic settings with 2 x omnidirectional mics)

• MapleMusic – Jazz and Blues

• Mercury SR

• Mobile Fidelity Sound Lab - One Step, Original Master Recording, SuperVirgin vinyl, UHQR

• Mosaic Records

• MPS Records

• Music Matters - reissues jazz albums at 45 rpm from Blue Note Records, SRX vinyl

• Nautilus - Half-speed masters (SuperDiscs)

• Odin – Norway

• Octave Records - 45-rpm virgin vinyl single-pressings

• Opus 3 - Sweden

• ORG Original Recordings Group - reissues 180g-vinyl rock and 45rpm jazz from labels such as Impulse

• ORG Music (Remaster and re-issues)

• Impex

• Pope Music

• Pure Pleasure Analogue (PPA)

• Prophone

• Provogue records

• Prestige

• Proprius - Sweden

• RCA Victor Living Stereo

• Reference Recordings (classical, jazz, and vocal music)

• Riverside

• Readers Digest

• Rhino (those pressed at RTI)

• Sam Records re-issues

• Sheffield Lab's (“direct-to-disc” recording technique)

• Stockfisch Records - reissues (Direct Metal Masters - DMM)

• Speakers Corner - reissues of 180g-vinyl from A&M, Chess, Columbia, Decca, DG, Harmonia Mundi, Impulse, Mercury, Mercury Philips, RCA, Verve, and others.

• Telarc International Corporation - pioneered digital processing of the original (mastered using the Soundstream Digital Recording System)

• TBM (Three Blind Mice) – all Japanese performers

• The Nordic Sound - 2L audiophile reference recordings

• Verve Music Group – verve audiophile acoustic sounds series

• Vanguard

• VITAL (uses custom tube recording equipment)

• Varese Sarabande – soundtrack re-issues for Arista Records

• Water Lily Acoustics

• Wilson Audiophile – EMI re-issues

• Windham Hill

Mastering engineers and mastering labs

Other indicators of a quality recording is to identify the mastering source. You need to identify good mastering engineers and mastering labs that have earned their reputation for producing good-quality recordings. Inspect the record folder notes to identify them if you are not sure of the recording quality. Check the records for etchings of these mastering engineers, you will find their initials on the silent end of the record. The following list is a good start however, it is by no means exhaustive, if I had inadvertently missed out on some people I apologize. Notably, all recording mediums such as Vinyl, Compact Discs, and streaming files are not mastered the same way.

Mastering Engineers (alphabetical order)

• Al Schmitt 

• Andrew Mendelson

• Bernie Grundman

• Bob Katz

• Bob Ludwig

• Chris Bellman

• Denny Purcell

• Doug Sax

• Emily Lazar

• George Marino

• Greg Calbi

• Howie Weinberg

• James Guthrie

• Joe Gastwirt 

• John Davis

• Kent Duncan

• Kevin Gray

• Krieg Wunderlichon

• Lee Hershberg

• Maarten De Boer

• Miles Showell

• Peter Doell

• Randy Merrill

• Ray Staff

• Rudy Van Gelder

• Ryan K. Smith

• Stan Ricker

• Stephen Marcussen

• Steve Hoffman

• Ted Jensen

• Tom Coyne

• Wallace Traugott

 
Mastering Studios (alphabetical order)

• Abbey Road Studios

• AcousTech Mastering

• AfterMaster Audio Labs

• AIR Studios Mastering

• Alchemy Mastering lab

• Bernie Grundman Mastering

• Cohearent Audio

• Gateway Mastering

• Georgetown Masters

• Howie Weinberg Mastering

• Joe Gastwirt Mastering

• Kendun Recorders

• Marcussen Mastering

• Masterdisk

• Metropolis

• Precision Lacquer/ Precision Mastering

• Sterling Sound

• The Exchange

• The Mastering Lab

Vinyl Composition Material

It is said that the vinyl composition that produces the record introduces distortion when the stylus rides the groove because of the inherent impurities of the vinyl. Some audiophile record manufacturers have chosen to adopt technologies to mitigate the noise floor on records so that more music detailing would be possible.

The abbreviation UHQR, (Ultra High-Quality Record) was first used in the 1980s on records pressed by JVC (Japanese pressing plant) they coined “super vinyl” which uses a proprietary compound to enable low surface noise. Thereafter, UHQR releases were made by various labels for example Telarc, Reference Recordings, and later Mobile Fidelity Sound Lab who licensed the name for some of their early notable pressings. 

