MFSL Ultradisc 24k Gold CD: Are they really worth it? 

Streaming has reliability issues. And, ocassionally songs mysteriously get taken down off the web. I don't have to worry about that with a CD.

more dinamic range in the old copy, that's why I start many years ago to buy original cd from early 90' late 80', my kind of music

Sade -Love Deluxe. 1992 I think. I heard this and I thought I was there. The best sounding CD I ever heard.

I own two discs The Alan Parsons Project’s Tales of Mystery and Imagination AP, and Sting’s Nothing Like The Sun. Sting’s album sounds amazing, even I own the DVD DTS Audio of the same album and the Gold Edition sounds way better and has a pristine audio with a greater sound quality than the DTS. I’ve bought these albums more than 20 years from today and the audio still shines. Thanks for the video, love it!

I still have all my old Ultradiscs from back in the day. I bought them all right when they came out so fortunately I didn't pay an arm and a leg for them. For me The Wall has always been one of my favorites. The mastering and mixing sounds so much better than the original cd. It's still my favorite release of The Wall, and the best Ultradisc I own. Other ones the differences sounded marginal to me, but The Wall I could definitely hear the difference in.

First I want to thank you for putting the effort and hard work into this video. It takes more time and effort than folks realize. So thank you! Im very analytical so please pardon me if some of this seems critical, it is not meant in tone to be. We all love music and that is why we care:) Strictly speaking cds here though my main listening is vinyl. I just dont think its fair most of the time to even place the best vinyl versions in the conversation concerning these titles. My “audiophile” journey began with MFSL gold cds. In the days of CD yor there use to be a place called “Tracks” which had rows and rows of cds. All those long boxes standing up proudly, ahh yes, those were the days. Or not. At 18-22$ a pop it wasnt exactly CD Warehouse prices that came later. Anyway, I went into Tracks one day to browse and ran across this odd looking item in this big longbox. Pink Floyd “The Wall” The banner said “Original Master Recording”. Except it was priced at $49.95! I passed. But got curious a few months later and started looking up what this Mobile Fidelity Sound Lab was all about. Later I went back to Tracks and it was still there. This time reduced to $39.95. I thought “Eh what the heck. Ill bite” and bought it. I think I had coupon also. A steal now right? And I still have the longbox and set. And thus my audiophile journey began.. I went on to collect (because I was initially a collector, not concerned necessarily with sound quality) all of the MFSL gold and silver cds. Conclusion after being more aware of sound quality and comparing many other versions such as originals, japanese, targets, west germans etc etc? My conclusion is it is a case by case basis. Some are very cool to have, such as the Elton John MFSL’s because they are basically flat transfers. Meaning I can adjust eq to my liking. Others are not so good. The Wall I would consider as ok for what it is, but a bit boosted on the bass and treble. For me, your original sounded more open as far as clarity of instruments. If you look closely at the peaks and vallies of the waveforms you provide, it is also visually evident that this is true. Which brings up another point. A point of contention I admit… The DR thing. DR is not a make it or break it reading. It is in fact only one aspect of sound. You mention a DR of 10 is not that good on the MFSL DSOTM. I would question that conclusion. And I think later on with the Supertramp title this is proven. A DR 10 is fine. What affects the sound more so is eq. And that is the issue I have with the DSOTM MFSL gold cd. The eq is odd. Kind of has this breathy quality to it compared to the best cd versions. I would pick the jpn Harvest blackface over it any day of the week. But not because the DR is 10 on the MFSL version. Of course if a DR is 4-5 or something ridiculous then it becomes a more overriding factor. But 8,9, 10 DRs? That is not an issue. For example, I think the Stones Hackney Diamonds is a silly 5 average. Which one can totally hear. But even more so is the eq sucking eggs on that album. A pity that the Stones arguably best album in decades is clamped down with compression and poor eq. Blue Train..MFSL vs the older original.. You can hear a difference in a DR of 12 and 13? Hmm ok. I think again, what you are hearing is more an eq difference, better convertors for the time and more care placed into the transfer. Coltranes tone is definitely more accurate, the cymbals shimmer properly and the overall openess is there