I'm still waiting for mine to be shipped, even though I pre-ordered them (Deluxe vinyl, with the extra tracks) back in March. There are several threads on the Hoffman site going now, including one specifically for each of the formats. As the Rockitman knows, I have quite a few pressings of these, and have compared even more.
On LZ 1, the Piros/Monarch circa 1974 is very, very good; the best pressing I heard on my system was a Monarch pressed in 69, but hard to find. I also have the Classic 33 and the 45. The 74 era Monarch should be findable for under $100. We did a shoot out last year with first UK, first US (east coast) and first US (Monarch) and the Monarch had more of the 'freight train' delivery associated with the 'RL' of LZII. I haven't had a chance to compare the 69 Monarch with the 74 Monarch.
On LZII, i had to go through several 'RL's' to find one that wasn't chewed up. It's pretty impressive because of its 'drive'- the notorious 'hot' cut that got pulled from the market. I have not heard the 45 rpm Classic and have a few other old copies- the RL, which is my 'go to' is quite expensive.
On LZ III, my go-to is a Classic III, which is pretty good for this record, given the acoustic stuff and midrange. I haven't bothered to try early UK and US, though I probably have some US copies languishing in the stacks.
LZ IV- can't remember, think it is a Piros, but would have to check. Not very expensive. I do have a Classic 45 rpm test pressing of Stairway- it's fun.
HOTH- if I remember this is the other 'RL'- and not expensive.
PG- I have a sort of first UK (albeit with a "5" stamper on the B side of the first record). The earliest UK pressing is expensive (I think it is 1/4/1/1) but the 1/5/1/1 stamper copy is not very pricey.
I'm not against sourcing from a digital master. If you are a Tull fan, you know that Benefit is very congested sounding- I have a UK first, a US first and a bunch of other copies. The recent remix by Steve Wilson (if memory serves) sounds better than either and it is digitally sourced.
Whether these new releases are the 'best' may be doubtful, but for the price, and given the fact that finding the right copies of the old pressings is somewhat time consuming, if not expensive (and the Classics are also expensive), I was willing to buy these just for the sake of hearing them.
(I'm really into the first two albums, after that, my interest wanes). |
PS- on IV, i think it is Porky/Pecko not Piros mastering, but I'd have to go check. Not terribly expensive. |
Just go to Hoffman's site- there's a ton of comparisons there with all sorts
of pressings of Zep and other things. I've barely scratched the surface, and
I'm hardly an expert, on Zep vinyl or other records- just done the research
and listened. (I have a friend that knows matrix numbers and first pressings
off the top of his head- I'm not anywhere close to that level of knowledge).
(Occasionally, I get lucky too!)
I've found that the albums I buy the most pressings of are
those which aren't terribly good recordings in the first place. I can't tell you
how many different pressings of Aqualung i have (i could, but it would be
embarrassing); all in the quest to find one that sounds 'good.'
Zep 1 is probably my favorite of their catalog, first heard it when it was
released, and for me, that combo of blues-based hard rock was the most
interesting to me- granted, other people like other Zep albums as the band
evolved. Unfortunately, to me, the first album always sounded a little
'canned'-
congested, sluggish, and lacking in 'life' and vividness. But, when you hear
a better sounding pressing, you realize it doesn't have to be that way. None
of these pressings get to the level of 'audiophile' (in the non-pejorative
sense of the word). The Classics, imo, give you a more open, detailed
sound; the Monarch Piros of LZ 1 seems to have more drive. The RL of II is
a well-known grail record- pretty pricey even for a VG+ and elusive as hell
in really minty condition.
That's one of the reasons I'm interested in these newest remasters. Not
everybody is going to go to the trouble to track down the 'right' old
pressings, or pay the prices some of them (the LZII RL) command, and the
Classics aren't really cheap either. But, dig in, the research is actually kind
of fun if you are patient; and if you are a bottom feeder, you can sometimes
find some of these early pressings in the bins or on the Bay. |
I'd be surprised (and delighted) to see uber quality all analog vinyl remasters of these, but I doubt that will happen for several reasons.* While vinyl has been enjoying a 'bump' it is hardly a determining format; leaving aside the condition of the tapes and who has them (I would assume for the stuff mastered in the States, that's Atlantic), there is little incentive for the label to do yet another release-even if it is a high end analog release- on the heels of this big push. (Hell, I even saw advertisements on cable TV for these). If they were done at all, I'd think it would have to be at the hands of a third party, like Chad. And assuming he could strike a deal, the cost of the master licenses would probably be insane.
Dfel- other than the RL of LZII, I think you can find good original or early pressings for less than astronomical prices. And based on what I've heard on my system, I wouldn't assume that the UK pressings are necessarily the 'best.' Finding copies that haven't been munched by grotty old tone arms is a challenge but you are more likely to find 'all analog' this way.
*PS I'd love to be proven wrong. |
Guys: don't you think the endless debate over CD v vinyl is not only beside
the point here, but moot, given that with these reissues, you can pick your
format- vinyl, CD, Hi-Rez?