Presently, Mobile Fidelity offers a proprietary compound developed by NEOTECH and RTI dubbed MoFi SuperVinyl to address two specific areas of improvement: noise floor reduction and enhanced groove definition. This compound is used on specific MoFi pressings and also features a carbonless dye for cleaner grooves that is said to be indistinguishable from the original lacquer. Mobile Fidelity Sound Lab believes that 'SuperVinyl' provides the quietest surface for the closest approximation of what they hear in the mastering lab. You will know it’s a SuperVinyl when you hold the record against a light source and you can see through the record.

Recently, Analogue Productions (AP) has acquired the rights to the abbreviation UHQR from JVC and has released its reissues in small editions under the name whose plates are pressed on transparent vinyl. AP believed to make a UHQR possible they would have to establish a set of exacting standards to include recording, mastering, plating, pressing, and quality control, which also includes the raw material that is used to make the record (the vinyl). AP found that the vinyl is not black in its pure state. The off-white color of their UHQR offering is the color of raw vinyl in its purest form (un-tinted vinyl). The iconic black color from a typical LP is a colorant called “carbon black” which was part of the original compound formulation used in old shellac records which has since been discontinued. Therefore, in pursuit of the ultimate recording quality, AP decided to enhance sound quality by removing anything they believed could detract from it. Record styli vibrate (or jitter) on a microscopic level, and any particles of carbon black pigment that happen to be on the surface of the groove could introduce surface noise. By not adding carbon black to their Clarity Vinyl™, they believe would eliminate the possibility of noise contamination due to carbon black particles so that the stylus would effortlessly slide down the groove wall. When they purchased Classic Records, the brand name Clarity Vinyl came with it. They have since resurrected, refined, and trademarked Clarity Vinyl, which they believe would provide vinyl in its purest form.

Music Matters has also developed their vinyl formula called SRX (Silent Running Xperience) which was conceived and developed by Rick Hashimoto of Record Technology and manufactured by NEOTECH. They believe their formula has the lowest noise floor of any other vinyl formulation. Notably, like the previously mentioned proprietary vinyl formulation, the record when held against a light source is translucent. Therefore we can assume that a translucent record is a good indicator of audiophile-quality vinyl with minimal impurities that would otherwise introduce surface noise during playback.

Digital quality recordings

Most analog labels listed previously are also available on CD and other high-resolution digital formats.  Re-mastered CDs may be better because they take away some of the noise floor inherent in older recordings. They usually have better soundstage and dynamics if they are lifted off a good analog master tape. CDs manufactured before 1995 may likely sound better than later CDs because of the loudness wars that produced more distortion and listener fatigue. Late-day POP music for mass production is generally poorly recorded and prone to this effect and is therefore not an ideal choice for the avid audiophile. CDs are generally better sounding than streaming music and the following high-resolution CD labels are far superior to both CD and streaming. The following list of digital mastering enhancements describes audiophile quality CDs in whose formats/labels you can trust:

CD quality formats and labels

• UHQCD (ULTIMATE HI-QUALITY CD) – Memory Tech Corporation (MTC) in Japan uses photopolymer instead of polycarbonate which is said to achieve a higher level of accuracy when reading the pits on a CD  

• SACD (Super Audio CD) created by Sony and Phillips is said to be sonically close to the master tape. The disc contains 3 separate versions of the same musical program. 1) Direct Stream Digital multi-channel surround 2) Direct Stream Digital (DSD) two-channel stereo 3) CD standard stereo 

• Direct Stream Digital (DSD) – a trademark used by Sony and Philips for digitally encoding audio signals for the Super Audio CD. The Delta-Sigma modulation technique uses one bit per sample with higher sampling rates, extended frequency, and dynamic range.

• DSD Direct Mastered CD by Octave Records

• 24-karat gold plated Ultradisc CD and Ultra-High Resolution (UHR) on MoFi (Mobile Fidelity Sound Lab) labels

• 24-karat gold plated DCC, Classic Compact Discs (Re-master series)

• XRCD (Extended Resolution CD) is a mastering and manufacturing process patented by JVC

• HDCD (High-Definition Compatible Digital) is a proprietary audio encode-decode process that claims to provide increased dynamic range over that of CDs      

• Analogue Productions - UHQR

• MMG (Golden Strings) - HDCD

• 20-bit recordings

• 24-bit recordings       

• UHD (Ultra High Definition)

Digital file formats

• • CD-quality (44.1khz – 16 bit) - WAV, FLAC, or ALAC files

• Audiophile quality - Recordings mastered better than CD quality (48 kHz/20-bit or higher)

