Tuttle et al v Audiophile Music Direct

[charlesphoto]

1 hour ago, Jud said:

The other thing I noticed is that the complaint says consumers may have bought the records anyway but wouldn't have paid as much. To me it takes a bit of the edge off any outrage the court is supposed to feel if it's all just a matter of wanting to pay less.

I agree. In this vein, MoFi could argue they brought extra value through the packaging, and limiting the item, and that the transfer made, whether it be AAA or ADA, is of the highest quality and the cost to do so is part of the final cost of the item. 

[The Computer Audiophile]

2 hours ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

What timing. In my email today, "from the original 3-track master tapes." 

 

If @Rt66indierock is to be believed, the average consumer thinks this is fake because the original tapes are worn out and it's sourced from digital. 

 

 

 

However, now that I look at it, is there a digital step? 25,000 copies? I don't know how this works.

[firedog]

2 hours ago, Jud said:

 

This is a thicket I don't think the plaintiffs' lawyers needed to wade into. Below is the cover of a MoFi SACD with the legend across the top, "Original Master Recording." That wording is used *by MoFi* as a kind of trademark (wonder if it's been registered?). The trouble with including this in the complaint is that it's then very easy to say this legend is very obviously no assurance of an all-analog process if it is used on MoFi's digital products as well.

 

The other thing I noticed is that the complaint says consumers may have bought the records anyway but wouldn't have paid as much. To me it takes a bit of the edge off any outrage the court is supposed to feel if it's all just a matter of wanting to pay less.

 

 

Original Master Recording is trademarked and has been used for both digital and analog releases.

So it doesn't necessarily mean AAA and no one could reasonably think or claim that it does.

The way they presented "one step" is something else, however. That was clearly intended to lead people to the conclusion of AAA. 

[firedog]

35 minutes ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

 

However, now that I look at it, is there a digital step? 25,000 copies? I don't know how this works.

AFAIR, when the big hi-res releases of KOB came out a number of years ago, they already said the original tapes had been transferred to digital and wouldn't be touched again - as they were degraded to the point where they couldn't be played anymore. 

Note that your ad doesn't say it's an all analog process. Only that the source is the original analog- which a digital source made from the original master tapes is.

I also seem to remember that the original mono mix tape didn't exist anymore - so either a safety copy or a remix had to be used (or something like that). 

edit: found this: https://www.analogplanet.com/content/miles-davis-kind-blue-monophonic-reissue-sonylegacy-analog-planet-exclusive#GgvHFW0KVw0v0f8q.97

[The Computer Audiophile]

6 minutes ago, firedog said:

Note that your ad doesn't say it's an all analog process. Only that the source is the original analog- which a digital source made from the original master tapes is.

Sounds similar to how we got into this whole mess 🙂

[sphinxsix]

Have a break guys. This is what Meta's newest, most advanced AI chatbot, BlenderBot 3, has to say about the case: :-)

 

 

I think BlenderBot's opinion on the topic is very clear.

The situation got a bit more complicated a moment later cause after becoming more familiar with the case he seemed to claim that there was a murder involved. His last question seemed a bit suspicious, so I left the site and disconnected my VPN. I'm also considering moving to some country beyond the reach of the American jurisdiction.. 

 

[firedog]

7 minutes ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

Sounds similar to how we got into this whole mess 🙂

Yep, but no graphic that omits the digitization and makes it seem all analog.

See the above link: It's also possible they are using a 5Oth anniversary mixdown tape, which also is derived from the original analog (as was the original stereo release), but isn't the stereo master tape from 1957.

[Iving]

44 minutes ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

However, now that I look at it, is there a digital step? 25,000 copies? I don't know how this works.

 

Unless something we don't know (possible - trying to find out), the AP UHQR is a repress of the Classic Records plates - cut in 1994 by Bernie Grundman from the original three-track tapes i.e. presumed all analogue.

[The Computer Audiophile]

2 minutes ago, Iving said:

 

Unless something we don't know (possible - trying to find out), the AP UHQR is a repress of the Classic Records plates - cut in 1994 by Bernie Grundman from the original three-track tapes i.e. presumed all analogue.

Not being familiar with this stuff, can those press 25,000 copies?