Czarivey- were you actually serious that you thought this newest LZ1
reissue sounded worse than a cassette? Did you buy a copy and listen to it
on your system?
DGarretson- was there a point you were trying to make here, more
generally, about original issue v Classic remaster since in a thread about
Zep reissues, you stated that you don't even like Led Zep and were
referring to another band altogether?
This place is a madhouse..... |
Rockit- back in NY as of a week ago, at least for the summer-fall. Will follow
up with you offline, i would love to hear your system at some point. Best to
all, |
Gotcha. I didn't see the OP's comment about the Who. My apologies for appearing to be a thread nazi. Too bad you don't appreciate Zep. I didn't get Black Sabbath or Alice Cooper until recently, and have now gotten immersed into early pressings of their material.
Best,
Bill Hart |
I won't mention Iron Butterfly.
Rock on. :) |
Moryoga: I think the 'muddy' sound of LZII (at least on several tracks) is due to the huge amount of crude processing done when the album was originally assembled- you can hear the overdubs and the layering of different tracks- it is very evident on the 'RL' of II where a track with heavy processing, like 'Whole Lotta Love' seems to suffer from generation loss due to all the gimmicks. There are some web discussions and articles about how the album was made that support this.
I still haven't listened to my new copies yet, but hope to do so soon. |
Mike: I have never heard the Classic (either 33 or 45) of LZ II. At this point in the game, I'd probably just go for the 45 if it was find-able. My comments re the 'RL' really don't lean toward 'fuzzy' but I can understand 'muddy': at least on the RL, there is a loss of immediacy when all that 'tape bouncing' is going on, compared to some of the other tracks where less 'processing' is going on; I hear it as generation loss due to the 'tape to tape' transfers that were apparently used to get the effects on that track. I still haven't listened to the new LZII, but did have a little time to listen and compare a couple tracks on the new LZI. I'll post my comments separately. Nice to see ya, Mike. Winter is over! Back in NY for a little while, and brought a nice big crate of old records back from Texas. |
A few quick observations on listening to the first two tracks of LZ 1,
admittedly a 'once through' with each of the different records mentioned
below.
The new vinyl sounds very good, quiet and has no apparent digital artifacts
that stand out- something I'd usually hear as a flattening of the
presentation, i.e., detail, but no life. It doesn't suffer from that, dynamics are
good- if forced to choose between some older pressing of questionable
provenance, with the surface noise and other hazards associated with old
records, this is a winner and a bargain to boot. That said,...
The '74 Piros/Monarch sounds far more 'filled in' tonally- the drum skin
sound is more vivid; i'm not sure that the record has more dynamics than
the new recut, but the bass tone is more fleshed out. It just sounds more
'saturated' tonally; I suppose you could call this 'richness' or 'warmth' but to
my ears (and I've been listening to copies of LZI since it came out), this
was never a great sounding record, it always sounded a little 'pinched'
when things got going, and a little muted (I used the word 'canned,' as in
'muffled') when I commented on this record, generally, earlier in this thread.
The Piros has more life than the standard issue from back in the day (I
have a bunch of copies) and the Monarch pressings just seem to be the
most vivid of the bunch. (The best original I ever heard, owned by a
neighbor, is a first press Monarch, which I'll try to compare on his system
with the '74 when we get together in a couple weeks).
The Classic 45- same two cuts- Good Times/Bad Times & 'Babe I'm Gonna
Leave You'- just sounds more spectacular than the Piros in some ways-
whether it is a difference in EQ, the 45 rpm iteration, or something else, I
have no idea. It is also more organic and filled-in sounding, tonally, than the
new remaster, and has more 'air' and spaciousness to the whole
presentation, but we are talking about a very expensive, hard to find
record today. What's interesting is the comparison between the Piros and
the Classic...but I'll save that for more listening and a different
posting/thread.
Bottom line, as a preliminary reaction: the new re-cut doesn't come as
close to the uber copies as I had hoped, but I don't think that's damning by
any means. (I was hoping for the best on these and I'm not disappointed).
I've heard lots of lousy copies of LZ1 and frankly, for new, gettable, quiet
vinyl, this is a very good record.
Final caveat: this album, in my experience, has a lot of track to track
variability in sound quality, so even if I thought my conclusions were
somehow 'definitive' for me (and they aren't, I'll listen to the rest of the
record and do more comparisons), other tracks on LZI may present a
different result than my comparison of just the first two tracks. (I also have a
copy of the Classic 33, but I figured I'd just skip over that one, for now).
Needless to say, I'm hardly an arbiter of what any of you may think, given
your ears and your systems, but I promised to share my reactions, within
the limits of my system and my listening bias (which tends toward wanting
an absolutely grainless, unprocessed sounding midrange, and having a
system that does not deliver gargantuan bass, but has very good 'tone,'
midrange clarity and a fair amount of life, using horns and SET amps). |
Moryoga: to your point, and as more grist for bitchin,' after all the controversy over the Beatles vinyl set released a couple years ago derived from a digital master, they are now being released as mono pressings, purportedly straight analog, no digital in the chain. http://www.thebeatles.com/news/beatles-get-back-mono
Maybe there is hope after all. I agree with Mike that tapes are supposed to be treated as the Crown Jewels.
