Pet Sounds AF Gold re-issue

[The Shift]

Good debate and views on the new Steve Hoffman remaster of Pet Soudns here:

http://www.imwan.com/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=17&t=47072&st=0&sk=t&sd=a&hilit=Pet+sounds

[grillo]

bum link...

[Bean Bag]

I fix:  http://www.imwan.com/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=17&t=47072&st=0&sk=t&sd=a&hilit=Pet+sounds

[Bean Bag]

bump.  Wondering if anybody here has picked this up.  Two questions:

1.  Why wouldn't Hoffman just reissue his original DCC?
2.  OR, since the Audio Fidelity wasn't same source as the DCC, why bother remastering a lesser source?  Which leads back to question 1.

[JeffRetro]

bump.  Wondering if anybody here has picked this up.  Two questions:

1.  Why wouldn't Hoffman just reissue his original DCC?
2.  OR, since the Audio Fidelity wasn't same source as the DCC, why bother remastering a lesser source?  Which leads back to question 1.

1. Because digital remastering technology has improved greatly over the 16 years since the DCC was done, which leads to question 2.
2. When Hoffman did the original DCC he only had access to the PET SOUNDS L.A. master for a few hours.  In that time he made flat transfers straight to digitial (a Sony PCM 1630 IIRC) and analog (a 30 ips flat transfer).  A week or so later he did the same with the N.Y. master.  The master for the DCC CD was then compiled using the L.A. digital transfer with  WIBN and the CN train sounds (and possibly the intro if not complete "I'm waiting For The Day") from his N.Y. tape digital transfer inserted.

A year later when he issued PS on LP he did a similar thing with the analog transfers he had made (but apparently used IWFTD from the L.A. master this time).  This is the tape now used for the Audio Fidelity CD.

So why would he use the analog over the digital?  Well, 16 years later the digitial copy is no longer state of the art; hence his decision to go back to his analog tape which is, for all intents and purposes, an exact copy of the original master and remaster from that using the latest technology - incluiding this time HDCD encoding.  Also this time rather than tweaking any EQ he did the mastering completely flat and left in the original step fades that were on the original master - a by-product of the boards of the day - but have been smoothed out on every CD of PS to date.  So this truly does seem to be the closest to what Brian heard in the studio.

I actually haven't gotten the CD yet, but possibly today.  Can't wait.

[Bean Bag]

Thanks for the post.  So the DCC was mastered directly from the digital copies taken directly from the LA and NY tapes.  The benefit being there's less "copy of a copy"...but the downside is that early digital transferring could be seen as less than today's.

The AF was mastered directly from the analogue copies made back then.  The benefit being the analog copy gets better digital encoding/mastering...but the downside is it's an additional analog generation away from the NY and LA tapes.

The DCC didn't "degrade" a generation since it was was never copied to analog first....yet it suffers from said "less-than-stellar" early digitaltronics.

[Leo K]

Since listening to the new AF Pet Sounds I've gone though most my other PS releases...green label LP, warner LP, DCC LP, DCC CD, and this new AF is the most clear on my system (and the bass the most gorgeous)...it was an amazing listening experience all the way through, bringing some kind of old remembered magic back...

Still love the old DCC for the heavy bass and murky quality, but now love this AF for the overall balance, detail and clarity, with no loss of that bass, and the sound is less murky overall...with a sweet high end so beautiful on the ears.  The difference between the DCC and AF is obvious. 

[chris.metcalfe]

Beanbag,
Thanks for bringing the Imwan site to my attention! Good stuff.

[Bean Bag]

That was wee helper's work...I just fixed the link.   

[The Shift]

That was wee helper's work...I just fixed the link.   

Ooops, just fixed the original link.  Many thanks Bean Bag! 

