A few weeks ago, a reader wrote to let me know that they enjoyed my TBVO on Marvin Gaye’s What’s Going On and to ask me if I had a favorite version of Let’s Get It On. That got me thinking. What better way to celebrate Valentine’s Day than with a Let’s Get It On Mini-TBVO?

 

Seeing as this is a Mini-TBVO, I won’t be doing my usual exhaustive (or, depending on your perspective, exhausting) history of its recording. Instead, I’ll skip right to the version analysis. But for those interested in reading about the writing and recording of Let’s Get It On, I recommend David Ritz’s indispensable biography of Gaye, Divided Soul; Blair Jackson’s superb Mix article on the title track; Andy Flory’s UDiscover article on the album; and the liner notes to the 2001 Deluxe Edition CD written by Ritz, Ed Towsend, and Ben Edmonds.

 

Now, without further ado, here are the existing digital versions of Let’s Get It On:

 

1)     The first mastering of Let’s Get It On is the 1986 “Motown Compact Classic” CD mastering (MOTD-5192) by John Matousek. This mastering also appears on the 1986 twofer CD (ZD72456) of What’s Going On and Let’s Get It On. Notably, though, some versions of the “Motown Compact Classic” CD (3746351922) appear to use the Matousek mastering with small deviations below 40 Hz.

2)     Another a variation (TCD08013TD) of the 1986 What’s Going On and Let’s Get It On twofer contains the second digital mastering of Let’s Get It On, this time by Tom Baker.

3)     Let’s Get It On was next remastered by Gavin Lurssen on a CD first issued 1994 (530 055-2) and later reissued in 1998 (314530885-2), among other times.

4)     The fourth mastering of Let’s Get It On was done by Kevin Reeves for the 2001 2CD “Deluxe Edition” (440 014 757-2), which includes 29 bonus tracks. This mastering was reused for a single-CD edition with a mere two bonus tracks released in 2002 (064 021-2).

5)     Let’s Get It On was next remastered in 2003 by Darcy Proper for a surround/stereo hybrid SACD (0602498605943). A 24/192 PCM version of Proper’s mastering has been released on the 2004 DVD (B0001922-19) and 2015 Blu-Ray (B0022768-46), both of which contain the SACD’s surround mix, too. Finally, Proper’s mastering is also the 24/192 version available on HDTracks, Qobuz, ProStudioMasters, and other downloading/streaming sites tagged as “Universal Music Group Studio Masters” with a release date of 2014. Interestingly, while the other versions are identical once level-matched, the files on the Blu-Ray seem to have miniscule deviations from the other files, mostly below 40 Hz.

6)     In 2008, Mobile Fidelity Sound Labs released its hybrid CD/SACD (UDSACD 2039) of Let’s Get It On containing a new remastering by Shawn R. Britton.

 7)     The final digital masterin      g of Let’s Get It On is a 41-track 24/96 “Deluxe Edition” available on download and streaming sites like HDTracks, Qobuz, and ProStudioMast ers. It’s dated 2023 and dubbed “Motown Studio Masters” with no mastering credit.

 

Interestingly, the release notes on ProStudioMasters for both Proper’s 24/192 download and the uncredited 24/96 “Deluxe Edition” download note that tracks one through seven of Let’s Get It On come from “high-resolution digital transfers of material originating from an analogue master source,” but that track eight, "Just to Keep You Satisfied," comes from a 24/44.1 file. Out of curiosity, I took “Just to Keep You Satisfied” from two releases of Proper’s mastering, the uncredited 24/96 “Deluxe” mastering, and the SACD layer of Briton’s mastering and ran them through MusicScope. Here’s what I saw:

 

 

The Proper mastering and hi-res “Deluxe” mastering clearly show a cutoff around 21 kHz on “Just to Keep You Satisfied,” while the MoFi SACD does not. However, it’s also not as if there’s much information above 21 kHz on the MoFi SACD, assuming humans could hear it. Regardless, as the ProStudioMasters notes suggest, this issue is confined to “Just to Keep You Satisfied.” Could it mean that both Proper’s mastering and the hi-res “Deluxe Edition” mastering are based off of the same Universal Music digital transfer, perhaps from its Iron Mountain vault? Could it mean that the original master tape for “Just to Keep You Satisfied” is misplaced, and Proper and the mystery mastering engineer chose to use a previous digital transfer, while Britton chose to use an analog safety master? Could it mean none of those things? Something else entirely? Yes, yes, yes, and yes. Ultimately, I don’t think it matters that much. To paraphrase, the proof is in the listening.

