New Order vinyl vs. CD discussion (with samples!)

Posted this over on another forum (here) where dorks like me do a lot of vinyl transfers to CD, thought I'd bring the discussion over here...

As I mentioned in the Why Vinyl thread, I've been doing a lot of New Order needledrops as the currently-available CD catalog is absolute crap compared to the original vinyl.

The as-originally-issued-in-the-80s CDs, both US and UK issues, are just OK-sounding. Nothing to write home about - if anything, they're flat transfers that sound like bad bog-standard 80s CDs. On the other hand, the multitude of compilations in the 90s/00s commit every crime in the book - bad EQ, brickwalled compression/limiting, etc etc.

Which brought me to re-evaluate their vinyl catalog. Oh man, that original UK (and in some cases Japanese releases of UK singles) vinyl really hits the sweet spot. What the catalog could sound like on CD if anybody who had the slightest inkling of decent sound could work on it!

Even on my (compared to others on this forum) crap turntable/cartridge setup, the vinyl just SMOKES the CD issues.

Let's compare the excellent 1984 B-side track "Lonesome Tonight", using edited 3-minute samples so as to not taunt the copyright police.

First off, the vinyl version. This is straight-off-the-vinyl, nothing besides very very light click/pop removal done to it:

"Lonesome Tonight", from a MINT Japanese pressing of the FAC103 12" single on Factory Records

Compare that to this next sample, same exact portion as above, but from the original 1987 CD (level-matched to the vinyl, otherwise no editing done besides fades for the sample):

"Lonesome Tonight", straight from the US Qwest Records Substance 1987 CD

(I also have the UK Factory CD issue of Substance, but disc 2 from that (which this song resides on) was mastered really poorly and was never corrected for the UK market - the US version on Qwest does not suffer from that specific mastering issue.)

IMHO the vinyl just obliterates the CD version here. So much more presence, "oomph", vitality, you name it. Now I'm by no means a vinyl purist - my vinyl collection numbers in the low double digits, as compared to my high triple-digit CD count - but I gotta call a spade a spade when I see it (or hear it in this case).

If I, a lowly fan with no ulterior motive besides good sound, can sense such a massive difference in quality/clarity/presence/etc and fall in love with the track all over again because it sounds awesome this way, why can't the band or their management or London Records? If their catalog was remastered on CD to sound like this vinyl sample, I'd buy each and every release they put out all over again. In a heartbeat. They can have wads of my hard-earned cash for it.

Thoughts?

Later on in the thread, someone pines for the original Ceremony on CD, with somebody replying that it finally got a CD release on Singles. My response:

Don't waste your time with Singles. While the concept was great (get those old 7" mixes on CD, many for the first time ever), the execution was terrible. Compressed to death, life-sucking compression and EQ done. See my post on this very forum here with a screenshot comparison of "Ceremony" from this CD and a fresh transfer from the vinyl.

Here's audio evidence, 2-minute clips of "Ceremony" fresh (from last night) from my mint green-sleeve 12" single (yes, same version of the song as the copper-sleeve 7"), and straight from Singles with no processing but fades.

First, the vinyl transfer:

"Ceremony", straight from my 12" vinyl, 2-minute clip - spectacularly dynamic, excellent sound quality, a fine track indeed. Best version of "Ceremony" by New Order? Possibly.

Now, the first-time-on-CD appearance on Singles:

"Ceremony", straight from Singles (same 2 minutes), oh the humanity... Not only is the sound quality extremely questionable, not to mention squashed, they swapped L/R channels in the process! Many songs this wouldn't be as noticeable, but with the high hats prominently in the right channel on the original vinyl, it stands out like a sore thumb here.

Make your own decision - but for humanity's sake hold on to that original vinyl single! Can't beat the sound...

BTW "Temptation" on Singles is just as problematic - which is a shame because the original format (33rpm 7", 5+ minute song) doesn't do the song justice and all copies I've heard suffer from excessive sibilance. It could have been awesome on CD - but they blew it.

Thoughts?

The only problem with this, is that it opens up another round of London re-issues and post-digital exploitation. You might sit back and wait for something like the recent Cure re-masters, which are atrocious, because they ain't gonna get it, and don't care about such details. There are about 5 mastering studios in the world that could get this party right, and they're not the ones Polygram/Universal or anyone else have much interest in. To add – they can't even give a toss about the artwork. I saw a copy of the Closer CD in a shop last week, the cover picture was so filled in you could hardly see it.

All of this has been self-evident for years. CD is a shit format, but it's convenient. Nobody understands the acoustic issue because by and large all this is run by accountants.

What in effect we should say to everybody, is get out there with your own copies and when you can, buy whatever second-hand vinyl copies you can find, and transfer them and distribute them IN YOUR LOCAL AREA, ie. to friends, for nothing.

I am not advocating bootlegging, not at all. Not in the sense that the Napster case suggested. This was a good "crossroads", because we can now also talk about how shit mp3 is as a format.

If you want to get hi-fi, also get hi-fi in your heads!

When you play a CD, you're playing technology from 1978.

They're doing this on purpose, to make it sound "better" on Ipods, computer speakers and crap "hi-fi" equipment. To increase the perceived loudness, the midrange frequencies are boosted. That's why there is less "punch" and less "air" to it: bass and treble are just drowned in a muddy pool of sound. At least you can fix that for yourself by using an equalizer. However, you can't fix the overcompression and hard limiting...

My god, this just shows you how lazy and profit orientated record companies really are.

Me being 16, I don't have a Turn Table (although my hi- fi is ok) and the stylus on my dad's has ben broken for the past couple of weeks.

Glad I'm not the only one who wishes we could get some *quality* remasters of NO's 80s output.

Wow, listening to that clip of Ceremony is a revelation! Listening to the same song on Singles, you'd never know dynamic the original recording is.

I've always wondered why they haven't remastered the back catalog. Is it a lack of demand thing, or is it due to copyrights getting screwed up when Factory imploded?

My god, ceremony does sound much better with your version (although I can hear some crackles about 1/2 way through, but that's probably just normal)

I was wondering, how does the vinyl version of Substance compare in quality to the original singles and the cd version?

Maybe some time soon SACD, HDCD or DVD-A will take off meaning much better sound quality and being able to fit multiple NO albums on single discs (at this greater quality)

It just goes to prove that CD is by no means the definitive, archive medium that people think it is.

It's just another variation.

johnny james wrote: It just goes to prove that CD is by no means the definitive, archive medium that people think it is.

It's just another variation.

OK, but cd should be *much* better than vinyl when it comes to sound quality. The fact that this isn't the case here is merely due to poor (re)mastering of the original tapes.

redphoenix11 wrote: I've always wondered why they haven't remastered the back catalog. Is it a lack of demand thing, or is it due to copyrights getting screwed up when Factory imploded?

Pretty sure it's not a copyright issue. It's up to the band and the label. In that order. I believe New Order own their masters. Warner is their distributor. Can someone clarify this?