[Jud]

59 minutes ago, firedog said:

Original Master Recording is trademarked and has been used for both digital and analog releases.

So it doesn't necessarily mean AAA and no one could reasonably think or claim that it does.

The way they presented "one step" is something else, however. That was clearly intended to lead people to the conclusion of AAA. 

 

Yes, I think that's it exactly.  I don't think the attempt to make "Original Master Recording" mean something other than its use under trademark is a great idea, especially when the marketing language and diagram regarding "One Step" are so clearly favorable to plaintiffs.

[firedog]

6 minutes ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

Not being familiar with this stuff, can those press 25,000 copies?

Depends what you are referring to by "plates". AFAIK, They can make lots of stampers and produce lots of copies. They can also make new master lacquers from the tapes. Or make a copy of the master tape and produce more copies that way.  My understanding is that this was done back in the day when some albums sold millions. That's why the serious collectors look at the run out groove on the record to see what master/laquer was used. 

MOFI got exposed b/c they started selling numbers that didn't match the "one step" claims.

[Iving]

31 minutes ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

Not being familiar with this stuff, can those press 25,000 copies?

 

Fremer says in relation to the Apr. '21 33 1/3 LP UHQR release here: https://www.analogplanet.com/content/analogue-productions-launches-25000-copy-uhqr-miles-davis-kind-blue-1:

 

"Bernie cut directly from the 3 track tape. No mix down." [= mixed on the fly to 2 channels live]
and
"They're using metal parts from 1995 Classic reissue. The 3 track master is no longer usable."

 

also
Q. So this is being pressed a from metal source which was made in 1995? Don't metal discs like these also wear out with use? Is this an issue here?
A. Stampers wear out. Mothers are good for many, many stampers. The "father" is good for many, many mothers. This will not at all be an issue.

 

Hence I suppose wiggle room for the 45.

 

Also - I got from well-informed member Strat-Mangler on sh.tv:
Yes, it's a repress of the Classic Records pressing from 1995. It features the corrected speed discrepancy which had previously on every other prior reissue.
This occurred originally because the tape machine for the stereo mix was running slow on that day. That is why the speed issue was only for the first side. The difference was of a 1/4 note so noticeable to some musicians but most people never noticed anyway.
Since the original 3-track master tapes were used for the last time (likely ever) on that 1995 pressing and due to Bernie Grundman's meticulous nature, the tape speeds were verified to be accurate.
Now, to accomplish this in the analog domain, the tape machine would merely need to run 1/4 of a note faster to offset the tonal difference. Of course, this could be done digitally but would require 2 conversions and some processing. Plus, we're referring to 1995 digital technology. Windows 95 had just come out. Of course, digital manipulation was in its infancy.
Safe to say it's 100% perfectly AAA with no digital steps whatsoever.

Thing is - I was reading something - I'd have to go back and try to find - about Grundman doing this and that around the mid '90s where there were digital steps involved. This is the turmoil we're in now because of MoFi. We doubt. But doubt is good if it leads us to best we can establish as truth.

 

Anyway - the tape is shot now - so Rt66indierock wouldn't be necessarily wrong to say we "should" know that ...

 

Strat-Mangler gave me more on TBVO KOB if you want it ...

 

[Jud]

32 minutes ago, Iving said:

 

Unless something we don't know (possible - trying to find out), the AP UHQR is a repress of the Classic Records plates - cut in 1994 by Bernie Grundman from the original three-track tapes i.e. presumed all analogue.

 

Appears to be confirmed by Chad Kassem in YouTube interview that this is the Classic Records pressing (but 1995?):

 

"We learn one thing in the interview: my guess that the tape source for this AP reissue of KOB was the mix done in 1995 by Kevin Gray for Classic Records was indeed correct. The mastering was done at the same time. Chad says he has been asked why AP didn't do a new mastering, and the answer is simple: 1- Sony will never again let the 3-track master tape leave it's vault; and 2- There is no way to improve on the job Gray did in 1995. It's as good as it gets."

