Discussion:
Mercury Living Presence Vol. 1
(too old to reply)
Dana John Hill
2013-05-03 16:43:24 UTC
Judging from the price that the Mercury Living Presence Vol. 1 box set
is consistently fetching on eBay and elsewhere (well north of $300), I'm
starting to think the edition was a bit too limited. The second volume
is set to release soon in the USA, but those of us who missed the first
installment appear to be out of luck.

Given that the first edition sold out, is another run a possibility?

Dana John Hill
Gainesville, Florida
Randy Lane
2013-05-03 16:57:08 UTC
It would not surprise me if sets like these get reissued in 5-7 year cycles. But the mega box era is still too new for us to know for sure.
Dana John Hill
2013-05-03 19:04:55 UTC
Post by Randy Lane
It would not surprise me if sets like these get reissued in 5-7 year cycles. But the mega box era is still too new for us to know for sure.
I am seldom surprised when poorly selling recordings get deleted, even
if they are titles I would like to have in my own collection. For
example, some years back I wrote a message to EMI asking about the
Kubelik Mathis der Maler, and whether there was a chance it might turn
up in the GRotC series. I was told that it was unlikely, since the set
had sold so poorly when it was initially released on CD - something like
a couple dozen copies per year. (As it turns out, the set has since been
reissued in a different EMI series, though I managed to track down a
copy of the original CD issue.)


But this Mercury box seems like a different deal. It was issued in the
USA in March 2012, and seemed to go out of print within a year, in spite
of rising relatively high in the Amazon sales rankings. Considering that
it commands well above its original asking price in the used market, and
that there appears to be no shortage of people willing to fork over so
much money, one would think the label would see fit to make a few more
boxes.

I admit I have no idea how these sorts of decisions are made. Perhaps
folks sat around a room and said, "Let's make 3,000 of these bad boys
and that's that forever, no matter what, end of story, period." Perhaps
they are taking the idea of "limited edition" seriously (though I don't
know if this was marketed as a limited edition, per se). Perhaps they
made a calculated decision to withhold Vol. 1 to avoid hurting sales of
Vol. 2. I'm tempted to buy six or seven copies of Vol. 2 and sit on them
for a year to cash in on eBay later.

Meanwhile, I am beginning to suspect that the Karajan 1960s set is about
to disappear. It's listed as out of stock most places. Given that
Karajan 1970s is on its way, could DG be following the same script?

Anybody here know anything about this topic?

Dana John Hill
Gainesville, Florida
William Sommerwerck
2013-05-03 20:32:21 UTC
"Common sense" suggests that a publisher isn't going to produce more of an
item than it thinks it can sell in a reasonable time. Who wants to be stuck
with unsold stock?

Of course, if the item is more popular than expected, what does the publisher
do? Does it duplicate the initial run, only to find it doesn't sell out
quickly enough?
David Fox
2013-05-03 20:59:48 UTC
Post by William Sommerwerck
"Common sense" suggests that a publisher isn't going to produce more of
an item than it thinks it can sell in a reasonable time. Who wants to be
stuck with unsold stock?
Of course, if the item is more popular than expected, what does the
publisher do? Does it duplicate the initial run, only to find it doesn't
sell out quickly enough?
Why do I get the feeling we're giving this more thought than they are?

DF
Oscar
2013-05-03 21:05:26 UTC
Post by Dana John Hill
Judging from the price that the Mercury Living Presence Vol. 1 box set
is consistently fetching on eBay and elsewhere (well north of $300), I'm
starting to think the edition was a bit too limited. The second volume
is set to release soon in the USA, but those of us who missed the first
installment appear to be out of luck.
Given that the first edition sold out, is another run a possibility?
In late 2010, when the second 'DG 111' set http://tiny.cc/5n0iww was
first issued, Universal _did_ do a very limited second run of the
first DG 111 boxed set, originally released October 2009 http://tiny.cc/wm0iww
The first set sold-out quickly, and was OOP by the time the second set
came to market.

I think there is a good possibility we may see a second run of the
first Mercury set. Sold-out quickly and there is no reason to think
another couple thousand sets won't blow out in similar haste.
wade
2013-05-03 23:17:24 UTC
Post by Oscar
Post by Dana John Hill
Judging from the price that the Mercury Living Presence Vol. 1 box set
is consistently fetching on eBay and elsewhere (well north of $300), I'm
starting to think the edition was a bit too limited. The second volume
is set to release soon in the USA, but those of us who missed the first
installment appear to be out of luck.
Given that the first edition sold out, is another run a possibility?
In late 2010, when the second 'DG 111' set http://tiny.cc/5n0iww was
first issued, Universal _did_ do a very limited second run of the
first DG 111 boxed set, originally released October 2009 http://tiny.cc/wm0iww
The first set sold-out quickly, and was OOP by the time the second set
came to market.
I think there is a good possibility we may see a second run of the
first Mercury set. Sold-out quickly and there is no reason to think
another couple thousand sets won't blow out in similar haste.
I am glad i bought the original single CD issues of all the mercurys and replaced the CDs with SACDs where those were issued. But the second big box irritates me in that there is that extra CD and the book that can only be obtained with the box. that would require my selling all my individual CDs to get the box, just for those two extra items.
Tom D.E. Deacon
2013-05-05 12:17:09 UTC
Post by Dana John Hill
Judging from the price that the Mercury Living Presence Vol. 1 box set
is consistently fetching on eBay and elsewhere (well north of $300), I'm
starting to think the edition was a bit too limited. The second volume
is set to release soon in the USA, but those of us who missed the first
installment appear to be out of luck.
Given that the first edition sold out, is another run a possibility?
In late 2010, when the second 'DG 111' sethttp://tiny.cc/5n0iwwwas
first issued, Universal _did_ do a very limited second run of the
first DG 111 boxed set, originally released October 2009http://tiny.cc/wm0iww
The first set sold-out quickly, and was OOP by the time the second set
came to market.
I think there is a good possibility we may see a second run of the
first Mercury set. Sold-out quickly and there is no reason to think
another couple thousand sets won't blow out in similar haste.
I am glad i bought the original single CD issues of all the mercurys and replaced the CDs with SACDs where those were issued.  But the second big box irritates me in that there is that extra CD and the book that can only be obtained with the box.  that would require my selling all my individual CDs to get the box, just for those two extra items.
I agree. But they had to provide some lure for people to buy these
boxes.

Thing is: they are probably NOT using the stampers approved personally
by WCF when the CDs were first issued.

I would hang on to ALL of your single CDs of the MLP reissue series if
I were you. I know that I will. If for no other reason than the
booklets, which are surely not reprinted in those boxes.

The boxes are intended for mass sale, not for the collector.

TD
William Sommerwerck
2013-05-05 13:47:53 UTC
They are probably NOT using the stampers approved
personally by WCF when the CDs were first issued.
Why wouldn't they? It's the cheapest way to reissue the recordings.

Now, if you're suggesting that stampers made from the same tape source will
produce "different sounding" CDs -- I don't want to get into that.
David Fox
2013-05-05 14:54:43 UTC
Post by William Sommerwerck
They are probably NOT using the stampers approved
personally by WCF when the CDs were first issued.
Why wouldn't they? It's the cheapest way to reissue the recordings.
Now, if you're suggesting that stampers made from the same tape source
will produce "different sounding" CDs -- I don't want to get into that.
We've been through this already. Yes, it's possible for stampers to
matter in CD playback, but that issue is also transport-specific (i.e. a
given stamper won't sound better across all CD players, only some).
What WK-F didn't realize is that whatever she was optimizing was only
with respect to her particular playback setup - more specifically,
whichever transport mechanism was built into her CD player.

I discovered this issue when I was ripping my entire CD collection to my
music server. Everything was going fine - zero errors detected by
software - until I got to some (but far from all) Warner Music CD's. I
researched the problem and found out that these CD's didn't play well
with the DVD/CD drive installed on my music server. I put those CD's in
a pile, ripped them on my Mac (zero errors again), and the problem was
solved.

I have little doubt that if the CD's in the big MLP box are from
identical masters as the original CD releases, ripping these CD's will
result in identical WAV files as those ripped from the original CD's.
Bits are bits. That's the wonder of digital. If all of the bits are
properly retrieved in adequate time for a given DAC to process them,
there is no "better" as far as the stamper's concerned.

DF
David Fox
2013-05-05 15:08:37 UTC
Post by David Fox
Post by William Sommerwerck
They are probably NOT using the stampers approved
personally by WCF when the CDs were first issued.
Why wouldn't they? It's the cheapest way to reissue the recordings.
Now, if you're suggesting that stampers made from the same tape source
will produce "different sounding" CDs -- I don't want to get into that.
We've been through this already. Yes, it's possible for stampers to
matter in CD playback, but that issue is also transport-specific (i.e. a
given stamper won't sound better across all CD players, only some).
What WK-F didn't realize is that whatever she was optimizing was only
with respect to her particular playback setup - more specifically,
whichever transport mechanism was built into her CD player.
I discovered this issue when I was ripping my entire CD collection to my
music server. Everything was going fine - zero errors detected by
software - until I got to some (but far from all) Warner Music CD's. I
researched the problem and found out that these CD's didn't play well
with the DVD/CD drive installed on my music server. I put those CD's in
a pile, ripped them on my Mac (zero errors again), and the problem was
solved.
I have little doubt that if the CD's in the big MLP box are from
identical masters as the original CD releases, ripping these CD's will
result in identical WAV files as those ripped from the original CD's.
Bits are bits. That's the wonder of digital. If all of the bits are
properly retrieved in adequate time for a given DAC to process them,
there is no "better" as far as the stamper's concerned.
DF
This is also why those silly SHM-CD's from Japan are demonstrably a
crock of crap. They rip identically to their standard CD brethren. If
a customer is worried that their standard CD won't "read" as well as a
SHM-CD, all they have to do is rip it to disc with something like Exact
Audio Copy and then verify via the log files that there were zero read
errors. They can then either continue to use their standard CD with
full comfort that every last bit is at the ready for reading, or they
can stream the perfect rip they just made. Again, there is no context
for "better" here.

DF
td
2013-05-05 16:47:27 UTC
Post by David Fox
Post by William Sommerwerck
They are probably NOT using the stampers approved
personally by WCF when the CDs were first issued.
Why wouldn't they? It's the cheapest way to reissue the recordings.
Now, if you're suggesting that stampers made from the same tape source
will produce "different sounding" CDs -- I don't want to get into that.
We've been through this already.  Yes, it's possible for stampers to
matter in CD playback, but that issue is also transport-specific (i.e. a
given stamper won't sound better across all CD players, only some).
What WK-F didn't realize is that whatever she was optimizing was only
with respect to her particular playback setup - more specifically,
whichever transport mechanism was built into her CD player.
I discovered this issue when I was ripping my entire CD collection to my
music server. Everything was going fine - zero errors detected by
software - until I got to some (but far from all) Warner Music CD's. I
researched the problem and found out that these CD's didn't play well
with the DVD/CD drive installed on my music server.  I put those CD's in
a pile, ripped them on my Mac (zero errors again), and the problem was
solved.
I have little doubt that if the CD's in the big MLP box are from
identical masters as the original CD releases, ripping these CD's will
result in identical WAV files as those ripped from the original CD's.
Bits are bits.  That's the wonder of digital.  If all of the bits are
properly retrieved in adequate time for a given DAC to process them,
there is no "better" as far as the stamper's concerned.
DF
This is also why those silly SHM-CD's from Japan are demonstrably a
crock of crap.  They rip identically to their standard CD brethren. If
a customer is worried that their standard CD won't "read" as well as a
SHM-CD, all they have to do is rip it to disc with something like Exact
Audio Copy and then verify via the log files that there were zero read
errors.  They can then either continue to use their standard CD with
full comfort that every last bit is at the ready for reading, or they
can stream the perfect rip they just made.  Again, there is no context
for "better" here.
I have NO idea what the SHM CDs from Japan are or what their claims
are. Let's stick to one topic at a time, please.