  • FLAC, ALAC, WAV, AIFF, DSD, or MQA files (96 or 192 kHz sample rates – 44.1 kHz/24-bit, 48 kHz/24-bit, and 88.2 kHz/24-bit)

  • Apple lossless ALAC

  • AIFF

  • PCM (Pulse Code Modulation)

  • DSD (1-bit Direct Stream Digital) – for SACD

  • DXD (352.8Khz /32 bit)

Identify quality compact discs

Seven factors that would suggest quality in their rank order:

1. SACD.

2. Recordings mastered better than CD quality (48 kHz/20-bit or higher including MQA).

3. Mastered or re-mastered by renowned mastering engineers and or mastering studios as listed previously.

4. CD quality formats and labels as listed previously – providing audiophile-grade sonics.

5. Re-mastered directly from the analog master tapes.

6. CDs designated as AAD.

7. Gold disc.

Note: The quality of the recording will be higher if there are more factors from the list that can be identified and those that are higher up on the list. Each factor identified will add to the quality of sound reproduction.

Analog vs Digital

I know this ‘can’ has been kicked down the road many times, suffice it to say, analog uses different technologies in mastering, manufacturing, and playback from Compact Disc or digital streaming so it’s not fair to make a definitive A / B / A comparison for which one’s sound better even from the same album. Ironically, we hear analog distortions and interpret them as being more pleasant than digital distortions which are derived from our subjective perceptions. One reason for the phenomenon may be attributed to high-quality audio transformers that are said to generate distortion types that are pleasing to the ear. Inductive reactance in audio transformers imparts subtle time delays that vary according to frequency. This affects the phase alignment of the signal across the frequency band. However, in contemporary digital recordings, it’s possible for a signal to travel from the initial recording to the final listener without seeing an audio transformer, hence losing this pleasing distortion effect. Further, the application of the cutting lathe for vinyl production is dependent upon using inductors and transformers in the signal chain and most modern turntables use a magnetic cartridge that works like a generator, which imparts subtle distortions inherent in transformers.

 Nevertheless, I will give my 2 cents worth. I feel analog has a sharper edge to the images which is more gritty and warmer, unlike digital which is more aggressive at the top end. Therefore, in the analog medium, the image outlines are well delineated, making it more palpable. The soundstage has a better depth of field with more quiet spaces between images. It is a bit short on absolute dynamics and has a higher noise floor outside the music. In digital, the dynamic contrast between each musical instrument is lacking when compared to analog making each instrument relatively louder. However, the distortions in digital I sense are inside the music rendering it 'cold' and less involving. Images in digital are rounder, less clear, and bloated in the bass region. Notably, a well-mastered vinyl will always sound better than a poorly mastered CD or digital stream. Conversely, a well-mastered CD or digital stream will always sound better than a poorly mastered vinyl.

The following comparisons are the general sensing from most seasoned audiophiles and audio reviewers when using both mediums. Go listen to both on highly resolving systems and you be the judge.

Identify quality vinyl recordings - a dozen factors that would suggest quality in their rank order:

1. Scratches - No visible signs of surface scratches; the noise and ticks will make the music sound unpleasant.

2. Warping - No indication of warping on the record; the extreme movement of the stylus and cantilever will create wow and flutter distortions

3. First-generation pressings from the country of origin - These are much sought after and expensive especially from early pressings because of avid collectors who may not necessarily be audiophiles. Audiophiles may prefer first-generation prints because the source tape is reckoned to be in pristine condition and not subject to wear and tear that would affect the integrity of data stored in those tapes, moreover, the aging process if kept for long periods depending on the quality of the tape material and the method of storage would mitigate tape deterioration. That means the lower the serial number on the records, the better it is to assume for their recording quality if it was derived from a quality master. Not all first-generation prints are good, nevertheless, the more pressings derived from a given stamper, the more sound quality deterioration you can expect. However, the pre-70s era has ironically produced some good-quality recordings. Labels such as RCA Victor Living Stereo, Decca – London, Columbia six-eyed, Blue Note, Warner Bros, Apple, Capitol, Verve, etc. are labels among others you should consider.

4. Remastered or mastered directly from the analog master tapes - The source in this instance is critical, those taken directly off analog master tapes are preferred to those recorded digitally or analog transferred to digital, and then converted back to analog again. However, those old analog masters that are not well-preserved or kept in pristine condition or are overly used on a cutting lathe should be suspected of their absolute quality. Recordings sourced directly from analog magnetic tapes instead of digitally archived ones are a good indicator of a quality recording. 

