• If you have bought, sold or gained information from our Classifieds, please donate to Quadraphonic Quad and give back.

    You can become a Supporting Member or just click here to donate.

Jeff Beck Group - Truth

QuadraphonicQuad

Help Support QuadraphonicQuad:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Very nice!!! In your opinion who does better pressings of SACD’s Audio Fidelity or MOFI?

Also is this the 1st time both AF & MOFI have released the same titles in same format?

My question: Is this a brand new MoFi SACD remaster? As a rule, I had NO problems with AF's Stereo SACD remasters and, IMO, TRUTH sounds excellent compared to my Japanese RBCD Imports of TRUTH/BECK~ OLA [2 for 1 disc].....The masters were always a bit HISSY but I do know that MoFi has a great relationship with SONY/COLUMBIA and wonder if their original analogue tapes were better than the ones supplied to AF?
 
My question: Is this a brand new MoFi SACD remaster? As a rule, I had NO problems with AF's Stereo SACD remasters and, IMO, TRUTH sounds excellent compared to my Japanese RBCD Imports of TRUTH/BECK~ OLA [2 for 1 disc].....The masters were always a bit HISSY but I do know that MoFi has a great relationship with SONY/COLUMBIA and wonder if their original analogue tapes were better than the ones supplied to AF?
Interesting….I’m just glad it’s being redone by MOFI because I missed out on the AF edition and REFUSED to pay $175 + for a copy, now maybe the AF editions will go much cheaper, so I can compare😊
 
Interesting….I’m just glad it’s being redone by MOFI because I missed out on the AF edition and REFUSED to pay $175 + for a copy, now maybe the AF editions will go much cheaper, so I can compare😊

Then how far behind can BECK~OLA be, MM. That I want!

Actually quite surprised Sony Japan didn't reissue those titles as Stereo SACDs in their special 7" packaging to conincide with the Jeff Beck Multi~CH titles!

Hmmmm!
 
I don't know the provenance of AF's Truth, but the original Epic album and initial domestic CD releases were from second-generation analogue reels, the masters being controlled overseas by EMI. The expanded Epic reissues of Truth and Beck-Ola from 2006 were stickered with yellow notes stating they were mastered from the "original source tapes," a red flag if I ever saw one.

Considering the age of Truth and Beck-Ola, I suspect both albums were cut on four tracks, making a balanced quad mix difficult, if not impossible despite current DES technology. It wouldn't surprise me if "Beck's Bolero" was cut at IBC on a three-track machine.
 
I don't know the provenance of AF's Truth, but the original Epic album and initial domestic CD releases were from second-generation analogue reels, the masters being controlled overseas by EMI. The expanded Epic reissues of Truth and Beck-Ola from 2006 were stickered with yellow notes stating they were mastered from the "original source tapes," a red flag if I ever saw one.

Considering the age of Truth and Beck-Ola, I suspect both albums were cut on four tracks, making a balanced quad mix difficult, if not impossible despite current DES technology. It wouldn't surprise me if "Beck's Bolero" was cut at IBC on a three-track machine.

Might help to explain the inordinate amount of Hissssss on those early 'remasters!'
 
I've got this 2006 Japan CD TOCP-53826 release - remastered by Peter Mew at Abbey Road.

JBeckTruth.jpg

Sounds damn good to!
 
Last edited:
Has anyone received their copy yet and have been able to compare this with the Audio Fidelity edition? If so please be detailed as possible but in layman’s terms…thanks😊
 
Thanks for that but the only thing I could find there was someone else asking for a comparison…that was yesterday. Could you please provide link😊
There are two threads unfortunately. Search for both.

Long story, short as I recall from one of them...AF tighter, more detail; MFSL more bottom end.
 
There are two threads unfortunately. Search for both.

Long story, short as I recall from one of them...AF tighter, more detail; MFSL more bottom end.
Just found one comparison it’s a worthy review. Some people like MOFI pressings better than AF and vise a versa. But seems the separation is better on the AF but sound levels are low while there is more Bass and higher sound levels on the MFSL/MOFI.

Id like to see what people on QQ say about the comparison.

I do have an extra copy still sealed of the MOFI #215 for trade for the AF version, if anyone is interested😊

oh and this version is AWESOME!!! Just love it❤️
 
Just found one comparison it’s a worthy review. Some people like MOFI pressings better than AF and vise a versa. But seems the separation is better on the AF but sound levels are low while there is more Bass and higher sound levels on the MFSL/MOFI.

Id like to see what people on QQ say about the comparison.

I do have an extra copy still sealed of the MOFI #215 for trade for the AF version, if anyone is interested😊

oh and this version is AWESOME!!! Just love it❤
I always wonder why people even comment on the sound levels of uncompressed, unlimited mastering. Just turn the lower one up.

However, having said that, volume has a big effect on the way we perceive sound. it’s amazing how many people will opine with utmost certainty on two versions of a recording without making any effort to do the most important thing in making a valid comparison....level matching. And then they compound it by not noting perhaps the second most important thing...at what volume did they do the comparison?

It’s why most anonymous (and even non-anonymous) internet audio comparisons and reviews are basically useless. Or maybe even worse than useless. I personally try find people who seem to basically hear what I hear for their opinions and pretty much ignore the rest.
 
I always wonder why people even comment on the sound levels of uncompressed, unlimited mastering. Just turn the lower one up.

I can answer that.

If you put a stack of records or CDs on a changer and let it run while you are writing code, it is annoying to have to stop working to change the volume when the level suddenly changes.
 
I can answer that.

If you put a stack of records or CDs on a changer and let it run while you are writing code, it is annoying to have to stop working to change the volume when the level suddenly changes.
You must get quite frustrated listening to well mastered music on a disc changer then because the average volume is inherently going to vary considerably between discs. Sounds like replaygain is for you...but it largely renders the question moot of whether an Audio Fidelity mastering is better or worse than an MFSL mastering.

But regardless...which is correct? And to the point at hand, which is better or worse with regard to fidelity? It’s an irrelevant point with regard to fidelity.
 
Back
Top