confirmation-bias

50 Years Later and What, If Anything, Has Changed?

Audiophile Quality Pressings of Orchestral Music Available Now

In 1975 Klavier licensed and reissued some well-regarded EMI recordings with mastereing by one of our favorite mastering engineers, Doug Sax. They were to be produced here in the states for the domestic audiophile market.

I wrote a long piece many years ago about how ridiculously bad these records sounded. You can find it here.

I just happened to look up the album today to find out what year it had come out (1975) and discovered that back in 2015, when I first wrote about the record, I had somehow ignored the fact that not all the pressings were produced the same way. There was a special version made for a company called Eastern Pacific Sounds, no doubt serving the Asian audiophile market. It differed in ways that will be familiar to the audiophiles of today, even though it came out 50 years ago.

Single Step processing was used for this “Limited Edition” release. The stamper was made from the first generation master and not more than 1,000 were pressed from each stamper. This process allows all records to be of “test pressing” quality. Klavier records are used by many manufacturers and audio specialty shops for demonstrating their equipment.

For the Klavier release of Offenbach Overtures with Fremaux, our current favorite, they managed to produce even fewer pressings per stamper:

Single Step processing was used for this “Limited Edition” release. The stamper was made from the first generation master and not more than 500 were pressed from each stamper. This process allows all records to be of “test pressing” quality.

The problem with this way of thinking about records has always been a lack of evidence to support any of the supposed gains in sound or pressing quality. As with so much of audio and records, no doubt confirmation bias is at the heart of the problem

We did some testing ourselves years ago for the 45 RPM “Very Limited Edition” of Rumours, in which we demonstrated fairly conclusively that no two records sound the same, no matter how few you press from a stamper. (You can read all about it here.)

We discussed the conventional wisdom of buying promos so that you can get “test pressing” quality or something close to it. This also has proven to be of little value.

And now we have “one-step” pressings, some of which have been reviewed on this blog, either by me, Robert Brook or my customers. (This might be a good place to start to learn more about their sound quality, which, as far as we can tell, is consistently dismal.)

(more…)

On Heroes, It Took Us Ages to Break the Sound Barrier

Hot Stamper Pressings of the Music of David Bowie Available Now

Because the conventional wisdom turned out to be so wrong.

Our intuition that the British originals of Heroes would sound the best was incorrect.

The experiments we carried out falsified that prediction.

In our world, intuitions have a bad track record, but more than a few audiophiles — many of whom are addicted to sharing their “record knowledge” on audiophile forums and youtube channels — seem unaware of the shortcomings of this approach.

Taking a page from one of the greatest minds of the 20th century, we’ve opted to use a more scientific approach in order to discover the record pressings that have by far the best soundi, and we encourage you to do likewise. 

We pioneered the evidence-based approach to finding the best sounding pressings, and, like all good scientists, we shared it with everyone. Some in the audiophile community have taken it to heart, but most have chosen to put their faith in reviewers, forum posters, common sense and logic.

None of these produce consistently good results, but those who use these methods are loathe to question them and only rarely if ever learn the error of their ways.

Once a decision has been made and a specific pressing acquired — you could call it door number three I suppose — cognitive dissonance and confirmation bias immediately kick in to justify the result, and soon enough the game is over. The prize has been won. It’s as good as it gets. Whatever faults it may have must lie in the recording, not the pressing.

(more…)

What Do You Get When You Buy a Record from Analogue Productions?

Skeptical Thinking Will Help You Identify Records with Better Sound

Chad Kassem, the man who founded Analogue Productions sometime in the 90s,  claims that all his pressings are superior to those of his competitors, as well as all previous reissues, and — gasp! — even the originals, or perhaps it would be better to say especially the originals.

In doing so he makes claims that can be tested. Our commentary today will look at how he came to believe in the superiority of his product. Naturally we disagree with him about the quality of his records, and have been doing so since the early-90s.

But don’t these disagreements just boil down to one opinion differing with another, our opinion versus his?

As a matter of fact, no. It turns out there are ways to run experiments which are guaranteed to identify the record pressings that actually do have better sound. We at Better Records have spent more than twenty years developing and refining a great many of these methods. Given the necessary resources, these methods are sure to produce reliable data.

This is data backed by evidence. Testable data. Data derived from experiments that may not eliminate the value of opinions, but removes them from the position they occupy most often in the world of audio, front and center, and relegates them to the margins where they are more appropriate.

So let’s get back to the question we asked above: What do you get when you buy a record on the Analogue Productions label?

In the simplest terms, you get a record that meets with Chad’s approval.

Since Chad appears — at least to me — to have no critical listening skills to speak of, he must instead rely on the assurances of the engineers who work for him. Yes, they tell him, they succeeded in making him a record of the very highest quality. There are no conflicts of interest they say. We all love music and are just interested in making the best record we can. Unsurprisingly, we made he best version ever.

Their professional opinions are then backed up by those that review and sell these very same records.

Everyone operating in this circular chain gets paid to agree that Chad’s records are indeed of the highest quality, exactly what one would expect to hear frmo those who know how they were made. (Confirmation bias — hearing what you expect to hear — is surely the most powerful weapon in the arsenal of those who make and market audiophile records.)

(more…)

An Overview of Beatles Oldies But Goldies

Hot Stamper Pressings of the Music of The Beatles Available Now

This is a Beatles album we think we know well.

We’ve done a number of shootouts for A Collection of Beatles Oldies over the last ten years or so, and our experimental approach using many dozens of copies provides us with strong evidence to support the following conclusions regarding the sound of the originals vis-a-vis the reissues:

  1. The best of the early pressings always win our shootouts. No reissue has ever earned our top grade of A+++ and it is unlikely any reissue ever will.
  2. The reissues can be quite good however. The best of them have earned grades of Double Plus (A++).
  3. The worst of the early pressings also earned grades of Double Plus (A++).
  4. Conclusion: if you have a bad original and a good reissue, you might be fooled into thinking the sound quality was comparable.

(more…)

Some Thoughts on Testing in Audio

Robert Brook runs a blog called The Broken Record, with a subtitle explaining that his blog is:

A GUIDE FOR THE DEDICATED ANALOG AUDIOPHILE

Some THOUGHTS on TESTING in AUDIO

My Two Cents

I made a couple of quick notes and sent them by email to Robert, as follows:

  • One record is not enough for this test, or any other for that matter, and
  • Tests need to be blinded.

Without blinding all you are doing is confirming your prejudices, which is something you correctly point out in your piece, and no matter how much you want to think you aren’t doing that because you are trying so hard to guard against it, it is almost surely what you will end up doing.

Confirmation bias is at the heart of most mistaken audio judgments, something I learned a very long time ago, and only after making every kind of mistake there is to make, over the course of decades no less. Only one thing had the power to set me on the right path, and without it I would never have learned how to make any real progress in audio, or find better sounding records for that matter.

If you don’t know how to run good experiments, how can you be sure your results are of any value?

(more…)

The Yellow Label Reissues Can Sound Very Good, But Great? Not a Chance

Hot Stamper Pressings of Contemporary Jazz Albums Available Now

The earlier pressing on the site as of this writing is an amazingly well recorded album with many fine qualities:

Boasting seriously good grades from top to bottom, this vintage Contemporary pressing is doing just about everything right.

These sides are bigger and more open, with more bass and energy, than most others we played – the saxes and trumpets are immediate and lively.

Mr. Earl Hines himself showed up, a man who knows this music like nobody’s business – Leroy Vinnegar and Shelly Manne round out the quartet.

“Great musicians produce great results, and most of the LP’s tracks were done in one or two takes. The result is ‘a spontaneous, swinging record of what happened’ when Carter met Hines ‘for the first time. . . .'”

Our notes for the Yellow Label reissues point out that they are always more compressed, with some added upper midrange. The intro benefits from this but the peaks can get congested.

The earlier pressings, especially the originals on the Black Label, are the most likely to sound right, but they are tough to find in audiophile playing condition.

If you see a copy on the site with these grades — less than 2+ on both sides — it will proabably have a Yellow Label and some of the shortcomings we mention above.

Correct, In This Case

Some people like to search for relationships between the sound of the pressing and the label it has, but in our experience that is more often than not a fool’s errand once confirmation biases and other kinds of mistaken thinking are taken into account.

When the conventional wisdom turns out to be correct — in other words, when it comports with reality, at least for the six copies of this album that we played — we are happy to temporarily put aside our skepticism and learn the lessons playing a stack of copies of this title has taught us.

Why? Because the experimental evidence supports it.

(more…)

A Collection of Beatles Oldies on Video – Expert Advice?

The LOST Beatles Album | Cancelled By Apple – Should It Be Re-released?

Click on the link above to see an interesting and informative video that we think is well worth watching.

Allow me to make a few points:

As to the question posed above, my vote would of course be no. The new Beatles albums are awful sounding. Here are a few of rour eviews detailing their many shortcomings:

After playing those three, we gave up on the idea of playing the rest of the set.

The Mono Box (in analog!) was even worse. We played one record, heard truly awful sound, and that was all she wrote.

Mushy Sound Quality

Andrew Milton, the Parlogram Auctions guy, offers opinions about the sound quality of the various pressings he reviews. Naturally we are skeptical of reviewers’ opinions for reasons that should be clear to readers of this blog.

We have no idea how he cleans his records or how carefully he plays his records, or even what he listens for.

Frankly, even if we knew all those things it wouldn’t mean much to us. So many reviewers like so many bad sounding modern records that we’ve learned not to take anything they say seriously.

The comment about the 1G stampers being “mushy” that Andrew makes about 19 minutes in is one we take exception to. Part of the problem with his comment is that we can’t really be sure what he means by “mushy.” If it means smeary or thick, that has not been our experience with the best cleaned originals.

(more…)

How Does the Heavy Vinyl Rubber Soul Sound?

Hot Stamper Pressings of Rubber Soul Available Now

This review was originally written in 2015.

We are so excited to tell you about the first of the Heavy Vinyl Beatles remasters we’ve played! As we cycle through our regular Hot Stamper shootouts for The Beatles’ albums we will be of course be reviewing more of them*. I specifically chose this one to start with, having spent a great deal of time over the last year testing the best vinyl pressings against three different CD versions of Rubber Soul.

The short version of our review of the new Rubber Soul vinyl would simply point out that it’s awful, and, unsurprisingly, it’s awful in most of the ways that practically all modern Heavy Vinyl records are: it’s opaque, airless, energy-less and just a drag.

I was looking forward to the opportunity to take Michael Fremer, the foremost champion of thicky vinyl, to task in expectation of his usual rave review, when to my surprise I found the rug had been pulled out from under me — he didn’t like it either. Damn!

MF could hear how bad it was. True to form, he thinks he knows why it doesn’t sound good:

As expected, Rubber Soul, sourced from George Martin’s 1987 16 bit, 44.1k remix sounds like a CD. Why should it sound like anything else? That’s from what it was essentially mastered. The sound is flattened against the speakers, hard, two-dimensional and generally hash on top, yet it does have a few good qualities as CDs often do: there’s good clarity and detail on some instruments. The strings are dreadful and the voices not far behind. The overall sound is dry and decay is unnaturally fast and falls into dead zone.

It strikes me as odd that the new vinyl should sound like a CD. I have listened to the newly remastered 2009 CD of Rubber Soul in stereo extensively and think it sounds quite good, clearly better than the Heavy Vinyl pressing that’s made from the very same 16 bit, 44.1k remixed digital source.

If the source makes the new vinyl sound bad, why doesn’t it make the new CD sound bad? I can tell you that the new CD sounds dramatically better than the 1987 CD I’ve owned for twenty years. They’re not even close. How could that be if, as MF seems to believe, the compromised digital source is the problem?

Lucky for me I didn’t know what the source for the new CD was when I was listening to it. I assumed it came from the carefully remastered hi-rez tapes that were being used to make the new series in its entirety, digital sources that are supposed to result in sound with more analog qualities.

Well, based on what I’ve heard, they do, and those more analog qualities obviously extend to the new Rubber Soul compact disc. At least to these ears they do.

It’s possible my ignorance of the source tape allowed me to avoid the kind of confirmation bias — hearing what you expect to hear — that is surely one of the biggest pitfalls in all of audio and a pit that Fremer falls into regularly.

(more…)

Letter of the Week – “I think your blanket dislike of everything MoFi is also not credible.”

Record Collecting for Audiophiles from A to Z

Not long ago we received an email taking us to task for our bashing of Heavy Vinyl in general and Mobile Fidelity in particular.

Hey Tom,

I think your blanket ‘anything new is not as good as the best of original or vintage’ is totally illogical. Why couldn’t more care and excellence be put in to a new pressing now than the best you can find from an original vintage pressing? Take 70’s rock albums. With the oil crisis tons of vinyl was pretty rubbish and/or recycled, and sounds terrible. That having been said, most of the Jimmy Page remasters sound awful too. If you take somewhere like Craft Recordings and their one steps they are outstanding pressings. You also know RVG mastered records to deliberately avoid records jumping on relatively poor quality equipment and not to reflect the ‘true’ sound. So why can’t Kevin Gray master something now that RTI then presses that sounds ‘better’?