 

What about dynamics? Here’s the dynamic range of each version, measured by both R128 dynamic range and crest factor DR scores:

 

 

 

The obvious outlier here is the anonymous 2023 “Deluxe Edition” mastering. However, the R128 numbers aren’t quite as out of line as the DR scores. So let’s compare the waveforms of each in Audacity. Below is the title track, “Let’s Get It On,” in Har-Bal, both before and after Har-Bal’s perceived loudness matching. Proper’s mastering  is on the top in blue, and the anonymous 24/96 “Deluxe” mastering in on the bottom in black:

 

 

The anonymous 24/96 mastering undoubtedly has much more compression and limiting. For now, though, I’ll leave it in the analysis.

 

Let’s start our head-to-head analysis by pitting Matousek’s mastering against Baker’s. Here’s what the tonal balance of each look like in Har-Bal for a sample of three tracks. Matousek’s mastering is in yellow, and Baker’s is in orange:

 

 

On the title track and “Distant Lover,” the EQ of these two versions is very similar, except that Baker’s mastering has more energy below 100 Hz. On “Please Stay,” there are differences across the frequency spectrum, but they add up to Baker’s mastering being tilted towards the low end and Matousek’s being tilted towards the high end.

 

In subjective listening, the extra low end provided by Baker makes an enormous difference. Matousek’s mastering sounds comparatively honky and hollow. On a recording featuring the Funk Brothers, this is a sin. Thus, our first cut is the Matousek mastering.

 

Next up, Baker’s mastering faces Lurssen’s 1994 mastering. Here’s what Baker’s mastering (orange) looks like in Har-Bal when compared to Lurssen’s (green):

 

 

The differences are hard to summarize. Baker’s mastering has more energy above 2 kHz on all three tracks, though the degree of this difference varies significantly between the three. Lurssen’s mastering has more low end on two of the three sampled songs, while Baker’s has more on the other.

 

On the title track, the Baker mastering has a greater sense of air and a wider soundstage. It also renders key details — like the deep-mixed auxiliary percussion and Gaye’s signature layered vocals — much more clearly. The Lurssen mastering sounds veiled in comparison. On “Please Stay,” Lurssen’s extra low end is appreciated, but it doesn’t compensate for the extreme lack of treble energy. Again, the Lurssen mastering just obscures too many details.

 

Baker’s mastering (orange) now moves on to face Reeves’s (pink):

 

 

In general, the Baker retains its low-end edge, while on two tracks the Reeves mastering has much more energy above 2kHz or so.

 

The bigger issue, though, is that Reeves’s mastering almost sounds like a different mix. That’s because, across all three tracks, the left channel has much more treble energy than the right channel. This is very obvious when listening on headphones. It adds more reverb to the left channel, which has the effect of shifting the positioning of instruments such as the snare. It’s also visible in Har-Bal:

 

 

Ultimately, this is disqualifying for me. It doesn’t sound like the same album.

 

Now Baker’s mastering (orange) faces Proper’s (purple):

 

 

Besides the fact that Proper’s mastering tends to have a little more energy below 200 Hz or so, there’s no clear pattern. While there are clear differences in the mids and treble, too, these two masterings aren’t so far apart in terms of tonal balance.