My copy of LZIII Deluxe finally arrived today. |
Thanks for the kinds words, Jeff. I haven't gotten around to III yet, but I did a quite comparison of LZ II which I just posted on the Hoffman forum. Here it is verbatim, omitting the picture:
I just compared a very clean 'RL' SS/narrow side two (PR) with the new issue of LZII. Here's what I heard, listening only to 'Whole Lotta Love' and "Heartbreaker":
the new record sounds similar in overall tone, but there is simply no comparison in the overall propulsive thrust or 'punch'- the 'RL' wins hands down. Both records reveal the distortion when Bonham's drums come crashing through after the 'effects' passage in 'Whole Lotta Love,' it just seems to be part of the overall sound of this cut- which always sounded over-processed to me, from day one. (Not taking away from its musical merit, just saying). Plant's voice also seems far more 'open' on the 'RL' -perhaps that's a result of how this thing was EQ'd (I don't know enough about what source material was used for the digital transfer to comment intelligently on that). The new record has Plant's vocals sounding a little 'canned' to my ear.
Heartbreaker- same kind of difference- the recording is heavily overloaded, particularly the guitar- and the distortion is obvious in both the 'RL' and the new record, but somehow, perhaps an artifact of digital, the old 'uber' pressing just sounds more organic.
A couple of side notes: my system is not bass heavy, if anything, it is tuned to avoid discontinuity between the dynamic woofers and the midhorn, so if real bass is on the record you hear it, but it isn't normally a bone-crushing kind of system (I could adjust it that way, but the woofers would sound out of whack with the horns). The propulsive effect, the so-called 'freight train' delivery of the 'RL' is something you can hear immediately, not a 'golden ears' kind of thing.
I think these new records are great, a good value, I haven't even begun to explore the bonus tracks, but just wanted to weigh in. Here's a snap of the front end, as I was warming the system up for this comparison. (Both records were cleaned using the Audio Desk). |
NB. "quite" should be "quick" in the above posting; I don't get why the 'edit post' function doesn't work!#$^*:) |
I don't have any Classic pressings of LZII, but the Classic 45 of LZ 1 is an impressive listen; the Classic 33's of 1 and III are very good, though I still prefer the older Piros/Monarch remaster of LZ1 to the Classic 33 of that album.
I did break down and buy a first UK of LZIII (early, with the Peter Grant credit), so I'll be able to do a comparo of the new record against a Classic (33) of III and the UK first pretty soon.
I guess for ZoSo, et al, we'll just have to wait and see.
Fremer's review of LZII is online, if any of you are interested. |
Fjn- easiest way is to look on the label of the record- the Monarch's are distinguished by an 'MO' suffix after the catalog number. There are other indicia as well. There are several places on the web that discuss how to identify a Monarch, which is more common on the West Coast. Occasionally, you'll see the pressing plant identified in the ads. The 'hot one on LZ1 is actually not a first press, but a remaster by Piros, done circa 1974, with various indicia including matrix info, described in detail on the Hoffman site. That's a very nice sounding copy. I'm hoping to compare it to a Monarch first press of LZ1 that a friend has soon, which, as mentioned, sounded spectacular on my system, given that the recording itself just isn't great. |
Act, no not yet. The releases are in batches, the first, released at the beginning of June 2014, was the first three albums in various formats and combination packages with optional extras, bonus tracks, etc.
Page had announced all this over a year ago, if memory serves, promising that all the Zep albums would be re-released as remasters during 2014. Not sure what the next milestone date is for the next wave. Obviously IV will draw a pretty big audience. I saw somewhere that Zep is now 'charting,' at least in the UK for the first time, probably, in decades. |
Low- that just seems wrong. My dealings with Music Direct are largely limited to the occasional new MoFi (since they own that label). I've spoken over the phone and by email on a few occasions with the MD people and they were usually helpful and nice, but I'm not doubting what you reported. What if you contact the label itself~that just sounds wrong, if there is some chip in the vinyl edge, the record is defective; if the label had been defaced, or the cover bent or torn, it would be a defective 'item' even if the record itself was playable. |
Low, call them. That's how i usually deal w/ them if there is an issue over shipping or whatever. Perhaps the personal touch will make a difference. It seems absurd that a damaged product is considered acceptable, even if useable. If you ordered an appliance that arrived dented, I suppose that it's still not 'defective' in that sense. And, contact the label itself if you get nowhere with MD. Frankly, I'm surprised. Are these records out of stock, just out of curiosity? |
Moryoga- I doubt anybody questioned your sincerity, and the disclaimer was probably unnecessary, but the usual boilerplate also requires that you state "if you have an erection lasting more than 4 hours, consult a doctor immediately."
:) |