with the MFSL as compared to the older cd. But I do not think that a DR of plus 1 is making that kind of a difference as much as other factors. Nirvana.. Im actually surprised by the MFSL. I have a bit of a beat up MFSL gold cd that a friend gave me when he went to streaming (how lucky there right?) and my train of thought was the MFSL was not highly regarded. Im not even sure I listened to it but maybe once? Hey it still plays so I am not complaining in condition when it was free! Listening to the samples, surprisingly, I have to say the MFSL sounds better to me than the original. Why? Listen to the guitar, cymbals and vocals. All three are much more open sounding on the MFSL. On the guitar you can here the picks engagement along with layers of tonality. The cymbals actually sound like cymbals not a compressed “tss tss tss” and again with Kurts vocals they have more body and sound characteristically like Kurt more. The only negative I can say is there is a bit of a more “airy” quality to the MFSL which is edging into the mastering. But not distracting. And not sure why you hear the vocals as louder in the original. I think perhaps Kurt’s vocal is not lower in the MFSL but it is due to the MFSL having more presence in the instrumentation. Again, listen to the cymbals. Tell me which sound more open and natural? MFSL 100%. The orginal is a bit heavy on the bottom end. You mention MFSL was done in 1991. Well, that makes sense. Those tapes were super fresh at that time. Thus also contributing to the great sound. Surprisingly, gotta go with the MFSL gold on that one. As far as the peaks, I don’t see anything missing on the MFSL. The original has some topped off dynamics though. But again very marginal. Either way DR 11 is anything but “squished”. My guess is that on the MFSL gold cd Nevermind we are hearing much more of what was on the tapes. Just wish that bit of house sound “air” was gone. But again, the trade off is worth it. “Is the price worth the MFSL?” is a question one has to ask themselves. I know which Ill be listening to however. Supertramp “Crime Of The Century”… Now here is where dynamics is playing a bigger part, no doubt. However, as you say, the DSOTM has a DR of 10 also, yet is not ear fatiguing..Do DR numbers play as big a part as we think?..you have to listen. Listening is the biggest part. Then confirm with soundwaves and technical visual info to make sure bias is not jumping in there. But yeah, the 2002 yuck. The MFSL gold cd on the COTC is obviously the winner as far as breathing room goes. But also remember that hiss is going to be louder as one turns it up also. Think of it as the equivalent of noise floor of a low volume mastered lp. Though the MFSL gold cd really doesnt get compromised with hiss in this way. Again, listen to the keyboard. The main instrument. Nearly takes ones ears off with bright eq on the 2002 and not much better on the older version either. When the horns come in the MFSL gold has a broader sense of soundstage also. The band is right there in front of you. This Supertramp COTC is one of the stars of the old MFSL. Man, now if we could only get a definitive AP UHQR of THIS title wouldnt that be special? Don’t overlook MFSL silver cd series… I humbly recommend the silver cds. Procal Harum-A Salty Dog, Al Stewart Time Passages, Spirit 12 Dreams, I Robot, Youngbloods Elephant Mountain, Sonny Rollins-Way Out West, Joe Walsh-Barnstorm, Dillard and Clark - The Fantastic Expedition of/Through the Morning. All fantastic, even tempered, even mastered versions. And ones that are mastered in a more flat manner. It is only as good as what goes in… In the end, what the recording is, is what it is. If the fidelity is marginal at best then do not expect MFSL or anyone else to create a great sounding recording from lesser fidelity. Mastering can only do so much. A couple of humble suggestions for future videos of this nature… Always volume match when doing comparisons. Especially in the hi-rez downloads. Otherwise there will be a built in bias. “People choose the loudest” as best phenomena. The idea to judge these with downloads that are not volume matched I dont really get. That is the entire thing with the lower volume old MFSL gold cds. Many of them sound better as you turn them up. Volume matching with the loudest reveals the strength or exposes the weakness. So I disagree with the idea of not volume matching to make the judgement. This should be done across the board. And… Please with the graphs, can you make the order the same as the samples? It gets a bit confusing. Sounds like picky/gripes but I really do appreciate what you have done here and my opinions are just that..opinions. The video is very good and beneficial. Thanks again for your hard work! It is appreciated 👍🏻👍🏻