5. Mastered or remastered and cut by renowned mastering engineers at mastering studios as listed previously. Sometimes this information is indicated on the back of the covers or you could read their initials from the etchings on the silent part of the vinyl. Modern-day mastering equipment and experienced mastering engineers are generally even better than first pressings.

6. Audiophile-type labels as listed previously – are already invested in providing audiophile-grade sonics.

7. Less is more - Audiophile quality manufacturers boast a maximum of 1000 record pressings per stamper. Early pressings i.e., label numbers of no more than 4 digits, may also include motion picture soundtracks because they are issued in limited prints after the movie is screened with no re-prints. Likewise, if you come across insignias ‘Promotional’ pasted on records, these are meant for radio broadcasting, or DJs and will sound better than repressed vinyl. The “Test Pressings” that may be floating around are questionable as they are just samples for evaluation purposes by the artist/producers and for quality control. Although the recording quality may be superior, the final pressing chosen is unknown; therefore, you may not have the final ‘desired’ copy as intended by the artist. Repress vinyl may not achieve quality standards unless taken from an already reputable pressing plate. Repress vinyl is generally not desired because they are taken from generations well away from the original ‘mother’. Several stampers are produced from the ‘mother’; each stamper is said to produce the required number of records each manufacturer thinks they can sell. 

8. Special production techniques - such as 'direct to metal master', one-step recording', half-speed mastered, and direct transfer without EQ, compression, or limiter. Stockfisch Records uses the DMM (Direct Metal Mastering) technique, i.e., cutting the recording onto a copper plate - "Metal Master". This copper master record is said to be played with the best possible transfer technology and digitalized. A direct transfer without EQ i.e., bypassing the electronics directly to the master tape is also desirable. Suffice it to say, analog tapes that are digitally mastered would relatively sound better than their digital counterparts. One side pressing is an innovation to enable a flat base on the other non-playing side that would maintain the integrity of the cantilever action when the stylus is riding the undulating grooves, moreover, it is said that during the stamping process, one side pressing will maintain the integrity of the groove formation in the absence of stamping pressure when done on both sides of the record. The one-step process is another innovation that is said to remove the traditional three-step process which the former suffers from two stages of generational loss, whereas one-step is said to reveal more musical detail and a reduction of surface noise. Half-speed mastering records are said to be better sounding because high-frequency produce fast, transient cycles that are more difficult to cut than longer low-frequency sound waves. That is why the platter is run at half of the usual speed while the signal to be recorded is also fed to the cutting head at half of its regular playback speed. Therefore, the cutting head also has twice the amount of time to cut the intricate groove, which is said to result in a more detailed representation of the original sound source. However, half-speed is arguably said to be deficient in the lower registers.

9. Vinyl material (100% pure and not recycled from manufacturing leftover waste) or Japan super vinyl, UHQR, or SRX  formula that is said to produce less surface noise. Colored vinyl is sonically less desirable for the audiophile due to the inherent surface noise caused by the colored dye. However, Hitachi as early as 1958 has made colored “Everclean” vinyl that is said to be less prone to collecting static electricity and dust. Today most Japanese records are pressed using proprietary “virgin” vinyl (not re-cycled from manufacturing wastages) compounds which are translucent when you hold it up against a light source. They are extraordinarily quiet and have little or no surface noise. 

10. Speed - 45 RPM, provides greater bandwidth, improves dynamic range, and less inner groove distortion especially when cut further from the label. A 12-inch 45 rpm cut record is sonically superior to the 33.3 rpm derivative because 45s have wider spaced grooves which enables more information to get in during the cutting process. This would also allow the stylus to track better at playback with less surface distortion unlike the constricted grooves found on the 33.3 rpm cut. This improves bass definition and high frequencies with more detailing potential.  Moreover, the faster (45 rpm) the table spins the less groove distortion to the cantilever and tonearm during playback when the stylus modulates through less constricted undulating surfaces. 

11. Pressing from the recommended pressing plants as listed previously - their high-quality production standards generally produced better sonics compared to other plants, otherwise pressings from the US, UK, or Japan may be considered. Japanese records are often revered for their high-quality sound (JASRAC) and JVC for many years had re-issued better quality pressings for discerning buyers widely known as ‘Japan Pressings’. Quality pressing plants are also known to ensure that the center hole on the vinyl for the turntable spindle is perfectly centered to mitigate playback distortions.

