Many of the LP reissues from "Audio Fidelity" have been given high praise. But there's rarely, if ever, is there any mention of whether the LP's are analog or digitally sourced. They don't mention it at all on their own web site. Does anyone know?
"Audio Fidelity" Reissue Lp's: All Analog?
- Thread starter Grooves
- Start date
This lack of information is one of my biggest pet-peeves about Audiophile reissues. When it is not provided I always assume it's not a true AAA pressing.
Yeah, that's my feeling as well. What's funny is Fremer has reviewed at least two of their LP's and he's usually pretty good at mentioning whether an analog or digital source was used and then he doesn't say it only infers it. For example, he reviewed the AF reissues of "TRON" and Kate Bush's "The Sensual Word". He mentions that both were originally recorded on tape but then doesn't say anything more other than whether it was mastered by Steve Hoffman and/or Kevin Gray. Maybe I'm missing something, but why not spell it out plainly rather than just infer it?
I asked Audio Fidelity and their response was they don't go into mentioning sources since it's the mastering that makes the biggest difference.
Hmmm. That might be true to an extent but not when you're paying $30+ for an LP. If the original is on tape and it's being re-mastered to digital then onto an LP I think I have a right to know what I'm buying. Thank God it's not a $2 bag of fries cooked in questionable oil!
I asked Audio Fidelity and their response was they don't go into mentioning sources since it's the mastering that makes the biggest difference.
Hmmm. That might be true to an extent but not when you're paying $30+ for an LP. If the original is on tape and it's being re-mastered to digital then onto an LP I think I have a right to know what I'm buying. Thank God it's not a $2 bag of fries cooked in questionable oil!
Last edited:
This is a real pet peeve of mine. and the lack of info prevents me from purchasing more reissue vinyl.
They really need to get their act together, and come up with a coding system, like digital had from the inception. They could even use the same system; AAA, AAD, etc.
They really need to get their act together, and come up with a coding system, like digital had from the inception. They could even use the same system; AAA, AAD, etc.
Yeah, that's my feeling as well. What's funny is Fremer has reviewed at least two of their LP's and he's usually pretty good at mentioning whether an analog or digital source was used and then he doesn't say it only infers it. For example, he reviewed the AF reissues of "TRON" and Kate Bush's "The Sensual Word". He mentions that both were originally recorded on tape but then doesn't say anything more other than whether it was mastered by Steve Hoffman and/or Kevin Gray. Maybe I'm missing something, but why not spell it out plainly rather than just infer it?
I asked Audio Fidelity and their response was they don't go into mentioning sources since it's the mastering that makes the biggest difference.
Hmmm. That might be true to an extent but not when you're paying $30+ for an LP. If the original is on tape and it's being re-mastered to digital then onto an LP I think I have a right to know what I'm buying. Thank God it's not a $2 bag of fries cooked in questionable oil!
What a croc of an answer. Obviously it can assumed that it wasn't true analog. I can say that the AF Kate Bush - Hounds of Love is outstanding.
Though my intent is not to start a argument I did want to let him and AF know that a serious segment of purchasers share an opinion that is contrary to his statement.
My reply was as follows.
I have to beg difference with you re: the disclosure of LP source material. I (and many like myself) who collect vinyl records for serious listening pleasure, feel that by not disclosing the source material companies are in fact trying to hide whether the sources are digital or analog. Many serious vinyl lovers are peeved by the fact that record labels are not practicing "full disclosure" when it comes reissued vinyl records. I realize often times if the original source material was recorded on tape that tape may not be available. And I certainly agree that the mastering can determine the quality of a reissue. But really, when it comes right down to it I think that someone purchasing your product (or anyone else's for that matter) has a right to know essentially, what's in it!
Ultimately, if the goal is to sell your product, (the more the better), by not saying anything about the source material you automatically lose many potential customers. Yes, some would not buy any reissued LP from a digital source but others, like myself, would consider buying one. We would just like to know what it is we are buying.
My reply was as follows.