TD
Steve de Mena
2013-05-06 15:56:03 UTC
Post by td
Post by David Fox
Post by David Fox
Post by William Sommerwerck
They are probably NOT using the stampers approved
personally by WCF when the CDs were first issued.
Why wouldn't they? It's the cheapest way to reissue the recordings.
Now, if you're suggesting that stampers made from the same tape source
will produce "different sounding" CDs -- I don't want to get into that.
We've been through this already. Yes, it's possible for stampers to
matter in CD playback, but that issue is also transport-specific (i.e. a
given stamper won't sound better across all CD players, only some).
What WK-F didn't realize is that whatever she was optimizing was only
with respect to her particular playback setup - more specifically,
whichever transport mechanism was built into her CD player.
I discovered this issue when I was ripping my entire CD collection to my
music server. Everything was going fine - zero errors detected by
software - until I got to some (but far from all) Warner Music CD's. I
researched the problem and found out that these CD's didn't play well
with the DVD/CD drive installed on my music server. I put those CD's in
a pile, ripped them on my Mac (zero errors again), and the problem was
solved.
I have little doubt that if the CD's in the big MLP box are from
identical masters as the original CD releases, ripping these CD's will
result in identical WAV files as those ripped from the original CD's.
Bits are bits. That's the wonder of digital. If all of the bits are
properly retrieved in adequate time for a given DAC to process them,
there is no "better" as far as the stamper's concerned.
DF
This is also why those silly SHM-CD's from Japan are demonstrably a
crock of crap. They rip identically to their standard CD brethren. If
a customer is worried that their standard CD won't "read" as well as a
SHM-CD, all they have to do is rip it to disc with something like Exact
Audio Copy and then verify via the log files that there were zero read
errors. They can then either continue to use their standard CD with
full comfort that every last bit is at the ready for reading, or they
can stream the perfect rip they just made. Again, there is no context
for "better" here.
I have NO idea what the SHM CDs from Japan are or what their claims
are. Let's stick to one topic at a time, please.
TD
Japen has been releasing THOUSANDS of classical titles on SHM-CD for
3-4 years now.

Steve
Norman Schwartz
2013-05-06 18:39:46 UTC
Post by Steve de Mena
Post by td
Post by David Fox
Post by David Fox
Post by William Sommerwerck
They are probably NOT using the stampers approved
personally by WCF when the CDs were first issued.
Why wouldn't they? It's the cheapest way to reissue the
recordings.
Now, if you're suggesting that stampers made from the same tape
source will produce "different sounding" CDs -- I don't want to
get into that.
We've been through this already. Yes, it's possible for stampers
to matter in CD playback, but that issue is also
transport-specific (i.e. a given stamper won't sound better across
all CD players, only some). What WK-F didn't realize is that
whatever she was optimizing was only with respect to her
particular playback setup - more specifically, whichever transport
mechanism was built into her CD player.
I discovered this issue when I was ripping my entire CD collection
to my music server. Everything was going fine - zero errors
detected by software - until I got to some (but far from all)
Warner Music CD's. I researched the problem and found out that
these CD's didn't play well with the DVD/CD drive installed on my
music server. I put those CD's in a pile, ripped them on my Mac
(zero errors again), and the problem was solved.
I have little doubt that if the CD's in the big MLP box are from
identical masters as the original CD releases, ripping these CD's
will result in identical WAV files as those ripped from the
original CD's. Bits are bits. That's the wonder of digital. If
all of the bits are properly retrieved in adequate time for a
given DAC to process them, there is no "better" as far as the
stamper's concerned.
DF
This is also why those silly SHM-CD's from Japan are demonstrably a
crock of crap. They rip identically to their standard CD brethren.
If a customer is worried that their standard CD won't "read" as
well as a SHM-CD, all they have to do is rip it to disc with
something like Exact Audio Copy and then verify via the log files
that there were zero read errors. They can then either continue to
use their standard CD with full comfort that every last bit is at
the ready for reading, or they can stream the perfect rip they just
made. Again, there is no context for "better" here.
I have NO idea what the SHM CDs from Japan are or what their claims
are. Let's stick to one topic at a time, please.
TD
Japen has been releasing THOUSANDS of classical titles on SHM-CD for
3-4 years now.
I recently had to buy a SHM-CD because it was the only available version of
a particular recording.
Post by Steve de Mena
Steve
td
2013-05-06 21:39:27 UTC
Post by Steve de Mena
Post by td
Post by David Fox
Post by William Sommerwerck
They are probably NOT using the stampers approved
personally by WCF when the CDs were first issued.
Why wouldn't they? It's the cheapest way to reissue the recordings.
Now, if you're suggesting that stampers made from the same tape source
will produce "different sounding" CDs -- I don't want to get into that.
We've been through this already.  Yes, it's possible for stampers to
matter in CD playback, but that issue is also transport-specific (i.e. a
given stamper won't sound better across all CD players, only some).
What WK-F didn't realize is that whatever she was optimizing was only
with respect to her particular playback setup - more specifically,
whichever transport mechanism was built into her CD player.
I discovered this issue when I was ripping my entire CD collection to my
music server. Everything was going fine - zero errors detected by
software - until I got to some (but far from all) Warner Music CD's. I
researched the problem and found out that these CD's didn't play well
with the DVD/CD drive installed on my music server.  I put those CD's in
a pile, ripped them on my Mac (zero errors again), and the problem was
solved.
I have little doubt that if the CD's in the big MLP box are from
identical masters as the original CD releases, ripping these CD's will
result in identical WAV files as those ripped from the original CD's.
Bits are bits.  That's the wonder of digital.  If all of the bits are
properly retrieved in adequate time for a given DAC to process them,
there is no "better" as far as the stamper's concerned.
DF
This is also why those silly SHM-CD's from Japan are demonstrably a
crock of crap.  They rip identically to their standard CD brethren. If
a customer is worried that their standard CD won't "read" as well as a
SHM-CD, all they have to do is rip it to disc with something like Exact
Audio Copy and then verify via the log files that there were zero read
errors.  They can then either continue to use their standard CD with
full comfort that every last bit is at the ready for reading, or they
can stream the perfect rip they just made.  Again, there is no context
for "better" here.
I have NO idea what the SHM CDs from Japan are or what their claims
are. Let's stick to one topic at a time, please.
TD
Japen has been releasing THOUSANDS of classical titles on SHM-CD for
3-4 years now.
I realize that, Steve. Just have never felt it worthwhile
investigating them.

TD
td
2013-05-05 16:46:19 UTC
Post by William Sommerwerck
They are probably NOT using the stampers approved
personally by WCF when the CDs were first issued.
Why wouldn't they? It's the cheapest way to reissue the recordings.
Now, if you're suggesting that stampers made from the same tape source
will produce "different sounding" CDs -- I don't want to get into that.
We've been through this already.  Yes, it's possible for stampers to
matter in CD playback, but that issue is also transport-specific (i.e. a
given stamper won't sound better across all CD players, only some).
What WK-F didn't realize is that whatever she was optimizing was only
with respect to her particular playback setup - more specifically,
whichever transport mechanism was built into her CD player.
I discovered this issue when I was ripping my entire CD collection to my
music server. Everything was going fine - zero errors detected by
software - until I got to some (but far from all) Warner Music CD's. I
researched the problem and found out that these CD's didn't play well
with the DVD/CD drive installed on my music server.  I put those CD's in
a pile, ripped them on my Mac (zero errors again), and the problem was
solved.
I have little doubt that if the CD's in the big MLP box are from
identical masters as the original CD releases, ripping these CD's will
result in identical WAV files as those ripped from the original CD's.
Bits are bits.  That's the wonder of digital.  If all of the bits are
properly retrieved in adequate time for a given DAC to process them,
there is no "better" as far as the stamper's concerned.
First of all, David, she was using the sota CD playing equipment
purchased at e-fucking-normous expense for her studio in New Jersey.
Not her home CD player.

She steadfastly maintained over long discussions that regardless of
the ones and zeros and the theory of digital sound she could hear the
difference when the same recording was encoded to a pressing.

I doubt that you would have stood up and told her she was wrong. She
was NEVER wrong, David.

TD
Steve de Mena
2013-05-06 15:57:34 UTC
Post by td
Post by David Fox
Post by William Sommerwerck
They are probably NOT using the stampers approved
personally by WCF when the CDs were first issued.
Why wouldn't they? It's the cheapest way to reissue the recordings.
Now, if you're suggesting that stampers made from the same tape source
will produce "different sounding" CDs -- I don't want to get into that.
We've been through this already. Yes, it's possible for stampers to
matter in CD playback, but that issue is also transport-specific (i.e. a
given stamper won't sound better across all CD players, only some).
What WK-F didn't realize is that whatever she was optimizing was only
with respect to her particular playback setup - more specifically,
whichever transport mechanism was built into her CD player.
I discovered this issue when I was ripping my entire CD collection to my
music server. Everything was going fine - zero errors detected by
software - until I got to some (but far from all) Warner Music CD's. I
researched the problem and found out that these CD's didn't play well
with the DVD/CD drive installed on my music server. I put those CD's in
a pile, ripped them on my Mac (zero errors again), and the problem was
solved.
I have little doubt that if the CD's in the big MLP box are from
identical masters as the original CD releases, ripping these CD's will
result in identical WAV files as those ripped from the original CD's.
Bits are bits. That's the wonder of digital. If all of the bits are
properly retrieved in adequate time for a given DAC to process them,
there is no "better" as far as the stamper's concerned.
First of all, David, she was using the sota CD playing equipment
purchased at e-fucking-normous expense for her studio in New Jersey.
Not her home CD player.
She steadfastly maintained over long discussions that regardless of
the ones and zeros and the theory of digital sound she could hear the
difference when the same recording was encoded to a pressing.
I doubt that you would have stood up and told her she was wrong. She
was NEVER wrong, David.
TD
I'd tell her she was wrong too. Especially since she's the only
person I have ever heard of who has made this claim, amongst the
hundreds or thousands of CD mastering engineers. Nor is it explainable
by the science of 1s and 0s and error correction.

Steve
William Sommerwerck
2013-05-06 16:23:17 UTC
Post by Steve de Mena
I'd tell her she was wrong too. Especially since she's the only
person I have ever heard of who has made this claim, amongst
the hundreds or thousands of CD mastering engineers. Nor is it
explainable by the science of 1s and 0s and error correction.
Actually, others made this claim some time before WCF got involved.

It's (very, very remotely) possible that differences in pit shape /might/ have
a slight effect on the final sound. Maybe. But as SACDs (and some CDs) provide
sound that is more realistic/accurate than phonograph records, my curiosity
about this issue remains, at best, academic.
David Fox
2013-05-06 16:30:25 UTC
Post by td
Post by David Fox
Post by William Sommerwerck
They are probably NOT using the stampers approved
personally by WCF when the CDs were first issued.
Why wouldn't they? It's the cheapest way to reissue the recordings.
Now, if you're suggesting that stampers made from the same tape source
will produce "different sounding" CDs -- I don't want to get into that.
We've been through this already. Yes, it's possible for stampers to
matter in CD playback, but that issue is also transport-specific (i.e. a
given stamper won't sound better across all CD players, only some).
What WK-F didn't realize is that whatever she was optimizing was only
with respect to her particular playback setup - more specifically,
whichever transport mechanism was built into her CD player.
I discovered this issue when I was ripping my entire CD collection to my
music server. Everything was going fine - zero errors detected by
software - until I got to some (but far from all) Warner Music CD's. I
researched the problem and found out that these CD's didn't play well
with the DVD/CD drive installed on my music server. I put those CD's in
a pile, ripped them on my Mac (zero errors again), and the problem was
solved.
I have little doubt that if the CD's in the big MLP box are from
identical masters as the original CD releases, ripping these CD's will
result in identical WAV files as those ripped from the original CD's.
Bits are bits. That's the wonder of digital. If all of the bits are
properly retrieved in adequate time for a given DAC to process them,
there is no "better" as far as the stamper's concerned.
First of all, David, she was using the sota CD playing equipment
purchased at e-fucking-normous expense for her studio in New Jersey.
Not her home CD player.
She steadfastly maintained over long discussions that regardless of
the ones and zeros and the theory of digital sound she could hear the
difference when the same recording was encoded to a pressing.
I doubt that you would have stood up and told her she was wrong. She
was NEVER wrong, David.
TD
I'd tell her she was wrong too. Especially since she's the only person
I have ever heard of who has made this claim, amongst the hundreds or
thousands of CD mastering engineers. Nor is it explainable by the
science of 1s and 0s and error correction.
Steve
If anybody bothered to read what I wrote, I never claimed that WK-F was
necessarily wrong. It is possible she heard differences on her
particular transport with a particular set of stampers. That does not
imply that her rig was either cheap or defective. Particular transports
can have issues with particular mastering/stamping schemes.

One of the nice thing about ripping and streaming is that the
sometimes-difficult problem of returning a perfect stream of data from a
disc in real-time is eliminated. Once a disc is ripped perfectly, the
stream is always perfect. It is a far easier problem to buffer a
pre-ripped stream in real time than it is to freshly rip it and buffer
it. This is one of the reasons that audiophiles are adopting music
servers, and the sales of high-end CD players are plummeting. There are
only a trickle of new high-end CD players being released. If you look
at the high-end catalogs and magazines, ads for DAC's and servers
outnumber those for CD players by many orders of magnitude. Stand-alone
transports are practically extinct. I was at an audio dealer's shop a
few months ago. He had marked down a Meridan stand-alone transport from
$2000 to about $600 and there were no takers. This was not a one-off
situation.