[Bicyclerider]

The AF has dropouts not on the original DCC . . . other than that, it sounds pretty close to the DCC in my opinion.  My understanding is that the digital copy of the LA tape has not aged well, and that dictated using the analog tape copy.  But if you're mastering from a tape copy, why not master it entirely from the NY tape, which is the same generation down as the copy tape?  Unless that tape is in bad shape as well.

I enjoy listening to the greenline Japanese CD, which I believe is a flat digital copy of the LA tape.  Not as warm and analog sounding as the DCC, but also not as murky, it's more detailed, musical instruments are easier to pick out, there's not as much bass as the DCC but some might see that as an improvement.  The selling point for me is Brian's vocals on the greenline sound so clear and distinct like he's singing to you in your room as you listen, a palpable presence that I don't get from the DCC or the AF.  But the sound is definitely more "digital" (early A/D converters no doubt).

[JeffRetro]

Thanks for the post.  So the DCC was mastered directly from the digital copies taken directly from the LA and NY tapes.  The benefit being there's less "copy of a copy"...but the downside is that early digital transferring could be seen as less than today's.

The AF was mastered directly from the analogue copies made back then.  The benefit being the analog copy gets better digital encoding/mastering...but the downside is it's an additional analog generation away from the NY and LA tapes.

The DCC didn't "degrade" a generation since it was was never copied to analog first....yet it suffers from said "less-than-stellar" early digitaltronics.

Yes on everything you've said here, but a few comments.  The analog master that's been used for the new AF disc IS one more analog generation down from the masters used, but with the equipment that Hoffman's using and the fact that he made the transfer at 30 ips i'll bet even someone with the ears of a dog ( ;-) ) would be extremely hard-pressed to hear any difference.  And I would hardly call the 1992 digital transfer used for the DCC CD as "less than stellar."  It was state of the art at the time and still sounds great, though in the last 17 years the techonology has inevidtably advanced.

[JeffRetro]

Since listening to the new AF Pet Sounds I've gone though most my other PS releases...green label LP, warner LP, DCC LP, DCC CD, and this new AF is the most clear on my system (and the bass the most gorgeous)...it was an amazing listening experience all the way through, bringing some kind of old remembered magic back...

Still love the old DCC for the heavy bass and murky quality, but now love this AF for the overall balance, detail and clarity, with no loss of that bass, and the sound is less murky overall...with a sweet high end so beautiful on the ears.  The difference between the DCC and AF is obvious. 

I have to concur with Leo's assessment of the new AF disc.  It has great frequency response top to bottom, resulting in great bass and top end (both very important here since there's so much percussion on this album).  There's definitely more detail in the sound here than on any other mono version of Pet Sounds.  One thing that came through loud and clear is that the track for IJWMFTT was cut at Gold Star (which of course, we knew anyway), because you can clearly hear that magnificent Gold Star echo chamber performing its magic.  Going back to other versions of Pet Sounds you can hear it too, but here it just stands out.  There's all sorts of little things like that that make this disc a joy.  And toms, snares, and timpanis all have a wonderful punch to them that you haven't heard in other versions.

And what Leo likes about the older DCC disc is exactly what I didn't like.  It's very bass heavy, to the point where it was a little murky.  All a mater of preference, but the new version fixed that IMHO.

This is a limited edition of 5000 (and mine is #1840 and it's only been out a few weeks), so if you're interested don't put it off too long.

[JeffRetro]

The AF has dropouts not on the original DCC . . . other than that, it sounds pretty close to the DCC in my opinion.  My understanding is that the digital copy of the LA tape has not aged well, and that dictated using the analog tape copy.  But if you're mastering from a tape copy, why not master it entirely from the NY tape, which is the same generation down as the copy tape?  Unless that tape is in bad shape as well.

I enjoy listening to the greenline Japanese CD, which I believe is a flat digital copy of the LA tape.  Not as warm and analog sounding as the DCC, but also not as murky, it's more detailed, musical instruments are easier to pick out, there's not as much bass as the DCC but some might see that as an improvement.  The selling point for me is Brian's vocals on the greenline sound so clear and distinct like he's singing to you in your room as you listen, a palpable presence that I don't get from the DCC or the AF.  But the sound is definitely more "digital" (early A/D converters no doubt).