[Iving]

2 minutes ago, Jud said:

Appears to be confirmed by Chad Kassem in YouTube interview that this is the Classic Records pressing (but 1995?):

 

"We learn one thing in the interview: my guess that the tape source for this AP reissue of KOB was the mix done in 1995 by Kevin Gray for Classic Records was indeed correct. The mastering was done at the same time. Chad says he has been asked why AP didn't do a new mastering, and the answer is simple: 1- Sony will never again let the 3-track master tape leave it's vault; and 2- There is no way to improve on the job Gray did in 1995. It's as good as it gets."

 

I have seen a lot of triangulation on Bernie G 1994 or 1995.

[Jud]

BTW, this from the same Audiogon discussion forum where the quote about Kind of Blue comes from:

 

"Have you heard of The Electric Recording Company in England? They make limited-editions of extremely rare LP's, made using a completely valve (tube) system, and pressed in quantities of 100 or so. Priced at around $350 I believe, each release sells out in a matter of hours. The $350 price is a bargain, an original LP of the same title costing many thousands."

[Iving]

I'm getting

"The 1995 pressing I was referring to was for the 33rpm UHQR."

and

"For the 2x45rpm UHQR, this is a repress of the Classic Records pressing from 1999".

[The Computer Audiophile]

All so clear now 😳

[Iving]

7 minutes ago, Iving said:

I'm getting

"The 1995 pressing I was referring to was for the 33rpm UHQR."

and

"For the 2x45rpm UHQR, this is a repress of the Classic Records pressing from 1999".

 

Prseume same BG cut just 2 x 45 instead of 1 x 33.

[PYP]

so are these guys purist enough?  https://www.artone-studio.com

 

 

[Jud]

19 minutes ago, Iving said:

Fremer says in relation to the Apr. '21 33 1/3 LP UHQR release here: https://www.analogplanet.com/content/analogue-productions-launches-25000-copy-uhqr-miles-davis-kind-blue-1:

 

"Bernie cut directly from the 3 track tape. No mix down." [= mixed on the fly to 2 channels live]
and
"They're using metal parts from 1995 Classic reissue. The 3 track master is no longer usable."

 

20 minutes ago, Jud said:

 

Appears to be confirmed by Chad Kassem in YouTube interview that this is the Classic Records pressing (but 1995?):

 

"We learn one thing in the interview: my guess that the tape source for this AP reissue of KOB was the mix done in 1995 by Kevin Gray for Classic Records was indeed correct. The mastering was done at the same time. Chad says he has been asked why AP didn't do a new mastering, and the answer is simple: 1- Sony will never again let the 3-track master tape leave it's vault; and 2- There is no way to improve on the job Gray did in 1995. It's as good as it gets."

 

Did anyone happen to notice Fremer and the summary of the Kassem interview appear to be in conflict? (Bernie Grundman cutting direct to two channel with no mix down, vs. Kevin Gray mix.)

[Iving]

My sh.tv friend Strat-Mangler says: I'm not a mono person per se but the mono sounds much better as it's more coherent throughout and is better tonally balanced. Strange to say but it sounds more natural. The stereo's panning changes that. Some enjoy it more but everyone I've played both to preferred the mono.

 

Mono story here: https://www.analogplanet.com/content/miles-davis-kind-blue-monophonic-reissue-sonylegacy-analog-planet-exclusive

[Iving]

7 minutes ago, Jud said:

Did anyone happen to notice Fremer and the summary of the Kassem interview appear to be in conflict? (Bernie Grundman cutting direct to two channel with no mix down, vs. Kevin Gray mix.)

 

At first take I thought only a difference of id - Grundman vs. Gray. But the mix issue? What can we know these days?

[The Computer Audiophile]

Just now, Iving said:

 

What can we know these days?

Sometimes we just have to sit back and listen to the music. 😁

[Iving]

Just now, The Computer Audiophile said:

Sometimes we just have to sit back and listen to the music. 😁

 

Sure. But I'm 60 tomorrow. And I've become kinda interested in TBVO KOB to spend my birthday money on. Can't make the wrong call!

[Jud]

12 minutes ago, PYP said:

so are these guys purist enough?  https://www.artone-studio.com

 

 

 

Yet Mark Knopfler, with great audiophile cred, is using this for part of a not-yet-released album recorded in 2022: