Van Halen Mobile Fidelity SACDs now available for pre-orders

[JediJoker]

If we’re lucky enough to get the Hagar era from MoFi, I’d pay a lot of extra money to get number 316 of For Unlawful Carnal Knowledge.

As far as sound quality goes, I don't think there's much left on the table after the recent Hagar era hi-res remasters.

 

[Blackwood]

As far as sound quality goes, I don't think there's much left on the table after the recent Hagar era hi-res remasters.

As my luck would have it, that was announced right after I had filled in some gaps in my Hagar era library. I had sold off OU812 many years back, and never owned Balance, but rectified that not long ago. And then, boom, the remasters were announced.

 

[Hawkeye_Mo]

As my luck would have it, that was announced right after I had filled in some gaps in my Hagar era library. I had sold off OU812 many years back, and never owned Balance, but rectified that not long ago. And then, boom, the remasters were announced.

Little disappointd in the Van Hagar remasters, there is definite clipping in multiple tracks. I D/L the hi-res tracks from Qobuz. The waveforms appear to be twice the amplitude of the most recent Van Halen I album that was just released, and that sounds great. Guess the loudness wars weren't quite over yet.

 

[Blackwood]

Little disappointd in the Van Hagar remasters, there is definite clipping in multiple tracks. I D/L the hi-res tracks from Qobuz. The waveforms appear to be twice the amplitude of the most recent Van Halen I album that was just released, and that sounds great. Guess the loudness wars weren't quite over yet.

In a weak moment about an hour ago, and with Christmas around the corner, I clicked the “You really don’t need this but you know you want it” button on Rhino.com.

Well, to be accurate, with Gnarlywood being the shipper it’s likely more of a Happy 2024 gift to myself.

If it manages to get here before Christmas, not only will it be a miracle, but it can go in my Christmas stocking as a surprise gift from my wife who will be surprised to find out that she bought it for me.

 

[GOS]

In a weak moment about an hour ago, and with Christmas around the corner, I clicked the “You really don’t need this but you know you want it” button on Rhino.com.

Well, to be accurate, with Gnarlywood being the shipper it’s likely more of a Happy 2024 gift to myself.

If it manages to get here before Christmas, not only will it be a miracle, but it can go in my Christmas stocking as a surprise gift from my wife who will be surprised to find out that she bought it for me.

I'm easily confused. What did you order, specifically?

 

[Blackwood]

I'm easily confused. What did you order, specifically?

That’s on me... I’m easily confusing.

I bought the Van Halen Collection Vol. 2 CDs, which is not exactly on-topic. But my original point was that I thought it would be nice if MoFi just kept the Van Halen love going once they release 1984... whatever year that’ll be.

From expressing that simple wish, and @JediJoker’s reply, Rhino now has a bit more of my money.

 

[Alex Vlach]

So i listened to the MFSL SACD and compared it to the Best of Vol 1 (released in 1996) which has three songs from the first album. I have no choice but to state that to my ears the Best of Vol 1 sounds noticeably better in every way. By comparison, the SACD is more shrill, has more glare, the vocals are more distant and the soundstage is narrower.

Also, while comparing back & forth i noticed the track 'Runnin' With The Devil' is not exactly the same on both releases. On the SACD David Lee Roth can be heard saying 'yeah' at the 2:00 min mark and 'whooo' at the 2:03 min mark. The 1996 version doesn't have this. I thought remastering from the original tapes would result in identical tracks?

Here's what i don't understand; with today's advanced technology and superior analog to digital equipment (to name just a few elements in the production chain), i expected a noticeable improvement from the MFSL SACD release and the result is just the opposite. How can the same recording originally digitized in the mid-eighties with mediocre digital equipment (by today's standard) actually sound better? What am i missing?

 

[The Pink Floyd]

My VH one-step 45 rpm is finally out for delivery today. Can't wait to get it.

 

[Steve Matthew]

To be clear, my order was with Mobile Fidelity, (mofi.com) not Music Direct.

It was great thou!

 

[inspclouseau]

Just arrived from MoFi yesterday~ sacd

 

[Bill B]

Got an email with a link to Mofi's website to see this message...

 

[marpow]

Got an email with a link to Mofi's website to see this message...

View attachment 102018

Finally MOFI is listening to us. Don't buy pre orders and don't buy soon to be released.

 

[JediJoker]

Got an email with a link to Mofi's website to see this message...

View attachment 102018

I had wondered about that. This is a move in the right direction.

 

[Wagonmaster_91]

So i listened to the MFSL SACD and compared it to the Best of Vol 1 (released in 1996) which has three songs from the first album. I have no choice but to state that to my ears the Best of Vol 1 sounds noticeably better in every way. By comparison, the SACD is more shrill, has more glare, the vocals are more distant and the soundstage is narrower.

Also, while comparing back & forth i noticed the track 'Runnin' With The Devil' is not exactly the same on both releases. On the SACD David Lee Roth can be heard saying 'yeah' at the 2:00 min mark and 'whooo' at the 2:03 min mark. The 1996 version doesn't have this. I thought remastering from the original tapes would result in identical tracks?

Here's what i don't understand; with today's advanced technology and superior analog to digital equipment (to name just a few elements in the production chain), i expected a noticeable improvement from the MFSL SACD release and the result is just the opposite. How can the same recording originally digitized in the mid-eighties with mediocre digital equipment (by today's standard) actually sound better? What am i missing?

They are two different arrangements of "Running With The Devil". There are three sections to the song - The verses (two, with the second repeated), the chorus and the guitar solo. Both versions use the same elements (performance), but edited in different order. For example, the original album version (same as the new SACD) has Eddie's solo repeated after the 3rd (final verse) before the closing chorus. The 1996 "Best of" version goes right to the ending chorus.

The song ends up being the same length, just re-arranged. I never heard the reason for the re-arrangement bur suspect it had something to do with attracting more radio airplay at the time. (Remember they were a new group and this was their first album. Gotta get a hit!)

There was a third arrangement done that switched the verses around so that it went 2-1-2 instead of 1-2-2 as the two version above do. (I think I have that right, going from memory on this), but ultimately not issued.

 

[inspclouseau]

Just arrived from MoFi yesterday~ sacd

Will listen to it tonight~ Really didn't think I was going to get this one. Was surprised

 

[ssully]

Not sure why yet another mastering is needed, after the HDtracks versions released years ago (though you had to choose the ridiculous 192/24 quality version to get the full dynamic range, compression-free mastering)

The problem with a lot of the old VH albums is Ted Templeman skimped on bass. Some serious re-EQ (or better yet, remixing) would be needed to fix that.

 

[Bill B]

Not sure why yet another mastering is needed, after the HDtracks versions released years ago (though you had to choose the ridiculous 192/24 quality version to get the full dynamic range, compression-free mastering)

The problem with a lot of the old VH albums is Ted Templeman skimped on bass. Some serious re-EQ (or better yet, remixing) would be needed to fix that.

That was my main take away from my first listen to this MoFi VH1 sacd, lacking low end punch.
Otherwise, I thought it sounded pretty good.

 

[ssully]

That was my main take away from my first listen to this MoFi VH1 sacd, lacking low end punch.

that's baked in to the mixes

 

[Bill B]

I had wondered about that. This is a move in the right direction.

I guess the positive take away is that should mean "VH2" and "Fair Warning" should be out BEFORE "late 2024". Maybe 2nd and 3rd quarter respectively. (Which makes no sense since W&CF came out before FW, so why wasn't FW on the list?).

LOL.... when pigs fly if past performance is indicative of future results.

 

[LennonCobain]

How does the MoFi VH1 SACD compare to the DCC Gold CD?