DF
O
2013-05-06 17:39:55 UTC
Post by David Fox
One of the nice thing about ripping and streaming is that the
sometimes-difficult problem of returning a perfect stream of data from a
disc in real-time is eliminated. Once a disc is ripped perfectly, the
stream is always perfect. It is a far easier problem to buffer a
pre-ripped stream in real time than it is to freshly rip it and buffer
it.
The issue is time - can the transport read enough bits to fill the
buffer faster than the stream gets played? Things like Exact Audio
Copy can leisurely re-read the same frame from the disc until it
doesn't get a read error, and only give up after failing a hundred
times or so. It's not playing back a buffer simultaneously that needs
to keep playing continuously, so you don't hear an interruption in the
music. Other than that the process is the same.

-Owen
Norman Schwartz
2013-05-06 17:45:04 UTC
Post by David Fox
Post by Steve de Mena
Post by td
Post by David Fox
Post by William Sommerwerck
They are probably NOT using the stampers approved
personally by WCF when the CDs were first issued.
Why wouldn't they? It's the cheapest way to reissue the
recordings.
Now, if you're suggesting that stampers made from the same tape
source will produce "different sounding" CDs -- I don't want to
get into that.
We've been through this already. Yes, it's possible for stampers
to matter in CD playback, but that issue is also
transport-specific (i.e. a given stamper won't sound better across
all CD players, only some). What WK-F didn't realize is that
whatever she was optimizing was only with respect to her
particular playback setup - more specifically, whichever transport
mechanism was built into her CD player. I discovered this issue when I
was ripping my entire CD collection
to my music server. Everything was going fine - zero errors
detected by software - until I got to some (but far from all)
Warner Music CD's. I researched the problem and found out that
these CD's didn't play well with the DVD/CD drive installed on my
music server. I put those CD's in a pile, ripped them on my Mac
(zero errors again), and the problem was solved.
I have little doubt that if the CD's in the big MLP box are from
identical masters as the original CD releases, ripping these CD's
will result in identical WAV files as those ripped from the
original CD's. Bits are bits. That's the wonder of digital. If
all of the bits are properly retrieved in adequate time for a
given DAC to process them, there is no "better" as far as the
stamper's concerned.
First of all, David, she was using the sota CD playing equipment
purchased at e-fucking-normous expense for her studio in New Jersey.
Not her home CD player.
She steadfastly maintained over long discussions that regardless of
the ones and zeros and the theory of digital sound she could hear
the difference when the same recording was encoded to a pressing.
I doubt that you would have stood up and told her she was wrong. She
was NEVER wrong, David.
TD
I'd tell her she was wrong too. Especially since she's the only
person I have ever heard of who has made this claim, amongst the
hundreds or thousands of CD mastering engineers. Nor is it
explainable by the science of 1s and 0s and error correction.
Steve
If anybody bothered to read what I wrote, I never claimed that WK-F
was necessarily wrong. It is possible she heard differences on her
particular transport with a particular set of stampers. That does not
imply that her rig was either cheap or defective. Particular
transports can have issues with particular mastering/stamping schemes.
One of the nice thing about ripping and streaming is that the
sometimes-difficult problem of returning a perfect stream of data
from a disc in real-time is eliminated. Once a disc is ripped
perfectly, the stream is always perfect. It is a far easier problem
to buffer a pre-ripped stream in real time than it is to freshly rip
it and buffer it. This is one of the reasons that audiophiles are
adopting music servers, and the sales of high-end CD players are
plummeting. There are only a trickle of new high-end CD players
being released. If you look at the high-end catalogs and magazines,
ads for DAC's and servers outnumber those for CD players by many
orders of magnitude. Stand-alone transports are practically extinct. I was
at an audio dealer's shop a few months ago. He had marked down
a Meridan stand-alone transport from $2000 to about $600 and there
were no takers. This was not a one-off situation.
Audio advisor shows 18 CD players including one which has a $4500.00 price
tag.
http://tinyurl.com/d6jahvv
Post by David Fox
DF
David Fox
2013-05-06 18:05:43 UTC
Post by Norman Schwartz
Post by David Fox
Post by Steve de Mena
Post by td
Post by David Fox
Post by William Sommerwerck
They are probably NOT using the stampers approved
personally by WCF when the CDs were first issued.
Why wouldn't they? It's the cheapest way to reissue the
recordings.
Now, if you're suggesting that stampers made from the same tape
source will produce "different sounding" CDs -- I don't want to
get into that.
We've been through this already. Yes, it's possible for stampers
to matter in CD playback, but that issue is also
transport-specific (i.e. a given stamper won't sound better across
all CD players, only some). What WK-F didn't realize is that
whatever she was optimizing was only with respect to her
particular playback setup - more specifically, whichever transport
mechanism was built into her CD player. I discovered this issue when I
was ripping my entire CD collection
to my music server. Everything was going fine - zero errors
detected by software - until I got to some (but far from all)
Warner Music CD's. I researched the problem and found out that
these CD's didn't play well with the DVD/CD drive installed on my
music server. I put those CD's in a pile, ripped them on my Mac
(zero errors again), and the problem was solved.
I have little doubt that if the CD's in the big MLP box are from
identical masters as the original CD releases, ripping these CD's
will result in identical WAV files as those ripped from the
original CD's. Bits are bits. That's the wonder of digital. If
all of the bits are properly retrieved in adequate time for a
given DAC to process them, there is no "better" as far as the
stamper's concerned.
First of all, David, she was using the sota CD playing equipment
purchased at e-fucking-normous expense for her studio in New Jersey.
Not her home CD player.
She steadfastly maintained over long discussions that regardless of
the ones and zeros and the theory of digital sound she could hear
the difference when the same recording was encoded to a pressing.
I doubt that you would have stood up and told her she was wrong. She
was NEVER wrong, David.
TD
I'd tell her she was wrong too. Especially since she's the only
person I have ever heard of who has made this claim, amongst the
hundreds or thousands of CD mastering engineers. Nor is it
explainable by the science of 1s and 0s and error correction.
Steve
If anybody bothered to read what I wrote, I never claimed that WK-F
was necessarily wrong. It is possible she heard differences on her
particular transport with a particular set of stampers. That does not
imply that her rig was either cheap or defective. Particular
transports can have issues with particular mastering/stamping schemes.
One of the nice thing about ripping and streaming is that the
sometimes-difficult problem of returning a perfect stream of data
from a disc in real-time is eliminated. Once a disc is ripped
perfectly, the stream is always perfect. It is a far easier problem
to buffer a pre-ripped stream in real time than it is to freshly rip
it and buffer it. This is one of the reasons that audiophiles are
adopting music servers, and the sales of high-end CD players are
plummeting. There are only a trickle of new high-end CD players
being released. If you look at the high-end catalogs and magazines,
ads for DAC's and servers outnumber those for CD players by many
orders of magnitude. Stand-alone transports are practically extinct. I was
at an audio dealer's shop a few months ago. He had marked down
a Meridan stand-alone transport from $2000 to about $600 and there
were no takers. This was not a one-off situation.
Audio advisor shows 18 CD players including one which has a $4500.00 price
tag.
http://tinyurl.com/d6jahvv
Correct, but did you count the DAC's? At least 3x that number. The
sales figures are probably even more skewed. Most of those CD players
are existing stock that are not exactly flying off the shelves these days.

DF
Randy Lane
2013-05-06 17:51:24 UTC
Qualify "ripped perfectly" please.
What criteria do you use to determine if a cd was "ripped perfectly"?
David Fox
2013-05-06 18:07:31 UTC
Post by Randy Lane
Qualify "ripped perfectly" please.
What criteria do you use to determine if a cd was "ripped perfectly"?
Zero read errors, all parities check. Very straightforward to
objectively major. That's one of the benefits of digital.

DF
O
2013-05-06 18:29:52 UTC
Post by David Fox
Post by Randy Lane
Qualify "ripped perfectly" please.
What criteria do you use to determine if a cd was "ripped perfectly"?
Zero read errors, all parities check. Very straightforward to
objectively major. That's one of the benefits of digital.
And this is not an unusual situation to have happen. All disks that
store data must meet this criteria in order to even work. CD's that
store music are not as critical (you probably won't notice a missing
1/44,100 of a second), but still have the same quality as data CDs.

-Owen
David Fox
2013-05-06 19:10:53 UTC
Post by O
Post by David Fox
Post by Randy Lane
Qualify "ripped perfectly" please.
What criteria do you use to determine if a cd was "ripped perfectly"?
Zero read errors, all parities check. Very straightforward to
objectively major. That's one of the benefits of digital.
And this is not an unusual situation to have happen. All disks that
store data must meet this criteria in order to even work. CD's that
store music are not as critical (you probably won't notice a missing
1/44,100 of a second), but still have the same quality as data CDs.
-Owen
Actually, CD's are designed to work differently from data CD's. They
are built to be read as fault-tolerant streams vs. zero-tolerance data
files. The data streams are accompanied by Reed-Solomon codes which can
be used to reconstitute or when that fails interpolate missing data.
The end result for users is an uninterrupted sound stream whose
underlying quality may in fact be compromised by occasional bad reads.
If you try to read a data file from a CD-ROM on a PC and you encounter a
read error, your application will either return with an error code or abort.

DF
William Sommerwerck
2013-05-06 21:11:05 UTC
Post by Randy Lane
What criteria do you use to determine if a cd was "ripped perfectly"?
Zero read errors, all parities check. Very straightforward to objectively
major. That's one of the benefits of digital.
One can have undetectable errors, because both the data and the checksum are
corrupted in a way that cancels out. I saw this happened with UCSD p-System
software.

CD error correction supposedly takes into account the errors that actually
occur when a polycarbonate disk is pressed.
David Fox
2013-05-06 21:35:13 UTC
Post by William Sommerwerck
Post by Randy Lane
What criteria do you use to determine if a cd was "ripped perfectly"?
Zero read errors, all parities check. Very straightforward to
objectively major. That's one of the benefits of digital.
One can have undetectable errors, because both the data and the checksum
are corrupted in a way that cancels out. I saw this happened with UCSD
p-System software.
CD error correction supposedly takes into account the errors that
actually occur when a polycarbonate disk is pressed.
Correct. Parity-checking would identify those errors, and that same
parity data could be used correct them provided the ratio of parity data
to errors is sufficient.

DF
td
2013-05-06 21:42:49 UTC
Post by David Fox
Post by td
Post by William Sommerwerck
They are probably NOT using the stampers approved
personally by WCF when the CDs were first issued.
Why wouldn't they? It's the cheapest way to reissue the recordings.
Now, if you're suggesting that stampers made from the same tape source
will produce "different sounding" CDs -- I don't want to get into that.
We've been through this already.  Yes, it's possible for stampers to
matter in CD playback, but that issue is also transport-specific (i.e. a
given stamper won't sound better across all CD players, only some).
What WK-F didn't realize is that whatever she was optimizing was only
with respect to her particular playback setup - more specifically,
whichever transport mechanism was built into her CD player.
I discovered this issue when I was ripping my entire CD collection to my
music server. Everything was going fine - zero errors detected by
software - until I got to some (but far from all) Warner Music CD's. I
researched the problem and found out that these CD's didn't play well
with the DVD/CD drive installed on my music server.  I put those CD's in
a pile, ripped them on my Mac (zero errors again), and the problem was
solved.
I have little doubt that if the CD's in the big MLP box are from
identical masters as the original CD releases, ripping these CD's will
result in identical WAV files as those ripped from the original CD's.
Bits are bits.  That's the wonder of digital.  If all of the bits are
properly retrieved in adequate time for a given DAC to process them,
there is no "better" as far as the stamper's concerned.
First of all, David, she was using the sota CD playing equipment
purchased at e-fucking-normous expense for her studio in New Jersey.
Not her home CD player.
She steadfastly maintained over long discussions that regardless of
the ones and zeros and the theory of digital sound she could hear the
difference when the same recording was encoded to a pressing.
I doubt that you would have stood up and told her she was wrong. She
was NEVER wrong, David.
TD
I'd tell her she was wrong too.  Especially since she's the only person
I have ever heard of who has made this claim, amongst the hundreds or
thousands of CD mastering engineers. Nor is it explainable by the
science of 1s and 0s and error correction.
Steve
If anybody bothered to read what I wrote, I never claimed that WK-F was
necessarily wrong.  It is possible she heard differences on her
particular transport with a particular set of stampers.  That does not
imply that her rig was either cheap or defective. Particular transports
can have issues with particular mastering/stamping schemes.
One of the nice thing about ripping and streaming is that the
sometimes-difficult problem of returning a perfect stream of data from a
disc in real-time is eliminated.  Once a disc is ripped perfectly, the
stream is always perfect.
I see that you are not convinced. That's fine. But I trust WCF's ears
more than I do yours. Or your "theories".