On the old DCC disc Hoffman used the N.Y. tape for "I'm Waiting For The Day" (or at least its intro) to avoid those dropouts that are on the L.A. master.  But this time around he only fixed major dropouts and left minor ones.  I've heard those dropouts on varous LP pressings of PS over the years, so it wasn't anything new to me.

And why not master the entire CD from the N.Y. tape?  Because an analog to analog transfer done on state of the art equipment for their time in 2009 versus one done in 1966 is going to be WAY more accurate to the original.  Plus we don't know at what speed the N.Y. tape was copied from the L.A. tape.  That alone could make a big difference as we know that Hoffman's copy was done at 30 ips.

The Greenline CD actually sounds fairly good, but it's been no-noised and the intros to WIBN and IWFTD were remixed from the session masters and spliced in (listen - you can hear the edits where the sound quality changes).  This same 1987 digital master was used for the 40th Anniversary Edition of Pet Sounds.

[c-man]

The AF has dropouts not on the original DCC . . . other than that, it sounds pretty close to the DCC in my opinion.  My understanding is that the digital copy of the LA tape has not aged well, and that dictated using the analog tape copy.  But if you're mastering from a tape copy, why not master it entirely from the NY tape, which is the same generation down as the copy tape?  Unless that tape is in bad shape as well.

I enjoy listening to the greenline Japanese CD, which I believe is a flat digital copy of the LA tape.  Not as warm and analog sounding as the DCC, but also not as murky, it's more detailed, musical instruments are easier to pick out, there's not as much bass as the DCC but some might see that as an improvement.  The selling point for me is Brian's vocals on the greenline sound so clear and distinct like he's singing to you in your room as you listen, a palpable presence that I don't get from the DCC or the AF.  But the sound is definitely more "digital" (early A/D converters no doubt).

Plus the last couple of barks are gone from "Caroline No".

[Bean Bag]

Thank you all for your input.  I just placed an order via Amazon.

I feel good about getting another copy of this album.  My favorite version has always been the PS Box single disc...it just took me there.  While it never sounded sonically impressive to throw me into "audiophile" mode or anything, I found I just enjoyed it more.  The other versions I have actually bugged me, for one reason or another.  I do enjoy the multi-channel DVD Audio version but that's only at home.  And it's more for the added perspective.  So I think this AF version will be my true desert island Pet Sounds disc.

Everyone's comments have helped sway me.  However, Amazon has sound samples up on this AF disc.  I can here the difference.  I've never heard the album sound this good -- in it's true mono glory.  Even on Amazon's samples I could hear the roundness of the bass -- it wasn't bleeding into the rest of the music.  It sounds like Pet Sounds alright -- but it just sounds a bit better.  I am a mono-believer with this album.  Something gooey happened with the mono mix.  I just melted together.  There's, yes, "magic" in the blending.  Tambourines, timpanis, lesley-amped guitars really get psychedelic I think on the mono.  They're creepy cool!

Lastly...I just found out, like a dumb-luck stranger, that my Lost and Found album is a Hoffman DCC!  I've been spending some serious time recently with my new found, long-owned, DCC and it's now going to my grave with me!  I love this disc.  Another topic all together, sure -- but I enjoyed the mastering.  It's very true.  And if Pet Sounds could be there...I'd be a fool to pass it by.

[Bicyclerider]

[

On the old DCC disc Hoffman used the N.Y. tape for "I'm Waiting For The Day" (or at least its intro) to avoid those dropouts that are on the L.A. master.  But this time around he only fixed major dropouts and left minor ones.  I've heard those dropouts on varous LP pressings of PS over the years, so it wasn't anything new to me.

