Vote

As you can see by the results there is no clear answer to the question "which is the "better" record?" The results are really too close to call.

The comments confirm what I've long thought: analogplanet readers are the most thoughtful and dedicated readers of any of the TEN sites. The number of comments posted here generally exceed those on the other sites but more importantly, the comments tend to me more thoughtful and well thought out. Fewer snarky ones too.

"Flie 1" is the "Better Records" original pressing and "File 2" is the Analog Productions reissue. I purposely used the Transfiguration Proteus, which has an 'exuberant' and wide open top end rather than one of the cartridges better known for a "burnished" top end, including the Miyajima Labs Madake a really extraordinary one that uses a bamboo cantilever that I just reviewed for Stereophile.

I chose that one because I think that whichever one you preferred it's clear at the AP reissue is not "bright" or "hard" or any of the pejoratives applied to many reissues.

That is why the vote was so close. Both of these records have their strengths and weaknesses. The original has a lush, well-textured "melt in your ears" presentation the reissue lacks but the reissue paints a far more transparent picture with obviously cleaner transients all drawn against a far blacker background.

There's no contest in terms macro dynamics: the reissue is far more dynamic. The original was probably limited to be playable on the turntables and cartridges of that time. The reissue producer and mastering engineer were under no such restraints and it can be heard. Arguably the original has more finely drawn micro dynamics—the small dynamic shifts that give recorded music the 'breath of life'.

There's no doubt that a modern cutting system like the Neumann used for the reissue produces far less distortion than what RCA used for the original, though to this day some prefer the Westrex.

However, what is simply not in doubt is that the Analog Productions reissue was cut using the original master tape. Few if any original shaded dogs, especially 3 track originals, were cut from the master tapes. All were cut from mix downs, or second generation mix downs.

That in part accounts for why the reissue sounds "more in your face" and the original pressing somewhat more distant and ethereal, which is a quality many admire.

When I did the comparison I played the original first and it does have a magical quality. When I played the reissue I didn't hear it as "in your face" or "hard". It definitely didn't have the original's lushness or delicacy but I think some of that was due to generation loss not because it was so recorded. Sometimes these things work out well to produce something that sounds more "real" than does the actual recording!

Overall while I enjoyed both versions I preferred the reissue, which I felt was far better focused, more dynamic, lower in distortion and more transparent as I define the word. The original sounded the way a photo looks with vaseline on the lens. But of course everyone is entitled their own opinion and every opinion is equally valid.

As you can see the votes were essentially evenly divided producing a toss-up. Interestingly the early voting way favored the Analog Productions reissue. As time passed the reissue almost caught up. I think it's a testament to the reissue's quality that the results were so close considering that the reissue is considered one of the "Living Stereo" greats.

Thanks to all who participated.