TD
Norman Schwartz
2013-05-06 18:41:20 UTC
Post by Steve de Mena
Post by td
Post by David Fox
Post by William Sommerwerck
They are probably NOT using the stampers approved
personally by WCF when the CDs were first issued.
Why wouldn't they? It's the cheapest way to reissue the recordings.
Now, if you're suggesting that stampers made from the same tape
source will produce "different sounding" CDs -- I don't want to
get into that.
We've been through this already. Yes, it's possible for stampers to
matter in CD playback, but that issue is also transport-specific
(i.e. a given stamper won't sound better across all CD players,
only some). What WK-F didn't realize is that whatever she was
optimizing was only with respect to her particular playback setup -
more specifically, whichever transport mechanism was built into her
CD player. I discovered this issue when I was ripping my entire CD
collection
to my music server. Everything was going fine - zero errors
detected by software - until I got to some (but far from all)
Warner Music CD's. I researched the problem and found out that
these CD's didn't play well with the DVD/CD drive installed on my
music server. I put those CD's in a pile, ripped them on my Mac
(zero errors again), and the problem was solved.
I have little doubt that if the CD's in the big MLP box are from
identical masters as the original CD releases, ripping these CD's
will result in identical WAV files as those ripped from the
original CD's. Bits are bits. That's the wonder of digital. If
all of the bits are properly retrieved in adequate time for a given
DAC to process them, there is no "better" as far as the stamper's
concerned.
First of all, David, she was using the sota CD playing equipment
purchased at e-fucking-normous expense for her studio in New Jersey.
Not her home CD player.
She steadfastly maintained over long discussions that regardless of
the ones and zeros and the theory of digital sound she could hear the
difference when the same recording was encoded to a pressing.
I doubt that you would have stood up and told her she was wrong. She
was NEVER wrong, David.
TD
I'd tell her she was wrong too. Especially since she's the only
person I have ever heard of who has made this claim, amongst the
hundreds or thousands of CD mastering engineers. Nor is it explainable
by the science of 1s and 0s and error correction.
Perhaps she had ESP.
Post by Steve de Mena
Steve
td
2013-05-06 21:40:40 UTC
Post by td
Post by William Sommerwerck
They are probably NOT using the stampers approved
personally by WCF when the CDs were first issued.
Why wouldn't they? It's the cheapest way to reissue the recordings.
Now, if you're suggesting that stampers made from the same tape source
will produce "different sounding" CDs -- I don't want to get into that.
We've been through this already.  Yes, it's possible for stampers to
matter in CD playback, but that issue is also transport-specific (i.e. a
given stamper won't sound better across all CD players, only some).
What WK-F didn't realize is that whatever she was optimizing was only
with respect to her particular playback setup - more specifically,
whichever transport mechanism was built into her CD player.
I discovered this issue when I was ripping my entire CD collection to my
music server. Everything was going fine - zero errors detected by
software - until I got to some (but far from all) Warner Music CD's. I
researched the problem and found out that these CD's didn't play well
with the DVD/CD drive installed on my music server.  I put those CD's in
a pile, ripped them on my Mac (zero errors again), and the problem was
solved.
I have little doubt that if the CD's in the big MLP box are from
identical masters as the original CD releases, ripping these CD's will
result in identical WAV files as those ripped from the original CD's.
Bits are bits.  That's the wonder of digital.  If all of the bits are
properly retrieved in adequate time for a given DAC to process them,
there is no "better" as far as the stamper's concerned.
First of all, David, she was using the sota CD playing equipment
purchased at e-fucking-normous expense for her studio in New Jersey.
Not her home CD player.
She steadfastly maintained over long discussions that regardless of
the ones and zeros and the theory of digital sound she could hear the
difference when the same recording was encoded to a pressing.
I doubt that you would have stood up and told her she was wrong. She
was NEVER wrong, David.
TD
I'd tell her she was wrong too.  Especially since she's the only
person I have ever heard of who has made this claim, amongst the
hundreds or thousands of CD mastering engineers. Nor is it explainable
by the science of 1s and 0s and error correction.
Hmmmm.

She also claims to have heard differences between certain European
pressings of the same digital tape and the ones which came out of the
USA plant.

Moreover, she convinced the audio engineers at Hannover.

TD
O
2013-05-06 22:16:42 UTC
In article
Post by td
I'd tell her she was wrong too.  Especially since she's the only
person I have ever heard of who has made this claim, amongst the
hundreds or thousands of CD mastering engineers. Nor is it explainable
by the science of 1s and 0s and error correction.
Hmmmm.
She also claims to have heard differences between certain European
pressings of the same digital tape and the ones which came out of the
USA plant.
Moreover, she convinced the audio engineers at Hannover.
Perhaps she did this with the force of her personality or the authority
of her position rather then with engineering arguments.

-Owen
td
2013-05-06 22:24:47 UTC
Post by O
In article
Post by td
I'd tell her she was wrong too. Especially since she's the only
person I have ever heard of who has made this claim, amongst the
hundreds or thousands of CD mastering engineers. Nor is it explainable
by the science of 1s and 0s and error correction.
Hmmmm.
She also claims to have heard differences between certain European
pressings of the same digital tape and the ones which came out of the
USA plant.
Moreover, she convinced the audio engineers at Hannover.
Perhaps she did this with the force of her personality or the authority
of her position rather  then with engineering arguments.
The proof of the pudding is in the eating.

In this instance, in the hearing. They were convinced. I saw the
"eureka" moment with my own eyes. The engineers sthemselves couldn't
figure out why they heard what they heard.

TD
Mort
2013-05-09 04:43:16 UTC
Post by td
She also claims to have heard differences between certain European
pressings of the same digital tape and the ones which came out of the
USA plant.
Hi,

I did too. I have a few pairs of USA and Germany pressed Cds. The
American pressings have more treble, while the German pressings have
less treble and an overall darker sound. These comparisons are on the
same playback equipment in ABAB hearings.

Mort Linder
Steve de Mena
2013-05-09 10:44:26 UTC
Post by Mort
Post by td
She also claims to have heard differences between certain European
pressings of the same digital tape and the ones which came out of the
USA plant.
Hi,
I did too. I have a few pairs of USA and Germany pressed Cds. The
American pressings have more treble, while the German pressings have
less treble and an overall darker sound. These comparisons are on the
same playback equipment in ABAB hearings.
Mort Linder
Apples and Oranges. That would be because of different master tapes
used to press those CDs. You can't get "more treble" from a different
CD stamper using identical masters.

Steve
td
2013-05-09 11:39:33 UTC
Post by Steve de Mena
Post by Mort
Post by td
She also claims to have heard differences between certain European
pressings of the same digital tape and the ones which came out of the
USA plant.
Hi,
I did too. I have a few pairs of USA and Germany pressed Cds. The
American pressings have more treble, while the German pressings have
less treble and an overall darker sound. These comparisons are on the
same playback equipment in ABAB hearings.
Mort Linder
Apples and Oranges. That would be because of different master tapes
used to press those CDs. You can't get "more treble" from a different
CD stamper using identical masters.
Wrong.

The identical mastertapes were used to press both the USA and European
CDs. Naturally, WCF was concerned about the transporting of the
masters - for which clones existed, nonetheless - but it was simply a
necessary risk to take in order to launch the series out of Hannover.

TD
Steve de Mena
2013-05-10 08:53:27 UTC
Post by td
Post by Steve de Mena
Post by Mort
Post by td
She also claims to have heard differences between certain European
pressings of the same digital tape and the ones which came out of the
USA plant.
Hi,
I did too. I have a few pairs of USA and Germany pressed Cds. The
American pressings have more treble, while the German pressings have
less treble and an overall darker sound. These comparisons are on the
same playback equipment in ABAB hearings.
Mort Linder
Apples and Oranges. That would be because of different master tapes
used to press those CDs. You can't get "more treble" from a different
CD stamper using identical masters.
Wrong.
The identical mastertapes were used to press both the USA and European
CDs. Naturally, WCF was concerned about the transporting of the
masters - for which clones existed, nonetheless - but it was simply a
necessary risk to take in order to launch the series out of Hannover.
TD
Right.

Sorry, it's utter bullshit that CDs made from the same masters could
have more "treble" from one stamper than another.

Regardles, I don't even think the original poster was discussing
Mercury CDs, just some unnamed CDs, probably from the early CDs when
regions pressed CDs based on whatever masters they had lying around.

Steve
td
2013-05-10 13:36:52 UTC
Post by Steve de Mena
Post by td
Post by Steve de Mena
Post by Mort
Post by td
She also claims to have heard differences between certain European
pressings of the same digital tape and the ones which came out of the
USA plant.
Hi,
I did too. I have a few pairs of USA and Germany pressed Cds. The
American pressings have more treble, while the German pressings have
less treble and an overall darker sound. These comparisons are on the
same playback equipment in ABAB hearings.
Mort Linder
Apples and Oranges. That would be because of different master tapes
used to press those CDs. You can't get "more treble" from a different
CD stamper using identical masters.
Wrong.
The identical mastertapes were used to press both the USA and European
CDs. Naturally, WCF was concerned about the transporting of the
masters - for which clones existed, nonetheless - but it was simply a
necessary risk to take in order to launch the series out of Hannover.
TD
Right.
Sorry, it's utter bullshit that CDs made from the same masters could
have more "treble" from one stamper than another.
Did I say "more treble", Steve?

I just said they sound different.

TD
MiNe 109
2013-05-10 14:19:49 UTC
Post by Steve de Mena
Post by td
Post by Steve de Mena
Post by Mort
Post by td
She also claims to have heard differences between certain European
pressings of the same digital tape and the ones which came out of the
USA plant.
Hi,
I did too. I have a few pairs of USA and Germany pressed Cds. The
American pressings have more treble, while the German pressings have
less treble and an overall darker sound. These comparisons are on the
same playback equipment in ABAB hearings.
Mort Linder
Apples and Oranges. That would be because of different master tapes
used to press those CDs. You can't get "more treble" from a different
CD stamper using identical masters.
Wrong.
The identical mastertapes were used to press both the USA and European
CDs. Naturally, WCF was concerned about the transporting of the
masters - for which clones existed, nonetheless - but it was simply a
necessary risk to take in order to launch the series out of Hannover.
TD
Right.
Sorry, it's utter bullshit that CDs made from the same masters could
have more "treble" from one stamper than another.
Regardles, I don't even think the original poster was discussing
Mercury CDs, just some unnamed CDs, probably from the early CDs when
regions pressed CDs based on whatever masters they had lying around.
Some early pressing plants did routine DA/AD conversions that could
change the sound compared to the same master from a different plant.
Obviously, it is no longer the same "master" in this case.

Stephen
David Fox
2013-05-10 14:28:41 UTC
Post by Steve de Mena
Post by td
Post by Steve de Mena
Post by Mort
Post by td
She also claims to have heard differences between certain European
pressings of the same digital tape and the ones which came out of the
USA plant.
Hi,
I did too. I have a few pairs of USA and Germany pressed Cds. The
American pressings have more treble, while the German pressings have
less treble and an overall darker sound. These comparisons are on the
same playback equipment in ABAB hearings.
Mort Linder
Apples and Oranges. That would be because of different master tapes
used to press those CDs. You can't get "more treble" from a different
CD stamper using identical masters.
Wrong.
The identical mastertapes were used to press both the USA and European
CDs. Naturally, WCF was concerned about the transporting of the
masters - for which clones existed, nonetheless - but it was simply a
necessary risk to take in order to launch the series out of Hannover.
TD
Right.
Sorry, it's utter bullshit that CDs made from the same masters could
have more "treble" from one stamper than another.
Regardles, I don't even think the original poster was discussing Mercury
CDs, just some unnamed CDs, probably from the early CDs when regions
pressed CDs based on whatever masters they had lying around.
Steve
Surrender to the power of the magic stampers, Steve. From now on,
always demand magic stampers. CD's made from the same digital masters
but pressed with mortal stampers are worthless. People who own CD's
pressed from magic stampers are special because just a little bit of the
magical powers fall out of the pits and bestow magic upon them. These
reissued CD's at $2/each are no bargain because they contain no magic.

Does everything make sense now?