I have to beg difference with you re: the disclosure of LP source material. I (and many like myself) who collect vinyl records for serious listening pleasure, feel that by not disclosing the source material companies are in fact trying to hide whether the sources are digital or analog. Many serious vinyl lovers are peeved by the fact that record labels are not practicing "full disclosure" when it comes reissued vinyl records. I realize often times if the original source material was recorded on tape that tape may not be available. And I certainly agree that the mastering can determine the quality of a reissue. But really, when it comes right down to it I think that someone purchasing your product (or anyone else's for that matter) has a right to know essentially, what's in it!
Ultimately, if the goal is to sell your product, (the more the better), by not saying anything about the source material you automatically lose many potential customers. Yes, some would not buy any reissued LP from a digital source but others, like myself, would consider buying one. We would just like to know what it is we are buying.
Oh Yes! It would. The issue is definitely very deeply emotional. The sound is secondary in this particular instance. I have seen here on WBF people backtracking from their own glorious reports on how great an LP was once it is simply suggested, let alone proved that the masters or source could have been digital. Suddenly what they heard as being great on retrospect and with the new Knowledge is no longer great sounding ... this Mantra of :"Let your ears be the judge", suddenly sounds (pun intended) weak.
Yes and no. While I would prefer a AAA product I have no problem with purchasing something that isn't. I think I might be a little more cautious with a non-AAA product as I tend to seek out more user reviews prior to a purchase. I think if someone discounts a purchase because not is not AAA he's doing him/herself a major disservice. Digital intervention on analogue product is not the Grim Reaper many say it is.
I think you have the wrong perspective on this issue.
if a recording is in the analog form and sounds good then it becomes difficult to tell the difference as far as the mastering source. fast forward to more information and sometimes the conclusion can change. I've heard a perfectly good master dub and assumed it was all analog. then later I did hear a true all analog master dub and could easily tell the difference. or maybe one likes a vinyl reissue assuming it's all analog only to hear an original that is all analog and appreciate the difference.
neither case is wishful thinking or something nefarious, only a natural course of discovery. but no doubt the lines of performance differences are blurred enough that the source does not always hit you in the face. and listening to music should be mostly about enjoyment, not analysis.
I have hundreds of digitally sourced Lps that vary greatly on the degree of 'digital' fingerprint that is evident. some have apparently none. yet collectively they don't measure up to analog sourced Lps. and it's a clear enough issue that one is always seeking the pure analog recording-mastering chain as the ultimate process. no different than dsd and PCM. there are plenty of wonderful sounding PCM recordings that might sound like dsd, but collectively the dsd and 2xdsd are clearly better.
living with and playing all these formats daily is it's own constant proof of concept.
everything in our audio listening is about our current reference. we like what we now are listening to until we hear something clearly better. so whether it's gear, or acoustics, or a mastering source of a particular recording......if we like it then fine. but expose us to better and we then appreciate the difference.
Last edited:
I agree. I have a few digitally mastered LP's that sound wonderful. Though, I will admit when coming across them in a "used" record bin I don't seek them out unless it's really a title I'm after. I can't say it would keep me from buying a new title BUT it would certainly depend upon the label issuing it. What gripes me is I specifically asked what the source was for an up coming release and he would not tell me. He's afraid, to that's all there is to it. If he's so confident in their mastering process and their final product then he should have nothing to worry about and the LP should sell itself. But to deny access to the information because you don't want to make it public knowledge is really just plain arrogant not to mention what it really says about how you view your customers..... "like cattle" comes to mind. The more I think about it the more PO'd I get.
if you sit down and speak to Chad from Acoustic Sounds/Analog Productions/QRP pressings he is very passionate about the provenance of recordings and giving his customers what they want and being honest about it. he gets frustrated about his competitors who play fast and loose with the sources of recordings.....or simply avoid the subject of source and leave customers guessing.
inconsistent information castes a dark cloud over all reissues and even all analog and dsd recordings.
and even his own website "Super Hi-Rez" doesn't give provenance on most of the albums!
And what about tape? I'm sure there are scores of "master/safety" tapes on eBay that came from a digital source!
Similar threads
 | Steve Williams Site Founder | Site Owner | Administrator |  | Ron Resnick Site Co-Owner | Administrator |  | Julian (The Fixer) Website Build | Marketing Managersing |