Speaking as someone who started buying CDs in 1989 and bought his first Mobile Fidelity Sound Lab CD at about 1990, here are a few points: I think that history has to be recognized here. MFSL was in the audiophile game for LPs and tapes as far back as the 1970's, and got into CDs relatively early -- before the 'major' labels really made the jump -- at least so far as I understand. The original MFSL approach to CDs was two-pronged: 1. To release significant albums on CD that had not yet been properly released by other labels across many genres (the MFSL aluminum Original Master Recordings), and 2. To release the CD equivalent of their half speed mastered LPs for popular recordings with perceived audiophile appeal (the MFSL Ultradisc recordings). To this end, both of these sets of recordings had the following goals: 1. Leverage their existing expertise and mastering toolchain to create albums sourced from proper masters (except when they screwed it up), 2. Come with complete artwork and liner notes (where possible), 3. Use as little compression as possible to preserve dynamics and avoid distortion (except when they didn't), 4. Sometimes include additional liner notes or important commentary from the the original creators of the recordings (the essay by Tom Dowd on the Layla Ultradisc comes to mind.) The Ultradisc recordings had the added benefit of supposedly superior surface material (24k Gold) much as their later LPs used a superior mix of vinyl (that was eventually adopted to manufacture some quad LPs). it is important to remember that in the early and mid-1980's goals 1-4 were often not true. The selection of tapes to use as sources were inconsistent, and some were poorly mastered. The packaging that CDs included was incomplete -- being whatever art they had on hand. I can recall getting CDs that only had poor reproductions of the front and back artwork from the album jackets, and utterly missing anything that might be included on the gatefold of vinyl LPs. I can recall getting an early copy of Miles Davis' Kind of Blue that lacked the original cover art entirely. My original major label copy of the Band's "Rock Of Ages" did not include all the tracks on the LP double album to fit into the running time of a single CD. The goal was to get out titles and fill the market, not necessarily produce proper recordings. In the packaging especially, early CDs were a little closer to cassette tapes than they were to vinyl. So, the fact that MFSL was giving vinyl-level attention to the medium was important at that time. The blanket statement "the old, original CDs are better and cheaper" needs to be more carefully qualified. That became more true as the 1980's turned into the 1990s. The market matured and major bands and the labels began to see the value of better reissues. That helped them catch up. To illustrate this point: you compare the MFSL Ultradisc to the 1993 release of DSOTM. That's a band supervised remaster of the album. Go back further to the 1984 CD release. I originally had that one from Capitol/EMI in the US. When I got the MFSL Ultradisc, I did a head to head comparison on very modest equipment in 1992 or so. I remarked in e-mail to friends at that time that the differences were noticeable. How those two compare in the dynamic range metrics you seem to prefer, I do not know... because I don't know if anyone was thinking in those terms back then. Your point that there are more modern releases of the same recordings on CD that are substantially better than MFSL releases from those days is well taken, and is very likely true. I agree that there is often far better value for money to be found in the market place. Like so much of the vinyl produced today, MFSL 24k Gold CDs are a collectors market and are now priced accordingly. That said, MFSL releases were often unique. I have the MFSL OMR release of Steve Winwood's solo album after his time in Traffic. That was the only CD release of that album at that time. I have the MFSL 24k Gold release of Jethro Tull's Living In The Past, which included all the tracks available on both the European and US LP releases. Those weren't available in one package until significantly later, I believe. I also have a copy of Taj Mahal's "Happy Just To Be Like I Am" which features the songs as they appear on the original master tape, not the order imposed to meet the dynamic needs of LP playback. Finally, when you consider the OMR recordings, MFSL did include more than pop, rock, and contemporary albums. I've scanned a few pages of the 1991 MFSL catalog that I kept all these years. In it, you can see that the full label offerings included a range of genres, including jazz, classical, spoken word, and comedy. They are located on my music Instagram account here: instagram.com/p/C4J9jaRLmgZ

Would be interesting to hear how those gold CDs match up to the MFSL SACD's

I will say this again and again MASTERING. IS. KEY! No matter the format, the price, the bit rate, or anything else, the mastering is where the magic happens. And these discs show it. In spite of all they have going for them, they all eventually boil down to the mastering

Thank you for the video. I have the same “Supertramp” CD by MFSL, made in Japan. The sound of this CD is simply fantastic. I also have the “Supertramp - Breakfast in America” CD by MFSL, and in my opinion, it also has a very good sound. In general, I prefer CDs from MFSL. In addition to dynamics, these discs have much less dirt at high frequencies than on original CDs, possibly this is related to more quality equipment and a more careful approach to digitization. But, of course, not all MFSL compact discs are as good as we would all like.

I don't know about the dynamics range with gold... But your selection of titles for this comparison video, that's an hell of selection you got, loved it !!! See ya, blue skies 🤙🏻🍀🎶

Great vid! Personally, MFSL CDs are usually a hit or miss, specially their Ultradisc II releases where it has been pointed out many times how they've smile-shape Eqd a lot of albums and artificially boosted the bass like on "The Wall" MFSL CD. Some MFSL CDs I've heard which are really good and the best on CD are "Double Fantasy", "Nilsson Schmilsson", or the hybrid SACD for "Surrealistic Pillow". But, I recommend doing some research before purchasing MFSL CDs, and if that albums has a DCC or Audio Fidelity reissue, I'd go for those instead

Thank you for another great video on CD's. As always, I agree with you. The format is not the limit, the master is. I confess I have many gold CD's: MSFL, DCC, Audio Fidelity, and Sony Mastersound (their anniversary series from 1993). 🎶❤️💿

Interestingly, the MFSL aluminum CD series of releases sound great to me. Since there aren't any releases in both the aluminum format and the gold format of the exact same album, it is nearly impossible to do a head to head comparison. I do, however, own the MFCD (Aluminum version) and the hybrid SACD version of The Grateful Dead album From The Mars Hotel. The MFCD version was released in 1985 and the hybrid SACD in 2019. To my ears, the old aluminum MFSL cd sounds much better than the SACD version. I have never seen any measurements comparing the two but would love to. Great video Guido!

One of the best sounding MFSL CDs. Rare, pricey but worth it: U2 - The Joshua Tree ! Off topic : two GREAT sounding Audio Fidelity CDs (SACD) : 1) Rage Against The Machine - Rage Against The Machine - 2) Vangelis - Blade Runner. The sound of both is "out of this world" ! Very good video ! Bravo !! ( Ps : maybe a video about DCC (Steve Hoffman) CD's) ? I think they are better than MFSL 😁

Ive said this for years about CDs. They are incredibly underrated (assuming they are mastered properly). We are still in the golden of cd when you can buy used discs for pennies. Ive bought Cds for as little as £2 and they have been in perfect condition. Even MFSL discs a few years ago were only £10. Now they are a fortune.

I have an SACD player and a few SACD’s. In all honesty, I just cannot tell the difference between an SACD and a good recording of a “Red Book” CD. Even with a very high bit rate MP3, I can’t really tell the difference. If there are differences, they are so imperceptible that the huge amount of extra money for the “superior” disc is simply not worth it to me. Maybe I’m just the odd man out. If I had my druthers, I’d prefer to have the “superior” discs………..just because. I can’t help but wonder if SACD’s, MOFI Gold discs, etc. were created just to take more money out of people’s wallets, even though the differences in audio are negligible at best. Great video. Thanks

Excellent video and VERY eye opening. Thank you for sharing!