DF
wade
2013-05-10 14:35:27 UTC
Post by David Fox
Post by Steve de Mena
Post by td
Post by Steve de Mena
Post by Mort
Post by td
She also claims to have heard differences between certain European
pressings of the same digital tape and the ones which came out of the
USA plant.
Hi,
I did too. I have a few pairs of USA and Germany pressed Cds. The
American pressings have more treble, while the German pressings have
less treble and an overall darker sound. These comparisons are on the
same playback equipment in ABAB hearings.
Mort Linder
Apples and Oranges. That would be because of different master tapes
used to press those CDs. You can't get "more treble" from a different
CD stamper using identical masters.
Wrong.
The identical mastertapes were used to press both the USA and European
CDs. Naturally, WCF was concerned about the transporting of the
masters - for which clones existed, nonetheless - but it was simply a
necessary risk to take in order to launch the series out of Hannover.
TD
Right.
Sorry, it's utter bullshit that CDs made from the same masters could
have more "treble" from one stamper than another.
Regardles, I don't even think the original poster was discussing Mercury
CDs, just some unnamed CDs, probably from the early CDs when regions
pressed CDs based on whatever masters they had lying around.
Steve
Surrender to the power of the magic stampers, Steve. From now on,
always demand magic stampers. CD's made from the same digital masters
but pressed with mortal stampers are worthless. People who own CD's
pressed from magic stampers are special because just a little bit of the
magical powers fall out of the pits and bestow magic upon them. These
reissued CD's at $2/each are no bargain because they contain no magic.
Does everything make sense now?
DF
and of course the SHMCDs are the only ones with magic, right?
wade
2013-05-10 14:39:52 UTC
Post by David Fox
Post by Steve de Mena
Post by td
Post by Steve de Mena
Post by Mort
Post by td
She also claims to have heard differences between certain European
pressings of the same digital tape and the ones which came out of the
USA plant.
Hi,
I did too. I have a few pairs of USA and Germany pressed Cds. The
American pressings have more treble, while the German pressings have
less treble and an overall darker sound. These comparisons are on the
same playback equipment in ABAB hearings.
Mort Linder
Apples and Oranges. That would be because of different master tapes
used to press those CDs. You can't get "more treble" from a different
CD stamper using identical masters.
Wrong.
The identical mastertapes were used to press both the USA and European
CDs. Naturally, WCF was concerned about the transporting of the
masters - for which clones existed, nonetheless - but it was simply a
necessary risk to take in order to launch the series out of Hannover.
TD
Right.
Sorry, it's utter bullshit that CDs made from the same masters could
have more "treble" from one stamper than another.
Regardles, I don't even think the original poster was discussing Mercury
CDs, just some unnamed CDs, probably from the early CDs when regions
pressed CDs based on whatever masters they had lying around.
Steve
Surrender to the power of the magic stampers, Steve. From now on,
always demand magic stampers. CD's made from the same digital masters
but pressed with mortal stampers are worthless. People who own CD's
pressed from magic stampers are special because just a little bit of the
magical powers fall out of the pits and bestow magic upon them. These
reissued CD's at $2/each are no bargain because they contain no magic.
Does everything make sense now?
DF
then again, there is real magic and there is fake magic.
Dana John Hill
2013-05-10 18:31:38 UTC
Post by David Fox
Post by Steve de Mena
Post by td
Post by Steve de Mena
Post by Mort
Post by td
She also claims to have heard differences between certain European
pressings of the same digital tape and the ones which came out of the
USA plant.
Hi,
I did too. I have a few pairs of USA and Germany pressed Cds. The
American pressings have more treble, while the German pressings have
less treble and an overall darker sound. These comparisons are on the
same playback equipment in ABAB hearings.
Mort Linder
Apples and Oranges. That would be because of different master tapes
used to press those CDs. You can't get "more treble" from a different
CD stamper using identical masters.
Wrong.
The identical mastertapes were used to press both the USA and European
CDs. Naturally, WCF was concerned about the transporting of the
masters - for which clones existed, nonetheless - but it was simply a
necessary risk to take in order to launch the series out of Hannover.
TD
Right.
Sorry, it's utter bullshit that CDs made from the same masters could
have more "treble" from one stamper than another.
Regardles, I don't even think the original poster was discussing Mercury
CDs, just some unnamed CDs, probably from the early CDs when regions
pressed CDs based on whatever masters they had lying around.
Steve
Surrender to the power of the magic stampers, Steve. From now on,
always demand magic stampers. CD's made from the same digital masters
but pressed with mortal stampers are worthless. People who own CD's
pressed from magic stampers are special because just a little bit of the
magical powers fall out of the pits and bestow magic upon them. These
reissued CD's at $2/each are no bargain because they contain no magic.
Does everything make sense now?
DF
Look, I personally don't really care if the label claims that they
harnessed the power of the unicorn for this reissue; I just want them to
make another batch so I can get my hands on it. I have a lot of MLP
discs already, but by no means do I have them all, and this seems like
the most economical way for me to get them.

Meanwhile, I'm still waiting to hear from Amazon about the Karajan 1960s
set I ordered. Nobody has it in stock. Can it really have gone out of
print in less than a year?

Dana John Hill
Gainesville, Florida
David Fox
2013-05-10 20:07:59 UTC
Post by Dana John Hill
Post by David Fox
Post by Steve de Mena
Post by td
Post by Steve de Mena
Post by Mort
Post by td
She also claims to have heard differences between certain European
pressings of the same digital tape and the ones which came out of the
USA plant.
Hi,
I did too. I have a few pairs of USA and Germany pressed Cds. The
American pressings have more treble, while the German pressings have
less treble and an overall darker sound. These comparisons are on the
same playback equipment in ABAB hearings.
Mort Linder
Apples and Oranges. That would be because of different master tapes
used to press those CDs. You can't get "more treble" from a different
CD stamper using identical masters.
Wrong.
The identical mastertapes were used to press both the USA and European
CDs. Naturally, WCF was concerned about the transporting of the
masters - for which clones existed, nonetheless - but it was simply a
necessary risk to take in order to launch the series out of Hannover.
TD
Right.
Sorry, it's utter bullshit that CDs made from the same masters could
have more "treble" from one stamper than another.
Regardles, I don't even think the original poster was discussing Mercury
CDs, just some unnamed CDs, probably from the early CDs when regions
pressed CDs based on whatever masters they had lying around.
Steve
Surrender to the power of the magic stampers, Steve. From now on,
always demand magic stampers. CD's made from the same digital masters
but pressed with mortal stampers are worthless. People who own CD's
pressed from magic stampers are special because just a little bit of the
magical powers fall out of the pits and bestow magic upon them. These
reissued CD's at $2/each are no bargain because they contain no magic.
Does everything make sense now?
DF
Look, I personally don't really care if the label claims that they
harnessed the power of the unicorn for this reissue; I just want them to
make another batch so I can get my hands on it. I have a lot of MLP
discs already, but by no means do I have them all, and this seems like
the most economical way for me to get them.
When the MLP box was released, I got the sense that things would play
out as they have: it would sell out and inflate in value. I felt this
way because 1) UMG seems to have lost all ability to calibrate supply
and demand; 2) It's a really great box set. I made a friendly wager with
a friend who was holding out for a cheaper price that it would only go
up in value over time. I was right.

If history repeats itself, I predict that the second box will become
more valuable than the first over time precisely because it won't be as
popular. This may seem perverse but this is exactly what happened with
the BMG Russian Pianists sets. The first box consisting of Vol 1-10
sold reasonably well and has remained semi-collectable. I bought my
copy in 1993 or so for about $100 and its resale value has remained
roughly that (retaining value is far from a bad thing for CD's). The
second box (vols 11-20) wasn't nearly as popular. The pianists were
mostly more obscure and it only sold a fraction of what the first set
sold. It went OOP and then became much more rare than the first box.
If you wanted Box 2, you'd have to pay between 2x and 4x of what you'd
have to pay to buy the "better" box. So, my advice is if you even think
you want Box 2, buy it quickly. Even if you decide not to keep it,
you'll be glad you did.
Post by Dana John Hill
Meanwhile, I'm still waiting to hear from Amazon about the Karajan 1960s
set I ordered. Nobody has it in stock. Can it really have gone out of
print in less than a year?
In the current environment? Absolutely! Look how quickly BMG issued
and deleted their Heifetz megabox. In this environment if you see a
cheap megabox that you even *think* you want, snap it up quickly.

DF
td
2013-05-10 21:21:27 UTC
The cogency of your argument is impressive. And worthless.

TD
Gerard
2013-05-10 21:32:04 UTC
Post by td
The cogency of your argument is impressive. And worthless.
TD
Who's argument? Which argument?
(By not quoting anything, and not mentioning the name of the poster you're
replying to, it's getting a puzzle.)
td
2013-05-11 00:34:10 UTC
I simply reply to a post. Google seems to eliminate the post to which one is answering. Strange.

TD
Gerard
2013-05-11 07:11:21 UTC
Post by td
I simply reply to a post. Google seems to eliminate the post to which
one is answering. Strange.
TD
Some other posts by you have "all quotable information".
I suppose you're using 2 (or more) different devices (and maybe different
accounts), each with it's own settings.
td
2013-05-11 11:50:43 UTC
Post by Gerard
Post by td
I simply reply to a post. Google seems to eliminate the post to which
one is answering. Strange.
TD
Some other posts by you have "all quotable information".
I suppose you're using 2 (or more) different devices (and maybe different
accounts), each with it's own settings.
You can't "set settings" on an IPad. Google Groups is what it is. When
you "reply to message", you do that, but Google Groups eliminates the
message. Very frustrating.

TD
Gerard
2013-05-11 12:59:21 UTC
Post by td
Post by Gerard
Post by td
I simply reply to a post. Google seems to eliminate the post to
which one is answering. Strange.
TD
Some other posts by you have "all quotable information".
I suppose you're using 2 (or more) different devices (and maybe
different accounts), each with it's own settings.
You can't "set settings" on an IPad. Google Groups is what it is. When
you "reply to message", you do that, but Google Groups eliminates the
message. Very frustrating.
TD
But Google Groups does not always eliminate everyting - see above.
I suppose that if eliminating everything can be prevented in one case, it can be
prevented in another case as well.
I don't use Google Groups, so I cannot help you with this.
td
2013-05-13 12:13:18 UTC
Post by Gerard
Post by td
Post by Gerard
Post by td
I simply reply to a post. Google seems to eliminate the post to
which one is answering. Strange.
TD
Some other posts by you have "all quotable information".
I suppose you're using 2 (or more) different devices (and maybe
different accounts), each with it's own settings.
You can't "set settings" on an IPad. Google Groups is what it is. When
you "reply to message", you do that, but Google Groups eliminates the
message. Very frustrating.
TD
But Google Groups does not always eliminate everyting - see above.
I suppose that if eliminating everything can be prevented in one case, it can be
prevented in another case as well.
I don't use Google Groups, so I cannot help you with this.
I don't need help.

I simply follow Google's instructions, whether on the iPad. Or Chrome,
which seems the best way to ensure that everything quoted actually
appears, but which is not always available.

So be it.

TD
td
2013-05-05 16:43:09 UTC
Post by William Sommerwerck
They are probably NOT using the stampers approved
personally by WCF when the CDs were first issued.
Why wouldn't they? It's the cheapest way to reissue the recordings.
Now, if you're suggesting that stampers made from the same tape source will
produce "different sounding" CDs -- I don't want to get into that.
WCF claimed that she could hear the difference between the same
recording produced by different stampers. She only always approved
one. Sometimes she thought the European CDs, produced from the same
digital masters from stampers made in Hannover, produced a more
faithful sound. She even managed to get the engineers to hear those
differences. Again, she only chose one of four or five made for
production.

If they DO use the same stampers produced some 15 years ago - hard to
believe, of course - then yes, the sound will be the same. But they
could have just used a CD to make the new stamper. Actually, as that
is a "clone" of the original recording it wouldn't be bad, just not
the original pressing she approved, that's all.

TD
D***@aol.com
2013-05-05 18:18:42 UTC
Post by td
Post by William Sommerwerck
They are probably NOT using the stampers approved
personally by WCF when the CDs were first issued.
Why wouldn't they? It's the cheapest way to reissue the recordings.
Now, if you're suggesting that stampers made from the same tape source will
produce "different sounding" CDs -- I don't want to get into that.
WCF claimed that she could hear the difference between the same
recording produced by different stampers. She only always approved
one. Sometimes she thought the European CDs, produced from the same
digital masters from stampers made in Hannover, produced a more
faithful sound. She even managed to get the engineers to hear those
differences. Again, she only chose one of four or five made for
production.
If they DO use the same stampers produced some 15 years ago - hard to
believe, of course - then yes, the sound will be the same. But they
could have just used a CD to make the new stamper. Actually, as that
is a "clone" of the original recording it wouldn't be bad, just not
the original pressing she approved, that's all.
TD
This matter has been discussed at great length for months on the website of the Association for Recorded Sound Collections (ARSClist). A major participant in every aspect of the discussion has been Tom Fine, the son of Bob and Wilma Cozart Fine. Tom and his brothers exercised control over every aspect of the project, including the selection of included recordings. My recollection of his many posts is that he and his brothers required that their mother's original transfers be used without alteration. They would consent to nothing less.

The full discussion can be found at ARSC's discussion site.