I think your blanket dislike of everything MoFi is also not credible. I listened to the original MoFi one step of Sgt. Pepper on a 2 million dollar plus system and it sounded better than any copy I’ve ever heard or anything else we had to compare it with that evening.

I’m not being critical. Just commenting. You clearly have a business in selling great sounding copies of ‘vintage’ pressings (at least I assume they are all vintage). That’s fine and that’s your prerogative. But it doesn’t render every single version of 60’s and 70’s releases produced in the last 10-15 years not worth listening to but it does support your business proposition. Fair enough.

I think you, your team and frequent shoppers may well be suffering from the one thing you kind of imply everyone who buys MoFi or Tone Poets records of – confirmation bias. But that’s fine. If it brings joy to your listening or that of your staff and customers I can’t argue with that. Well done. I just don’t buy the logic.  I too trust my ears! So I will at some point buy a copy that I’ve already got what I think is an amazing copy of and compare it to see for myself.

Nick H.

Nick,

Doing carefully controlled shootouts with large groups of records is the only practical way anyone can learn what to listen for. We wrote about it here in a review for Rubber Soul:

If you have five or ten copies of a record and play them over and over against each other, the process itself teaches you what’s right and what’s wrong with the sound of the album at key moments of your choosing.

Once your ears are completely tuned to what the best pressings do well that others do not do as well, using a specific passage of music — the acoustic guitar John beats the hell out of on Norwegian Wood just to take one example — it will quickly become obvious how well any given pressing reproduces that passage.

The process is simple enough. First you go deep into the sound. There you find something special, something you can’t find on most copies. Now, with the hard-won knowledge of precisely what to listen for, you are perfectly positioned to critique any and all pressings that come your way.

Admittedly, to clean and play enough copies to get to that point may take all day, but through the experience you will have gained knowledge that you cannot come by any other way.

If you do it right and do it enough it has the power to change everything you will ever do in audio.

Once you have done that work, when it comes time to play a modern record, on any label, it often becomes obvious what they “did to it” in the mastering, and how far short if falls when compared head to head to the pressings that were found to have the best sound. This is why we think the three most important words in the world of records are compared to what?

Our critiques are often quite specific about the sound of these records. Here is a good example from 2021: Cat Stevens on 2 Heavy Vinyl 45 RPM discs.

I would be happy to sell you a killer Sgt. Pepper to change your mind, same deal, but I feel at this point you are very unlikely to take me up on that offer for the reasons you list.

The rest of your questions are good ones but have already been answered at length and ad infinitum on our blog. There are 5000 6000 postings. We repeat ourselves a lot.

Many of those who were skeptical before they heard their first Hot Stamper have written us letters extolling the virtues of our pressings. Here are some testimonial letters you may find of interest:

Either way, thanks for writing,

TP

PS

Before you try your first Hot Stamper, as long as you are buying vintage pressings in the meantime, not audiophile records, you are probably not wasting much money. Every vintage pressing has the potential to teach you something. Any modern record should always be considered a stop-gap, never an answer, something to beat when you finally find a real pressing in acceptable playing condition.

(more…)

Hot Stampers Simply Do Not Exist for Some Audiophiles

Please Consider Taking Some of Our Hard-Earned Audio Advice

It is an unfortunate fact that, at least for some audiophiles, Hot Stampers simply do not exist.

They may be lovers of sound, the dictionary definition of an audiophile, but their systems are not revealing and accurate enough to allow them to hear how good a properly-mastered, properly-pressed, properly-cleaned vintage (or maybe not so vintage) pressing can sound relative to whatever other version of the music they may have — Heavy Vinyl, cassette, CD, etc.

They simply do not possess a system (power, equipment, room, tweaks) of the quality required to play them at their best. 

Others won’t have developed the rudimentary listening skills needed to recognize the superior sound of a Hot Stamper pressing when it’s playing on their turntable.

Speculation? Opinion? Not really. Not when the evidence is this overwhelming. Let’s look at some of the facts.

A great many analog-oriented audiophiles are quite happy with the sound of Heavy Vinyl LPs, the kind that we regularly trash around here.

Those pressings set a decidedly low standard for sound quality, to our ears anyway, so if the typical audiophile is happy with them, what does that tell you about the quality of his audio chain and the nature of his critical listening skills?

(more…)