12. Vinyl weight - 180 grams or heavier (heavier is better), Heavier records are less likely to move around on the turntable platter. This added stability (more damped) is likely to keep the cartridge and the tonearm from bouncing on the vinyl because of unwanted vibrations. This allows the stylus to read the grooves with a higher level of precision. Heavy vinyl is more resistant to warping hence less surfing distortion when the stylus rides the groove. It also improves stability while spinning, therefore less prone to wow and flutter from cartridge cantilever surfing. Although 200 or 225 grams are better, 180 grams was chosen by the audiophile industry instead of 140 grams (general consumer standard) because 180 grams offers an acceptable compromise relating to cost-benefit from a manufacturing standpoint.

 Note: 

• The quality of the recording will be higher if there are more factors from the list that can be identified and those that are higher up on the list. Each element identified will add to the sonic quality.

• Records with no etching on the silent end should be suspected as bootleg copies, and those with no indications of the country of manufacture on their labels or covers should also be suspected as not from the original manufacturer.

How to identify recording versions and value for records

There are two popular websites to go to and check the version you already have or plan to purchase. Discogs.com and popsike.com. At these sites, you would be able to determine the type of pressing, country of manufacture, mastering engineer or studio, editing, and pressing plant. You would also know the number of versions available and the market value (actual sales) from the lowest, average, and highest depending on their condition in terms of media and its covers. 

Six broad categories mostly determine the condition. Mint (M) which is unused and would normally be in the shrink/plastic, you can also view the spindle hole for evidence if it's been played before where the label would be worn at the spindle hole. Near Mint (NM), would be rarely played, with its cover in pristine condition and OBIs intact, and the records with no signs of scratches or warp. Very Good (VG) is the next best consideration, sellers will even indicate VG+ suggesting that the record is not often played or was clean and maintained with each use. There should not be any visible signs of scratches, but the cover edges may be slightly worn. The next type of offering would be termed Good (G), where there may be superficial scratches and the cover may be worn on the edges and color fade. Fair (F) not to be confused with fail are records that are generally often used but playable with some scratches. The covers may be faded or torn and may have ring marks due to the record edges. Usually, people would not try to sell records that are Poor (P) which means in poor condition, usually, these are not playable with many ticks and pops. Covers may be badly damaged including the labels or even record warp. Understandably the lowest price would be those that are fair and the highest for those Mint or near mint especially those out of print or collectibles that may demand a premium.

You should look at the covers, spine, or record label to identify the catalog number or better still the matrix numbers that are etched on the dead wax area (an area closest to the label where there is no music content on the record). The matrix numbers, mastering engineer initials, and sometimes the mastering studio and pressing plant may be etched, stamped, or written there. If you are unable to see the country of manufacture, they are offered on the websites suggested if the correct catalog number is keyed in the site. Barcodes on the covers suggest that the records were manufactured from 1980 onwards. They may also be reissued/repressed records. You may scan the barcodes to identify the information required on the website. Colored vinyl is another indication that the record is a recent production.  Catalog numbers that are in the 4-digit range are good suggesting that they are a generation away from the stamper. Catalog numbers more than 4 or with a hyphen and a corresponding number 1 or 2 (e.g. 1234-1) are an indication that they are re-issues by repressed and not to be confused with re-mastering.

Conclusion

Audiophile-quality recordings are essential for the complete enjoyment of a high-resolution system. It is also an important tool audiophiles use to dial in an audio system and reviewers for product evaluation. Quality recordings are further used to evaluate the quality of each companion component that integrates into an audio system. Notably high-end audio systems that have been properly set up will be limited in their performance unless they are used with audiophile-quality recordings to showcase the system.

A high-resolution system will not make a poor recording sound good and conversely, a poorly set up system will not be able to show off the attributes of a quality recording. Quality recordings played on a high-resolution system will in most cases demand an emotional and, on some occasions, a physical response from the listener like foot tapping, head bobbing, etc. Also, an emotional response aka the wow factor such as jaw-dropping, hair standing, etc. Nevertheless, audiophile-quality recordings on a finely tuned high-resolution system will inevitably draw the listener closer to the music whether it is records, CDs, or streaming from the cloud. Many old legendary analog master tapes are emerging from the woodwork and are being remastered. Even if streaming is poised to bury the compact disc and may shortly affect the vinyl industry, nevertheless the vinyl resurgent is back with a vengeance.

My generation may never know the faith in the analog (an early technology) medium having a sustainable place in this digital age. Suffice it to say, at the time of this writing, it has earned its rightful place as a standard-bearer for music reproduction and serves to challenge the digital industry to continue its efforts to reimagine its standards for quality music reproduction.

Note: Read also 'Resources/Audiophile Reference Recordings' for recommended Records, CDs, and streaming playlist

Questions?

Email

dennis@hearasia.com

 to request more information or to provide feedback