Don Tait
O
2013-05-06 01:48:05 UTC
Post by D***@aol.com
Post by td
Post by William Sommerwerck
They are probably NOT using the stampers approved
personally by WCF when the CDs were first issued.
Why wouldn't they? It's the cheapest way to reissue the recordings.
Now, if you're suggesting that stampers made from the same tape source will
produce "different sounding" CDs -- I don't want to get into that.
WCF claimed that she could hear the difference between the same
recording produced by different stampers. She only always approved
one. Sometimes she thought the European CDs, produced from the same
digital masters from stampers made in Hannover, produced a more
faithful sound. She even managed to get the engineers to hear those
differences. Again, she only chose one of four or five made for
production.
If they DO use the same stampers produced some 15 years ago - hard to
believe, of course - then yes, the sound will be the same. But they
could have just used a CD to make the new stamper. Actually, as that
is a "clone" of the original recording it wouldn't be bad, just not
the original pressing she approved, that's all.
TD
This matter has been discussed at great length for months on the website of
the Association for Recorded Sound Collections (ARSClist). A major
participant in every aspect of the discussion has been Tom Fine, the son of
Bob and Wilma Cozart Fine. Tom and his brothers exercised control over every
aspect of the project, including the selection of included recordings. My
recollection of his many posts is that he and his brothers required that
their mother's original transfers be used without alteration. They would consent to nothing less.
The full discussion can be found at ARSC's discussion site.
<Sorry, couldn't find a way to display the back discussion from this
site.>

How many different ways can you hear the number "eleven?"

CD's work by stamping an encoding of a number which is a precise
snapshot of the sound for 44,100 times every second. If that number is
a zero, then it's silence. If the number is positive then it indicates
the speaker cone should go in one direction for a certain distance; if
it is negative, then the cone should go in the opposite direction.
Just like the grooves in the phonograph record got more wiggles in the
louder parts, on your CD the value of these numbers increased the most
in the louder parts.

In addition to this number, there are additional numbers added which
are used to verify that these numbers are correct. A simple example is
to add a single digit to the original number that when added to the
number, makes the number end in a zero. If it doesn't end in a zero,
then you have a read error. (This is a simplified explanation, but the
principle is the same.)

So, if recordings sound different from one CD to another of the same
recording, then only one of two things can be happening:

1) One of the pressing machines, when read on the playback machine,
resulted in the playback machine detecting more errors, thus there was
a decay of the actual sound, or...

2) People are hearing what they want to hear.

If 1) is the case, then it would be a simple matter to detect: compare
all the numbers on both CD's. If you have enough read errors that
would cause a perceptible decay in the sound, then that's your baby.
Else it can only be number two, because the number eleven only makes
one sound.

CD players don't read sounds, they read numbers. And either they read
them or they don't. They send these numbers to another microchip that
converts them to speaker directions. Anything else is green felt pen
stuff.

-Owen
William Sommerwerck
2013-05-06 04:38:35 UTC
Post by O
CD players don't read sounds, they read numbers. And either
they read them or they don't. They send these numbers to
another microchip that converts them to speaker directions.
Anything else is green felt pen stuff.
I stopped reviewing because I discovered I couldn't trust my own hearing.
But...

In the early days of CD, I read an article about a poorly designed DAC that
could not handle data trains with dirty waveforms -- the DAC audibly fouled
the signal, even though it was receiving the correct data. It's possible there
are as-yet-unqualified errors that produce audible variations. *

However, I seriously doubt it. If we anticipate hearing differences, we
usually will. And when a second listen fails to reproduce the errors, most
listeners believe the first listen.

By the way, the "green felt pen" does reduce timing errors. The issue is
whether they're audible. The guys who made this claim gave me a demo in my
living room -- and I heard no difference (though they said they did).

* "Heavy" errors that require extensive interpolation aren't among them. A
disk with such serious damage would probably stutter or produce other obvious
errors.
td
2013-05-06 21:38:05 UTC
Post by O
Post by td
Post by William Sommerwerck
They are probably NOT using the stampers approved
personally by WCF when the CDs were first issued.
Why wouldn't they? It's the cheapest way to reissue the recordings.
Now, if you're suggesting that stampers made from the same tape source will
produce "different sounding" CDs -- I don't want to get into that.
WCF claimed that she could hear the difference between the same
recording produced by different stampers. She only always approved
one. Sometimes she thought the European CDs, produced from the same
digital masters from stampers made in Hannover, produced a more
faithful sound. She even managed to get the engineers to hear those
differences. Again, she only chose one of four or five made for
production.
If they DO use the same stampers produced some 15 years ago - hard to
believe, of course - then yes, the sound will be the same. But they
could have just used a CD to make the new stamper. Actually, as that
is a "clone" of the original recording it wouldn't be bad, just not
the original pressing she approved, that's all.
TD
  This matter has been discussed at great length for months on the website of
the Association for Recorded Sound Collections (ARSClist). A major
participant in every aspect of the discussion has been Tom Fine, the son of
Bob and Wilma Cozart Fine. Tom and his brothers exercised control over every
aspect of the project, including the selection of included recordings. My
recollection of his many posts is that he and his brothers required that
their mother's original transfers be used without alteration. They would consent to nothing less.
  The full discussion can be found at ARSC's discussion site.
<Sorry, couldn't find a way to display the back discussion from this
site.>
How many different ways can you hear the number "eleven?"
CD's work by stamping an encoding of a number which is a precise
snapshot of the sound for 44,100 times every second.  If that number is
a zero, then it's silence.  If the number is positive then it indicates
the speaker cone should go in one direction for a certain distance; if
it is negative, then the cone should go in the opposite direction.
Just like the grooves in the phonograph record got more wiggles in the
louder parts, on your CD the value of these numbers increased the most
in the louder parts.
In addition to this number, there are additional numbers added which
are used to verify that these numbers are correct.  A simple example is
to add a single digit to the original number that when added to the
number, makes the number end in a zero.  If it doesn't end in a zero,
then you have a read error. (This is a simplified explanation, but the
principle is the same.)
So, if recordings sound different from one CD to another of the same
1) One of the pressing machines, when read on the playback machine,
resulted in the playback machine detecting more errors, thus there was
a decay of the actual sound, or...
2) People are hearing what they want to hear.
If 1) is the case, then it would be a simple matter to detect: compare
all the numbers on both CD's.  If you have enough read errors that
would cause a perceptible decay in the sound, then that's your baby.
Else it can only be number two, because the number eleven only makes
one sound.
CD players don't read sounds, they read numbers. And either they read
them or they don't.   They send these numbers to another microchip that
converts them to speaker directions.  Anything else is green felt pen
stuff.
I would like to have seen you tell that to WCF. She would have chewed
up up and spat you out.

TD
O
2013-05-06 22:15:05 UTC
In article
Post by td
Post by O
Post by td
Post by William Sommerwerck
They are probably NOT using the stampers approved
personally by WCF when the CDs were first issued.
Why wouldn't they? It's the cheapest way to reissue the recordings.
Now, if you're suggesting that stampers made from the same tape source will
produce "different sounding" CDs -- I don't want to get into that.
WCF claimed that she could hear the difference between the same
recording produced by different stampers. She only always approved
one. Sometimes she thought the European CDs, produced from the same
digital masters from stampers made in Hannover, produced a more
faithful sound. She even managed to get the engineers to hear those
differences. Again, she only chose one of four or five made for
production.
If they DO use the same stampers produced some 15 years ago - hard to
believe, of course - then yes, the sound will be the same. But they
could have just used a CD to make the new stamper. Actually, as that
is a "clone" of the original recording it wouldn't be bad, just not
the original pressing she approved, that's all.
TD
  This matter has been discussed at great length for months on the website of
the Association for Recorded Sound Collections (ARSClist). A major
participant in every aspect of the discussion has been Tom Fine, the son of
Bob and Wilma Cozart Fine. Tom and his brothers exercised control over every
aspect of the project, including the selection of included recordings. My
recollection of his many posts is that he and his brothers required that
their mother's original transfers be used without alteration. They would
consent to nothing less.
  The full discussion can be found at ARSC's discussion site.
<Sorry, couldn't find a way to display the back discussion from this
site.>
How many different ways can you hear the number "eleven?"
CD's work by stamping an encoding of a number which is a precise
snapshot of the sound for 44,100 times every second.  If that number is
a zero, then it's silence.  If the number is positive then it indicates
the speaker cone should go in one direction for a certain distance; if
it is negative, then the cone should go in the opposite direction.
Just like the grooves in the phonograph record got more wiggles in the
louder parts, on your CD the value of these numbers increased the most
in the louder parts.
In addition to this number, there are additional numbers added which
are used to verify that these numbers are correct.  A simple example is
to add a single digit to the original number that when added to the
number, makes the number end in a zero.  If it doesn't end in a zero,
then you have a read error. (This is a simplified explanation, but the
principle is the same.)
So, if recordings sound different from one CD to another of the same
1) One of the pressing machines, when read on the playback machine,
resulted in the playback machine detecting more errors, thus there was
a decay of the actual sound, or...
2) People are hearing what they want to hear.
If 1) is the case, then it would be a simple matter to detect: compare
all the numbers on both CD's.  If you have enough read errors that
would cause a perceptible decay in the sound, then that's your baby.
Else it can only be number two, because the number eleven only makes
one sound.
CD players don't read sounds, they read numbers. And either they read
them or they don't.   They send these numbers to another microchip that
converts them to speaker directions.  Anything else is green felt pen
stuff.
I would like to have seen you tell that to WCF. She would have chewed
up up and spat you out.
Who you gonna believe, WCF or mathematics? She may have been right in
that one pressing machine made for a different result on the CD's it
pressed, but that could only be accomplished by having more or less
read errors than the CD it is compared to. As I said, it would be a
simple matter to compare the CD's generated. If it says eleven on one,
and eleven on the other, then the sound has to be eleven.


-Owen
td
2013-05-06 22:23:31 UTC
Post by O
In article
Post by td
Post by O
Post by D***@aol.com
Post by td
Post by William Sommerwerck
They are probably NOT using the stampers approved
personally by WCF when the CDs were first issued.
Why wouldn't they? It's the cheapest way to reissue the recordings.
Now, if you're suggesting that stampers made from the same tape source
will
produce "different sounding" CDs -- I don't want to get into that.
WCF claimed that she could hear the difference between the same
recording produced by different stampers. She only always approved
one. Sometimes she thought the European CDs, produced from the same
digital masters from stampers made in Hannover, produced a more
faithful sound. She even managed to get the engineers to hear those
differences. Again, she only chose one of four or five made for
production.
If they DO use the same stampers produced some 15 years ago - hard to
believe, of course - then yes, the sound will be the same. But they
could have just used a CD to make the new stamper. Actually, as that
is a "clone" of the original recording it wouldn't be bad, just not
the original pressing she approved, that's all.
TD
This matter has been discussed at great length for months on the website of
the Association for Recorded Sound Collections (ARSClist). A major
participant in every aspect of the discussion has been Tom Fine, the son of
Bob and Wilma Cozart Fine. Tom and his brothers exercised control over every
aspect of the project, including the selection of included recordings. My
recollection of his many posts is that he and his brothers required that
their mother's original transfers be used without alteration. They would
consent to nothing less.
The full discussion can be found at ARSC's discussion site.
<Sorry, couldn't find a way to display the back discussion from this
site.>
How many different ways can you hear the number "eleven?"
CD's work by stamping an encoding of a number which is a precise
snapshot of the sound for 44,100 times every second. If that number is
a zero, then it's silence. If the number is positive then it indicates
the speaker cone should go in one direction for a certain distance; if
it is negative, then the cone should go in the opposite direction.
Just like the grooves in the phonograph record got more wiggles in the
louder parts, on your CD the value of these numbers increased the most
in the louder parts.
In addition to this number, there are additional numbers added which
are used to verify that these numbers are correct. A simple example is
to add a single digit to the original number that when added to the
number, makes the number end in a zero. If it doesn't end in a zero,
then you have a read error. (This is a simplified explanation, but the
principle is the same.)
So, if recordings sound different from one CD to another of the same
1) One of the pressing machines, when read on the playback machine,
resulted in the playback machine detecting more errors, thus there was
a decay of the actual sound, or...
2) People are hearing what they want to hear.
If 1) is the case, then it would be a simple matter to detect: compare
all the numbers on both CD's. If you have enough read errors that
would cause a perceptible decay in the sound, then that's your baby.
Else it can only be number two, because the number eleven only makes
one sound.
CD players don't read sounds, they read numbers. And either they read
them or they don't. They send these numbers to another microchip that
converts them to speaker directions. Anything else is green felt pen
stuff.
I would like to have seen you tell that to WCF. She would have chewed
up up and spat you out.
Who you gonna believe, WCF or mathematics?  She may have been right in
that one pressing machine made for a different result on the CD's it
pressed, but that could only be accomplished by having more or less
read errors than the CD it is compared to.  As I said, it would be a
simple matter to compare the CD's generated.  If it says eleven on one,
and eleven on the other, then the sound has to be eleven.
It is not the difference between a CD made on one pressing machine and
another. It is rather the difference between one encoder used to make
the stamper, and another. There can also be distinct differences
dependent upon the audio chain used at the factory to transfer the
digital tape to the CD stamper.