 

How do they sound? On “Let’s Get It On,” Baker’s mastering and Proper’s are very close. It took many listenings across several different speakers, headphones, and IEMs, all of them in the vicinity of “neutral.” On warm-neutral transducers, there were times I felt that Proper’s rendering of the title track has a bit too much low end. But on bright-neutral transducers, I felt that Baker’s might have too little. It’s splitting hairs. In terms of EQ, these are two great masterings. However, I came to the conclusion that Proper’s mastering has the edge. Baker’s and Proper’s mastering strike a different balance of crack versus thwack for the snare on “Let’s Get It On.” But it’s hard to decide what the proper (no pun intended) balance is, since it depends on how that snare’s been tuned. More naturalistic elements, such as the saxophone, flute, and handclaps, though, come across as more lifelike on Proper’s mastering. It’s a tough, tough call, but the Proper mastering has a narrow edge on Baker’s for the title track when it comes to tonal balance. It’s advantage is even greater. when it comes to soundstage. I consistently felt that Proper’s mastering has significantly more depth and slightly more width. This pays dividends when it comes to dissecting the mix. At first blush, Baker’s version of “Let’s Get It On” has slightly more overt detail. That’s because it’s a bit “airier” (i.e. has more energy above 5 kHz or so) than Proper’s mastering. But all of those details exist in Proper’s version, too. Thanks to its deep, wide soundstage, Proper’s mastering has rock-solid instrument placement, which makes isolating individual elements in the mix easier despite this relative lack of “air.”

 

The other two songs sampled are even clearer wins for Proper. “Please Don’t Go” is stunning on Proper’s mastering. EQ, detail, soundstage. You name it. This is the best this song has sounded. René Hall’s orchestration is rendered in all of its exquisite detail. “Distant Lover” may be an even more dramatic win for Proper’s version. Something that’s continually frustrated me about this song mix is that the synthetic-sounding drum and tambourine tend to blend together into one sound. They’re finally distinct on Proper’s mastering, with plenty of three-dimensionality and very natural decays.

 

In short, Proper’s mastering (purple) is moving on to face Britton’s (blue):

 

 

Broadly speaking, Proper’s mastering has more low- and high-end, while Britton’s is more midrange-focused.

 

Despite these differences, both do justice to the title track. Bringing Baker’s CD back into the mix, I think I prefer Britton’s EQ to Baker’s. However, Proper’s version still has the edge on tonal balance. It also has the edge in detail retrieval. David Van De Pitte’s orchestrations are lush and realistic. Proper presents Wilton Felder’s bass with clean and well-defined transient edges, making those on the MFSL disc sound rounded in comparison. Relative to Proper’s mastering, Gaye’s hard-panned overdubbed vocals also lack immediacy and delineation on the MFSL release.

 

The MFSL version of “Let’s Get It On” also runs noticeably faster than the other versions. Precisely lining up the Baker, Lurssen, Proper, and Britton masterings in Audacity, the first three stay in perfect sync, while the latter runs ahead. The same speed issue occurs on “Please Stay” and “Distant Lover.”

 

Putting the speed issue aside, in terms of both EQ and technicalities, I prefer both Baker’s and Proper’s masterings of “Please Stay.” “Distant Lover” brings Baker’s and Britton’s masterings into a near-tie, but Proper’s still retains the lead.

 

What about “Just to Keep You Satisfied,” which Proper must’ve had to master from a different source than the rest of the album? Is it the Proper mastering’s Achilles heel? No. While this is a song that benefits from MFSL’s comparatively dark mastering, I still think I prefer Proper’s rendering.

 

That leaves only the uncredited 2023 24/96 “Deluxe Edition” as a threat to Proper’s near-crown. While it doesn’t quite suffer subjectively as much as one would expect given how much less dynamic it is than the other versions under review, it can’t hold a candle to Proper’s mastering (or several others that have already been eliminated).

 

Where the new “Deluxe Edition” does prove valuable, though, is its 33 bonus tracks. Yes, I wish they were mastered more dynamically. But there’s a bevy of stunning unreleased material to be heard. The same is true for the 29 bonus tracks on the earlier 2CD “Deluxe Edition.” While there’s some overlap between the bonus material on these two “Deluxe” versions of Let’s Get It On, each has unique tracks. Even when the two editions share an unrelease track, its mastering — and, in some cases, mix — is different. So, regardless of the fact that neither “Deluxe Edition” contains the best (or even second-best) mastering of the original album, both are worth seeking out. Even casual Marvin Gaye fans will find themselves in awe of the quality of his demos and castaways.

 

In terms of the original album, there’s a clear winner. When your serenading your lover this Valentine’s Day, be sure to put on Darcy Proper’s mastering of Let’s Get It On.

 

If you'd like to support Club TBVO, please use the link below to donate.