Who's cut hot and has radical grooves?

[Son-of-a-Weizen]

From the most recent Classic Recs newsletter. When they say "radical grooves," are they talking about deep sub grooves, or what?

* * * * *

IS YOUR SYSTEM UP TO THE TASK ... The Saga of Who's Next

(8/5/05 3:05 pm pst)

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

When we got the original analog 2 track 1/4" masters from The Who vaults in London, anticipation was high particularly given that this was the seminal Who album in most people's minds. Further, there have been no shortage of pressings of this title over the years since its 1971 release on the Track label in the UK, adding to the anxiety of the job at hand - how to equal or exceed the original UK release. Chris Bellman, from Bernie Grundman Mastering (Classic Genesis mastering), and I, giving Bernie a break from Rock cutting, started by A/B'ing the tape against a mint original UK Track copy of this landmark title. The Track copy was cut hot, albeit a little light in the bass and high frequencies, compared with the tape. There was a bit of gritty harshness to the pressing as well that was not on the tape. Suffice it to say, that we matched the level of the original pressing, but cut full bandwidth with no compression which was pretty obviously used on the original to get more level on the disk. We introduced the title with great fanfare at the CES in Las Vegas last January and immediately got raves from Michael Fremer (10/10) among others. The first pressing run immediately sold out and all was well until we received a few complaints about harshness or distortion in a few places on the disc. When we looked into it we found nothing structurally wrong with the pressings as confirmed by careful examination by Bernie Grundman under the microscope. Bernie did comment, however, that the disc was cut "hot" and that it wouldn't surprise him that people using highly non-compliant cartridges (read: not the best trackers) or cartridges somewhat misaligned, might have a problem tracking some of the most radical grooves. The tonearm/cartridge combo (12" SME/Shure V-15) on the lathe at Grundman Mastering had no problems tracking the grooves - even through Daltrey's blood curdling screams and the full bandwidth synthesizer passages on inside cuts - the hardest to track. The same was true when we played back test pressings and returned supposed defective copies on the system at TheMusic.com's Gear Shop listening room on a Kuzma XL with Airline tonearm and Kuzma Reference cartridge set up by TheMusic.com's own Scot "analog" Markwell (former HP setup man) - clear sailing and amazing sound.

Heeding Grundman's caution, we cut a backup set of lacquers at a lower level with NO changes to the EQ (read no remastering). For the second and all subsequent pressings we used the backup parts for the pressing runs. Why? Realizing that most systems, even audiophile systems, are likely to be severely challenged by radical first cutting (remember the 1S RCA Pines of Rome) we chose to fall back to a lower level cutting which would be more forgiving on the tonearm/cartridge abilities/setup but have less signal to noise than the more radically cut first pressing. I know that people don't want to hear that their analog front end may be somewhat challenged on a tracking level but this is really at the heart of the issue. When cartridges mistrack, exacerbated by pivoted tonearms and inner groove velocity issues, it is typically most noticeable in the high frequencies since this is where the most radical activity on a LP occurs. The tracking distortion is sometimes harsh, gritty or distorted sounding - try one of a variety of test records to see what I mean. You might just be surprised to learn that your turntable/ tonearm/cartridge combo just ain't quite up to the task of properly decoding what can be cut into the grooves of an LP. It has always been the case, to some degree, that encoding is easier than decoding - particularly in LP cutting. In fact, I am reminded of something Bernie Grundman told me early on in the history of Classic Records: "We can cut things that we can't accurately play back". I was puzzled at first, but now know that he is absolutely right.

So where does that leave us? For those that have first pressings and want a kinder gentler replacement, I suggest you consult the source you bought it from - Classic will honor those returned LP's. If your source won't honor the return, then you can, as an alternative, request to return it to our sister company, TheMusic.com (Groove Shop), by sending an email to whosnext@themusic.com and receive a replacement after you return the copy to us with arrangements to pay for the return postage and insurance. Having said that, I have ten copies of the first pressing that I will not part with because my system is more than capable of playing them back. Am I bragging? Well, yes, kind of, because I have the luxury of having Scot Markwell around to tune my front end to the edge of its life. Another alternative would be to consult Scot on how you too can get the most out of LP playback through better equipment/setup. Check out http://www.themusic.com/gear. But beware it may be hazardous to you wallet – ah, the cost of the pursuit of analog nirvana. Who's Next?