She would tinker with all of these elements before she cam up with a
combination that sounded most like the original analogue mastertape
and the digital transfer she had made from it.

TD
William Sommerwerck
2013-05-06 22:23:37 UTC
Post by O
Who you gonna believe, WCF or mathematics?
Neither. Though I lean strongly toward math, there is a remote possibility
she's right. But why deny people recordings over a highly debatable issue?
David Fox
2013-05-06 22:38:53 UTC
Post by O
In article
Post by td
Post by O
Post by D***@aol.com
Post by td
Post by William Sommerwerck
They are probably NOT using the stampers approved
personally by WCF when the CDs were first issued.
Why wouldn't they? It's the cheapest way to reissue the recordings.
Now, if you're suggesting that stampers made from the same tape source will
produce "different sounding" CDs -- I don't want to get into that.
WCF claimed that she could hear the difference between the same
recording produced by different stampers. She only always approved
one. Sometimes she thought the European CDs, produced from the same
digital masters from stampers made in Hannover, produced a more
faithful sound. She even managed to get the engineers to hear those
differences. Again, she only chose one of four or five made for
production.
If they DO use the same stampers produced some 15 years ago - hard to
believe, of course - then yes, the sound will be the same. But they
could have just used a CD to make the new stamper. Actually, as that
is a "clone" of the original recording it wouldn't be bad, just not
the original pressing she approved, that's all.
TD
This matter has been discussed at great length for months on the website of
the Association for Recorded Sound Collections (ARSClist). A major
participant in every aspect of the discussion has been Tom Fine, the son of
Bob and Wilma Cozart Fine. Tom and his brothers exercised control over every
aspect of the project, including the selection of included recordings. My
recollection of his many posts is that he and his brothers required that
their mother's original transfers be used without alteration. They would
consent to nothing less.
The full discussion can be found at ARSC's discussion site.
<Sorry, couldn't find a way to display the back discussion from this
site.>
How many different ways can you hear the number "eleven?"
CD's work by stamping an encoding of a number which is a precise
snapshot of the sound for 44,100 times every second. If that number is
a zero, then it's silence. If the number is positive then it indicates
the speaker cone should go in one direction for a certain distance; if
it is negative, then the cone should go in the opposite direction.
Just like the grooves in the phonograph record got more wiggles in the
louder parts, on your CD the value of these numbers increased the most
in the louder parts.
In addition to this number, there are additional numbers added which
are used to verify that these numbers are correct. A simple example is
to add a single digit to the original number that when added to the
number, makes the number end in a zero. If it doesn't end in a zero,
then you have a read error. (This is a simplified explanation, but the
principle is the same.)
So, if recordings sound different from one CD to another of the same
1) One of the pressing machines, when read on the playback machine,
resulted in the playback machine detecting more errors, thus there was
a decay of the actual sound, or...
2) People are hearing what they want to hear.
If 1) is the case, then it would be a simple matter to detect: compare
all the numbers on both CD's. If you have enough read errors that
would cause a perceptible decay in the sound, then that's your baby.
Else it can only be number two, because the number eleven only makes
one sound.
CD players don't read sounds, they read numbers. And either they read
them or they don't. They send these numbers to another microchip that
converts them to speaker directions. Anything else is green felt pen
stuff.
I would like to have seen you tell that to WCF. She would have chewed
up up and spat you out.
Who you gonna believe, WCF or mathematics? She may have been right in
that one pressing machine made for a different result on the CD's it
pressed, but that could only be accomplished by having more or less
read errors than the CD it is compared to. As I said, it would be a
simple matter to compare the CD's generated. If it says eleven on one,
and eleven on the other, then the sound has to be eleven.
-Owen
Or if it said ten on one and eleven on other, then they'd need to
attribute why.

I've explained at length using actual technical facts what the context
is for stampers to matter. I cannot say what WK-F - whom I respect
greatly as an audio producer/engineer - did or did not hear. There
*could* have been the context for her to detect a difference given
whatever transport she was using, and I'm more than willing to grant her
the benefit of the doubt. My points has been that this context is very
finite, and that current streaming technology can eliminate this very
narrow context completely. So, to recapitulate, if
UMG used the same WK-F masters for both the originally-issued CD's and
the box, as her own son Tom has attested, then that exact same data can
be read from the reissued CD's. Should one experience
transport-specific read errors, one can obviate that by computer-ripping
the CD and either re-ripping it to an error-free CD-R burn or streaming
the resulting computer rip directly to a DAC. Should no read errors
occur, there is zero potential context for difference.

There's no need to turn this into a cult-of-personality argument. Audio
CD technology is not a black box - it is documented, 30 years mature,
and very understandable provided one actually takes the effort to
understand it. One can always choose to reject logic or science, but
that's another topic. As the great sage Chico Marx once said, "Who you
gonna believe? Me or your own eyes?"

DF
weary flake
2013-05-06 23:32:52 UTC
Post by td
Post by O
CD players don't read sounds, they read numbers. And either they read
them or they don't.   They send these numbers to another microchip that
converts them to speaker directions.  Anything else is green felt pen
stuff.
I would like to have seen you tell that to WCF. She would have chewed
up up and spat you out.
WCF is always right, very well. But maybe you are wrong about
WCF, it is you posting, not WCF.

(also a fan of a different WCF, RIP).
td
2013-05-09 08:38:18 UTC
Yes, that's entirely possible. But having worked with her for six years, i have an advantage over some here who don't evn know what her initials stand for. Others who refer to her as WKF!!!!

Oh, well.

TD
Al Eisner
2013-05-09 20:54:48 UTC
Post by td
Yes, that's entirely possible. But having worked with her for six years, i have an advantage over some here who don't evn know what her initials stand for. Others who refer to her as WKF!!!!
Oh, well.
At least no-one has yet referred to her as "WTF".

(rmcr is such a polite newsgroup!)
--
Al Eisner
Mort
2013-05-09 04:46:32 UTC
Post by O
Post by D***@aol.com
Post by td
Post by William Sommerwerck
They are probably NOT using the stampers approved
personally by WCF when the CDs were first issued.
Why wouldn't they? It's the cheapest way to reissue the recordings.
Now, if you're suggesting that stampers made from the same tape source will
produce "different sounding" CDs -- I don't want to get into that.
WCF claimed that she could hear the difference between the same
recording produced by different stampers. She only always approved
one. Sometimes she thought the European CDs, produced from the same
digital masters from stampers made in Hannover, produced a more
faithful sound. She even managed to get the engineers to hear those
differences. Again, she only chose one of four or five made for
production.
If they DO use the same stampers produced some 15 years ago - hard to
believe, of course - then yes, the sound will be the same. But they
could have just used a CD to make the new stamper. Actually, as that
is a "clone" of the original recording it wouldn't be bad, just not
the original pressing she approved, that's all.
TD
This matter has been discussed at great length for months on the website of
the Association for Recorded Sound Collections (ARSClist). A major
participant in every aspect of the discussion has been Tom Fine, the son of
Bob and Wilma Cozart Fine. Tom and his brothers exercised control over every
aspect of the project, including the selection of included recordings. My
recollection of his many posts is that he and his brothers required that
their mother's original transfers be used without alteration. They would consent to nothing less.
The full discussion can be found at ARSC's discussion site.
<Sorry, couldn't find a way to display the back discussion from this
site.>
How many different ways can you hear the number "eleven?"
CD's work by stamping an encoding of a number which is a precise
snapshot of the sound for 44,100 times every second. If that number is
a zero, then it's silence. If the number is positive then it indicates
the speaker cone should go in one direction for a certain distance; if
it is negative, then the cone should go in the opposite direction.
Just like the grooves in the phonograph record got more wiggles in the
louder parts, on your CD the value of these numbers increased the most
in the louder parts.
In addition to this number, there are additional numbers added which
are used to verify that these numbers are correct. A simple example is
to add a single digit to the original number that when added to the
number, makes the number end in a zero. If it doesn't end in a zero,
then you have a read error. (This is a simplified explanation, but the
principle is the same.)
So, if recordings sound different from one CD to another of the same
1) One of the pressing machines, when read on the playback machine,
resulted in the playback machine detecting more errors, thus there was
a decay of the actual sound, or...
2) People are hearing what they want to hear.
If 1) is the case, then it would be a simple matter to detect: compare
all the numbers on both CD's. If you have enough read errors that
would cause a perceptible decay in the sound, then that's your baby.
Else it can only be number two, because the number eleven only makes
one sound.
CD players don't read sounds, they read numbers. And either they read
them or they don't. They send these numbers to another microchip that
converts them to speaker directions. Anything else is green felt pen
stuff.
-Owen
Hi,

I also remember reading an engineering analysis stating that it is
impossible for bumble bees to fly. Fortunately, the bees cannot read.

Mort
Kip Williams
2013-05-09 11:46:01 UTC
Post by Mort
I also remember reading an engineering analysis stating that it is
impossible for bumble bees to fly. Fortunately, the bees cannot read.
Urban legend based on an ancient misunderstanding, actually. Bees read fine.


Kip W
John Wiser
2013-05-09 12:08:11 UTC
Post by Kip Williams
Post by Mort
I also remember reading an engineering analysis stating that it is
impossible for bumble bees to fly. Fortunately, the bees cannot read.
Urban legend based on an ancient misunderstanding, actually. Bees read fine.
That's right! Otherwise why would they carry license plates?

jdw
Mort
2013-05-09 23:12:54 UTC
Post by John Wiser
Post by Kip Williams
Post by Mort
I also remember reading an engineering analysis stating that it is
impossible for bumble bees to fly. Fortunately, the bees cannot read.
Urban legend based on an ancient misunderstanding, actually. Bees read fine.
That's right! Otherwise why would they carry license plates?
jdw
Does the "bees read fine" refer to Wilma or to her husband?

Mort Linder
O
2013-05-09 14:49:12 UTC
Post by Kip Williams
Post by Mort
I also remember reading an engineering analysis stating that it is
impossible for bumble bees to fly. Fortunately, the bees cannot read.
Urban legend based on an ancient misunderstanding, actually. Bees read fine.
Of course they do: "Death, where is they sting?"

-Owen
td
2013-05-06 21:37:09 UTC
Post by td
Post by William Sommerwerck
They are probably NOT using the stampers approved
personally by WCF when the CDs were first issued.
Why wouldn't they? It's the cheapest way to reissue the recordings.
Now, if you're suggesting that stampers made from the same tape source will
produce "different sounding" CDs -- I don't want to get into that.
WCF claimed that she could hear the difference between the same
recording produced by different stampers. She only always approved
one. Sometimes she thought the European CDs, produced from the same
digital masters from stampers made in Hannover, produced a more
faithful sound. She even managed to get the engineers to hear those
differences. Again, she only chose one of four or five made for
production.
If they DO use the same stampers produced some 15 years ago - hard to
believe, of course - then yes, the sound will be the same. But they
could have just used a CD to make the new stamper. Actually, as that
is a "clone" of the original recording it wouldn't be bad, just not
the original pressing she approved, that's all.
TD
  This matter has been discussed at great length for months on the website of the Association for Recorded Sound Collections (ARSClist). A major participant in every aspect of the discussion has been Tom Fine, the son of Bob and Wilma Cozart Fine. Tom and his brothers exercised control over every aspect of the project, including the selection of included recordings. My recollection of his many posts is that he and his brothers required that their mother's original transfers be used without alteration. They would consent to nothing less.
Of course.

But did Universal use the STAMPERS which WCF approved personally for
the USA production and for Europe. That is the question.

TD
Oscar
2013-05-12 20:43:11 UTC
Post by Dana John Hill
Given that the first edition sold out, is another run a possibility?
In late 2010, when the second 'DG 111' set http://tiny.cc/5n0iwwwas
first issued, Universal _did_ do a very limited second run of the
first DG 111 boxed set, originally released October 2009 http://tiny.cc/wm0iww
The first set sold-out quickly, and was OOP by the time the second set
came to market.
Two more Universal Classics box reissues recently re-reissued:

• Wagner: The Great Operas From the Bayreuth Festival [Decca 33CD]
http://tiny.cc/ninzww orig. issued June 2008
• Messiaen: Complete Edition [DG 32CD] http://tiny.cc/hlnzww orig.
issued December 2008

To reiterate, just wait for Mercury 1 to be repressed. Instead of
doing something rash like this: http://tiny.cc/dsnzww
td
2013-05-13 12:15:40 UTC
Post by Dana John Hill
Given that the first edition sold out, is another run a possibility?
In late 2010, when the second 'DG 111' sethttp://tiny.cc/5n0iwwwas
first issued, Universal _did_ do a very limited second run of the
first DG 111 boxed set, originally released October 2009http://tiny.cc/wm0iww
The first set sold-out quickly, and was OOP by the time the second set
came to market.
• Messiaen: Complete Edition [DG 32CD]http://tiny.cc/hlnzwworig.
issued December 2008
This set sold out in very little time, surprising everyone at DG. So,
they are clearly hoping for more sales of this virtually unsaleable
repertoire.