The Greenline CD actually sounds fairly good, but it's been no-noised and the intros to WIBN and IWFTD were remixed from the session masters and spliced in (listen - you can hear the edits where the sound quality changes).  This same 1987 digital master was used for the 40th Anniversary Edition of Pet Sounds.
[/quote]

Steve didn't use the NY tape for Waiting for the Day - he said the only song he used was WIBN, then he used the dog barking/train part, and as you said a few intros - it makes perfect sense that the reason the dropout isn't heard is that he used the NY tape, BUT if the dropout is on the LA tape, and the NY tape is an analog copy, wouldn't it have the Waiting for the Day dropout as well?

I'm not sure about the greenline CD being no noised - the 1987 digital master (which, as you said was used for the 40th anniversary Pet Sounds) was not no noised according to Mark.  This is before the Pastmasters version (after the Greenline was pulled) which used the same no noised master as the first US Pet sounds release.  It's possible that no noise was applied before passing the tape on to Japan, but that seems unlikely.  They didn't process any of the tapes sent to Pastmasters - they were all flat analogue copies - because Capitol hadn't started work on any of those albums yet, just Pet Sounds.  I'll have to listen again.  It does make sense that some of the intros may have been replaced by Mark on the digital master, as he did do that on the eventual US digital no noised master as well.

And I agree with Bean Bag that the PS box mono version (from the NY tape) is a good sounding version - next to the DCC, AF and Greenline, it's the next best IMO.

[JeffRetro]

[

Steve didn't use the NY tape for Waiting for the Day - he said the only song he used was WIBN, then he used the dog barking/train part, and as you said a few intros - it makes perfect sense that the reason the dropout isn't heard is that he used the NY tape, BUT if the dropout is on the LA tape, and the NY tape is an analog copy, wouldn't it have the Waiting for the Day dropout as well?

I'm not sure about the greenline CD being no noised - the 1987 digital master (which, as you said was used for the 40th anniversary Pet Sounds) was not no noised according to Mark.  This is before the Pastmasters version (after the Greenline was pulled) which used the same no noised master as the first US Pet sounds release.  It's possible that no noise was applied before passing the tape on to Japan, but that seems unlikely.  They didn't process any of the tapes sent to Pastmasters - they were all flat analogue copies - because Capitol hadn't started work on any of those albums yet, just Pet Sounds.  I'll have to listen again.  It does make sense that some of the intros may have been replaced by Mark on the digital master, as he did do that on the eventual US digital no noised master as well.

And I agree with Bean Bag that the PS box mono version (from the NY tape) is a good sounding version - next to the DCC, AF and Greenline, it's the next best IMO.

The most likely explanation as to why the L.A. master has dropouts on the intro of IWFTD while the N.Y. safety copy made from it doesn't is because the N.Y. copy was made before the damage to the L.A. tape occurred.  The N.Y. tape was never used to master any of the LP variations of Pet Sounds and wasn't used to master anything until the CD era.  Meanwhile the L.A. master was used, abused, and misused by Capitol and Warner Bros. :-)  And according to petsite (who put up a timeline of PS tape use here: http://smileysmile.net/board/index.php?topic=2751.0 ) the original digital master prepared and used on the Greenline, Pastmasters, 1990 U.S., and 40 Anniversary Edition issues of PS was no noised.  I don't have either of the earlier Japanese releases anymore, but listening to the 1990 and 2006 versions they're pretty quiet.  It does sound like NR was used judiciously, and because of that the sound wasn't compromised to any significant (or even audible) extent.  But the intros of WIBN and IMFTD are definitley remixed; it's most apparent on the 2006 40th Anniversary Edition.  Listen to the tone of the guitar playing the opening riff and how it changes drastically after that first snare hit.

[buddhahat]

What exactly are these dropouts? I'm cluleless about this stuff. Are they obvious silent bits or what exactly?