TD
Dana John Hill
2013-05-13 17:31:47 UTC
Post by Dana John Hill
Given that the first edition sold out, is another run a possibility?
In late 2010, when the second 'DG 111' set http://tiny.cc/5n0iwwwas
first issued, Universal _did_ do a very limited second run of the
first DG 111 boxed set, originally released October 2009 http://tiny.cc/wm0iww
The first set sold-out quickly, and was OOP by the time the second set
came to market.
• Wagner: The Great Operas From the Bayreuth Festival [Decca 33CD]
http://tiny.cc/ninzww orig. issued June 2008
• Messiaen: Complete Edition [DG 32CD] http://tiny.cc/hlnzww orig.
issued December 2008
To reiterate, just wait for Mercury 1 to be repressed. Instead of
doing something rash like this: http://tiny.cc/dsnzww
Rash is right. But I have noticed that nearly every copy of MLP Vol 1
listed recently on eBay has sold for a similar price.

Coincidentally, while searching last weekend through my shelf of CDs
awaiting new jewel cases, I found a surprisingly large number of MLP
discs that I did not know I had. The two-disc set of Delibes ballets and
Dorati's Firebird recording, for example, I must have bought used
somewhere, jettisoned their broken cases, and set aside to re-case at
some point. (Also note that while one can fit several hundred case-less
CDs on just a few linear feet of shelf space, situations like this
suggest that it is not a good idea.)

Does anyone know if these MLP boxes include notes on the sleeves?

Dana John Hill
Gainesville, Florida
David Fox
2013-05-13 20:04:10 UTC
Post by Dana John Hill
Post by Dana John Hill
Given that the first edition sold out, is another run a possibility?
In late 2010, when the second 'DG 111' set http://tiny.cc/5n0iwwwas
first issued, Universal _did_ do a very limited second run of the
first DG 111 boxed set, originally released October 2009
http://tiny.cc/wm0iww
The first set sold-out quickly, and was OOP by the time the second set
came to market.
• Wagner: The Great Operas From the Bayreuth Festival [Decca 33CD]
http://tiny.cc/ninzww orig. issued June 2008
• Messiaen: Complete Edition [DG 32CD] http://tiny.cc/hlnzww orig.
issued December 2008
To reiterate, just wait for Mercury 1 to be repressed. Instead of
doing something rash like this: http://tiny.cc/dsnzww
Rash is right. But I have noticed that nearly every copy of MLP Vol 1
listed recently on eBay has sold for a similar price.
Coincidentally, while searching last weekend through my shelf of CDs
awaiting new jewel cases, I found a surprisingly large number of MLP
discs that I did not know I had. The two-disc set of Delibes ballets and
Dorati's Firebird recording, for example, I must have bought used
somewhere, jettisoned their broken cases, and set aside to re-case at
some point. (Also note that while one can fit several hundred case-less
CDs on just a few linear feet of shelf space, situations like this
suggest that it is not a good idea.)
Does anyone know if these MLP boxes include notes on the sleeves?
Dana John Hill
Gainesville, Florida
The cardboard sleeves reproduce the front and back covers of the CDs.
There is a very nice booklet with a series of essays, but the liner
notes from the booklets of the CDs are not included.

DF
Gerard
2013-05-13 20:31:15 UTC
Post by Dana John Hill
Coincidentally, while searching last weekend through my shelf of CDs
awaiting new jewel cases, I found a surprisingly large number of MLP
discs that I did not know I had. The two-disc set of Delibes ballets
That should be a three-disc set. Are you missing one disc?
Post by Dana John Hill
and Dorati's Firebird recording, for example, I must have bought used
somewhere, jettisoned their broken cases, and set aside to re-case at
some point. (Also note that while one can fit several hundred
case-less CDs on just a few linear feet of shelf space, situations
like this suggest that it is not a good idea.)
When stored appropiately (e.g. in small drawers) it is a good idea.
But it's always possible to forget details.
Dana John Hill
2013-05-13 21:31:44 UTC
Post by Gerard
Post by Dana John Hill
Coincidentally, while searching last weekend through my shelf of CDs
awaiting new jewel cases, I found a surprisingly large number of MLP
discs that I did not know I had. The two-disc set of Delibes ballets
That should be a three-disc set. Are you missing one disc?
No, you're right. I'm at work and it's not in front of me.
Post by Gerard
Post by Dana John Hill
and Dorati's Firebird recording, for example, I must have bought used
somewhere, jettisoned their broken cases, and set aside to re-case at
some point. (Also note that while one can fit several hundred
case-less CDs on just a few linear feet of shelf space, situations
like this suggest that it is not a good idea.)
When stored appropiately (e.g. in small drawers) it is a good idea.
But it's always possible to forget details.
Though I built custom shelving for my collection last summer, I still
don't have enough shelf space to house every disc in its own plastic
jewel case. So what I plan on doing soon is going through my collection,
placing less-frequently-accessed recordings in Jazzloft sleves. If I can
do this for five hundred discs, I should clear enough space to make room
for some of the bigger boxes that cannot be made smaller.

Dana John Hill
Gainesville, Florida
Steve de Mena
2013-05-14 08:08:42 UTC
Post by Dana John Hill
Given that the first edition sold out, is another run a possibility?
In late 2010, when the second 'DG 111' set http://tiny.cc/5n0iwwwas
first issued, Universal _did_ do a very limited second run of the
first DG 111 boxed set, originally released October 2009 http://tiny.cc/wm0iww
The first set sold-out quickly, and was OOP by the time the second set
came to market.
• Wagner: The Great Operas From the Bayreuth Festival [Decca 33CD]
http://tiny.cc/ninzww orig. issued June 2008
• Messiaen: Complete Edition [DG 32CD] http://tiny.cc/hlnzww orig.
issued December 2008
Oscar,

Thanks for the Messiaen heads-up, and overall for all your bargain and
unusual release posts!!

My bank account asks you to please stop, though. LOL.

Steve
Oscar
2013-05-14 08:38:44 UTC
Post by Steve de Mena
Thanks for the Messiaen heads-up, and overall for all your bargain and
unusual release posts!!
My bank account asks you to please stop, though. LOL.
I'll keep you posted when the DG box is reissued on single-sided 45
RPM 180g LP's ;-P
Peter H.
2013-05-28 16:09:07 UTC
While perusing www.importcds.com this morning, I noticed that MLP vol. 1 was available to order at a cost of ~$108, shipping in 5-7 days. My recollection is that this vol. 1 was not "orderable" in recent times (e.g. you could not place it in your cart). While I am not without my doubts that this could just be an error, I still thought to mention it on the off-chance that it could actually be available, perhaps as a limited 2nd run to coincide with the US release of vol. 2.
Peter H.
2013-05-28 16:15:43 UTC
I have not found any sign of availability on any other website, so I am rather skeptical. Still, it doesn't hurt anything to try, if you missed it the first time.
Randy Lane
2013-05-28 16:27:14 UTC
ImportCds.com now shows the 5-10 day availability status for everything that is past the release date and is not in stock. Don't let that fool you into believing they can get it.
Dana John Hill
2013-05-28 17:38:09 UTC
Post by Randy Lane
ImportCds.com now shows the 5-10 day availability status for everything that is past the release date and is not in stock. Don't let that fool you into believing they can get it.
In my recent quest to purchase the Karajan 1960s set on DG, I was
surprised by how many websites claimed to have the set "in stock", only
to find that placing the item in my online cart redirected me to Amazon,
which I know doesn't have it. Other sites claimed to have the set, but
when I placed my order I received a notice later admitting it was not
available. Some eBay sellers who claimed to have multiple copies
confessed that they actually didn't.

Dana John Hill
Gainesville, Florida
wade
2013-05-28 18:10:31 UTC
Post by Dana John Hill
Post by Randy Lane
ImportCds.com now shows the 5-10 day availability status for everything that is past the release date and is not in stock. Don't let that fool you into believing they can get it.
In my recent quest to purchase the Karajan 1960s set on DG, I was
surprised by how many websites claimed to have the set "in stock", only
to find that placing the item in my online cart redirected me to Amazon,
which I know doesn't have it. Other sites claimed to have the set, but
when I placed my order I received a notice later admitting it was not
available. Some eBay sellers who claimed to have multiple copies
confessed that they actually didn't.
Dana John Hill
Gainesville, Florida
Hmm. Company advertises item and processes sale against your credit card, collects the money and deposits it, after 3-4 months doesn't get supply and decides to refund your account the purchase price which you have either paid off or have been charged interest for x months. Meanwhile the $$ was sitting in their account earning interest?
Dana John Hill
2013-05-28 19:40:59 UTC
Post by wade
Post by Dana John Hill
Post by Randy Lane
ImportCds.com now shows the 5-10 day availability status for everything that is past the release date and is not in stock. Don't let that fool you into believing they can get it.
In my recent quest to purchase the Karajan 1960s set on DG, I was
surprised by how many websites claimed to have the set "in stock", only
to find that placing the item in my online cart redirected me to Amazon,
which I know doesn't have it. Other sites claimed to have the set, but
when I placed my order I received a notice later admitting it was not
available. Some eBay sellers who claimed to have multiple copies
confessed that they actually didn't.
Dana John Hill
Gainesville, Florida
Hmm. Company advertises item and processes sale against your credit card, collects the money and deposits it, after 3-4 months doesn't get supply and decides to refund your account the purchase price which you have either paid off or have been charged interest for x months. Meanwhile the $$ was sitting in their account earning interest?
In my case, nobody actually held on to my money for any length of time.
More than anything, I was just annoyed at how many websites out there
claim to be music retailers with inventory when, in fact, they exist
solely to redirect potential customers to Amazon or other retailers with
no in-stock merchandise.

And surely it is (or ought to be) against eBay policy to advertise an
item for sale when you do not actually have the item. After submitting
winning bids for items only to have transactions canceled, I have noted
language in the fine print reading something to the effect that, given
the particulars of their business, these merchants cannot guarantee that
they, in fact, have the items they have listed for sale.

It all reminds me of the Seinfeld episode in which Jerry tries to rent a
car.

Dana John Hill
Gainesville, Florida
David Fox
2013-05-28 21:24:06 UTC
Post by Dana John Hill
Post by wade
Post by Dana John Hill
Post by Randy Lane
ImportCds.com now shows the 5-10 day availability status for
everything that is past the release date and is not in stock. Don't
let that fool you into believing they can get it.
In my recent quest to purchase the Karajan 1960s set on DG, I was
surprised by how many websites claimed to have the set "in stock", only
to find that placing the item in my online cart redirected me to Amazon,
which I know doesn't have it. Other sites claimed to have the set, but
when I placed my order I received a notice later admitting it was not
available. Some eBay sellers who claimed to have multiple copies
confessed that they actually didn't.
Dana John Hill
Gainesville, Florida
Hmm. Company advertises item and processes sale against your credit
card, collects the money and deposits it, after 3-4 months doesn't get
supply and decides to refund your account the purchase price which you
have either paid off or have been charged interest for x months.
Meanwhile the $$ was sitting in their account earning interest?
In my case, nobody actually held on to my money for any length of time.
More than anything, I was just annoyed at how many websites out there
claim to be music retailers with inventory when, in fact, they exist
solely to redirect potential customers to Amazon or other retailers with
no in-stock merchandise.
And surely it is (or ought to be) against eBay policy to advertise an
item for sale when you do not actually have the item. After submitting
winning bids for items only to have transactions canceled, I have noted
language in the fine print reading something to the effect that, given
the particulars of their business, these merchants cannot guarantee that
they, in fact, have the items they have listed for sale.
It all reminds me of the Seinfeld episode in which Jerry tries to rent a
car.
Dana John Hill
Gainesville, Florida
Known bogus listings such as these allow us to benchmark which sellers
are worth dealing with going forward.

DF
Mort
2013-05-28 21:40:41 UTC
Post by Dana John Hill
Post by Randy Lane
ImportCds.com now shows the 5-10 day availability status for
everything that is past the release date and is not in stock. Don't
let that fool you into believing they can get it.
In my recent quest to purchase the Karajan 1960s set on DG, I was
surprised by how many websites claimed to have the set "in stock", only
to find that placing the item in my online cart redirected me to Amazon,
which I know doesn't have it. Other sites claimed to have the set, but
when I placed my order I received a notice later admitting it was not
available. Some eBay sellers who claimed to have multiple copies
confessed that they actually didn't.
Dana John Hill
Gainesville, Florida
Hi,

Similarly, I was looking for a certain model of a Casio watch, and
numerous websites from a Google search said that they had it. Upon
trying to place an order, it turns out that not one of them actually had
the watch, nor could they get one for me.

It is annoying, and wasteful of my time.

Mort Linder