[JeffRetro]

What exactly are these dropouts? I'm cluleless about this stuff. Are they obvious silent bits or what exactly?

Dropouts can vary from minor fluctuations in sound level to the complete loss of the signal for an instant and are caused by anything that causes the tape to lose contact with the playback head of the tape machine.  This can include any contamination on the tape or damage to the tape.  In the case of the first 5-6 seconds of IWFTD it's probably a case of the tape having been used so much over the years that it's showing wear in the form of some minor physical damage, enough to cause some very minor dropouts>  Hoffman corrected this on the original DCC release by editiing in the intro from the N.Y. safety copy but elected to not do it for the new AF release since they're so minor.

[buddhahat]

What exactly are these dropouts? I'm cluleless about this stuff. Are they obvious silent bits or what exactly?

Dropouts can vary from minor fluctuations in sound level to the complete loss of the signal for an instant and are caused by anything that causes the tape to lose contact with the playback head of the tape machine.  This can include any contamination on the tape or damage to the tape.  In the case of the first 5-6 seconds of IWFTD it's probably a case of the tape having been used so much over the years that it's showing wear in the form of some minor physical damage, enough to cause some very minor dropouts>  Hoffman corrected this on the original DCC release by editiing in the intro from the N.Y. safety copy but elected to not do it for the new AF release since they're so minor.

Thanks for the info. Are these dropouts obvious enough to be irritating or not really that noticeable unless you're paying close attention to them?

[?]

The N.Y. tape was never used to master any of the LP variations of Pet Sounds and wasn't used to master anything until the CD era.

The NY tape was used on some of the green label LP pressings.

[Bicyclerider]

The most likely explanation as to why the L.A. master has dropouts on the intro of IWFTD while the N.Y. safety copy made from it doesn't is because the N.Y. copy was made before the damage to the L.A. tape occurred.  The N.Y. tape was never used to master any of the LP variations of Pet Sounds and wasn't used to master anything until the CD era.  Meanwhile the L.A. master was used, abused, and misused by Capitol and Warner Bros. :-)  And according to petsite (who put up a timeline of PS tape use here: http://smileysmile.net/board/index.php?topic=2751.0 ) the original digital master prepared and used on the Greenline, Pastmasters, 1990 U.S., and 40 Anniversary Edition issues of PS was no noised.  I don't have either of the earlier Japanese releases anymore, but listening to the 1990 and 2006 versions they're pretty quiet.  It does sound like NR was used judiciously, and because of that the sound wasn't compromised to any significant (or even audible) extent.  But the intros of WIBN and IMFTD are definitley remixed; it's most apparent on the 2006 40th Anniversary Edition.  Listen to the tone of the guitar playing the opening riff and how it changes drastically after that first snare hit.

If the greenline was no noised, it is a different application of no noise than the Pastmasters and US versions, because it sounds completely different (and in a good way).  I find that unlikely, that a no noised digital master would be passed to Japan and then they would re-no noise it again.  Possible, but unlikely.  More likely is that the lack of hiss on some of the intros is from Mark remixing intros from the multitracks, which he did on a number of songs.

[jiggityjars]

I have a used copy of the Japanese Pastmasters version of the Pet Sounds CD if anyone is interested. PM me for more details. Thanks.

[JeffRetro]

If the greenline was no noised, it is a different application of no noise than the Pastmasters and US versions, because it sounds completely different (and in a good way).  I find that unlikely, that a no noised digital master would be passed to Japan and then they would re-no noise it again.  Possible, but unlikely.  More likely is that the lack of hiss on some of the intros is from Mark remixing intros from the multitracks, which he did on a number of songs.

As I understand it, the Japanese record company probably tweaked the EQ on the master they received which may account for the difference you're hearing.  Again, petsite (in the thread i linked to in an above post) specifically remembers reading in Billboard at the time that the digital master had been no noised.  Maybe he'll chime in here to elaborate on it.