Interesting video. You inspired me to go back and revisit my two MFSL discs, the only two I own, Queen's A Night at the Opera and A Day at the Races. I haven't listened to them in a while, but I remember when I got them back in the day that I did notice an improvement in the sound quality, listening on my home system through quality headphones. Now, all this time later, I'm intrigued to listen again and find out if I can still hear a difference.

I wished this segment you put together would have never ended. You hit some notes deep in my heart that have been dormant for way to long. I've enjoyed all your material but you hit this one directly out of the park. E difficile spiegarti con esatessa perche e troppo lunga la storia ma ti ringrazio veramente di cuore lo stesso. Un abbraccio veramente forte dalla Florida.👍

Great video! I have yet to try an MFSL cd. Usually, I prefer old AAD cds, but I think some remasters are great. The Ac/Dc-Back in black 1994 remaster is great. The AAD original cd is more audiophile sounding, very clean and detailed, but it sounds just a little bit "small" for a hard rock album. The 2003 remaster sounds huge, but it is very compressed and causes fatigue very fast. The 1994 version is a good middle ground. Dire Straits-Brothers in arms, a fully digital recording and mixing of course, is also better in the 1996 remaster than the original cd, I think. The original 80's cd was mastered in analog, then converted back to digital. Those early converters and doing it back and forth so much probably caused some loss. Sure, the dynamic range is huge, but it sounds very thin. The 1996 version still has plenty of dynamic range and also sounds a lot fuller. It all comes down to taste, of course 😃

MFSL Gold discs are absolutely worth it. Some of my best discs (fidelity wise) are MoFi’s. They’re incredible.

The gold disc were not worth it when they released at the end of the 80's beginning of the 90's in fact they did not sell well then because the price was to high and they did not last longer the a well cared for cd. I was a Dj for 30 years and I have owned them all from 8mm to Vinyl, Cassette and Cd's as well as external hard drives

Thank you for this. I have some of those CDs ... somewhere. When I bought them ... way back whenever ... I was not thinking of recording qualities, only the look of the package. Unlike my classical purchases where I expected different labels to offer different qualities like dynamic range.

Excellent video. I am always tempted to buy Mofi products thinking that I will have a better soundstage during playback. This video shows that it's a fool's errand. I listened intently with headphones and had the exact impression of the tracks that you did. I do like the UHQR vinyl pressings. I think they are worth the cost. By the way, while you were introducing The Wall tracks, I thought I heard The Division Bell in the background.

I played a couple of Mobile Fidelity Sound Lab CDs in my life. There is an excellent Beach Boys MFSL CD „Surfin' USA / Surfer Girl“ from the 80s that’s fantastic. Another MFSL CD I like is the Bob Marley Catch A Fire CD. It’s very very good and sounds very similar to the MFSL Vinyl from the same year. I also use a high quality very recent Technics SACD Player. Other MFSL CDs that I thought werent that special were the Nirvana or Jean Michel Jarre CDs. they are OK. in general some CDs are worth the money but many are not.

Crime Of The Century il mio album da isola deserta, lo adoro. Concordo in pieno con la tua opinione. Saluti dalla Sicilia.-

One of the best sounding rock CDs I've ever heard is August and Everything After by Counting Crows.I own the CD and a 96/24 download. The mastering is incredibly good. So much detail, and the modern downloads possess excellent dynamic range.

I was lucky enough to get ahold of the Dark Side of the Moon MFSL CD at a record store in Hawaii for about $15. It sounds nice, but it's not as close as the early Harvest black-faced/Toshiba-EMI black triangle editions.

I'm at The Wall segment, and immediately after less than 10 seconds I notice the second disc is clearly inferior - sounds louder, compressed. Now will continue to discover which is which!

Yes. For Dark Side, I had to replay the intro several times to suss out the details. I found that Track 1 had a little, tiny bit better resolution of the guitar decay than Track 2, but they were very, very close.

Supertramp!!! My favorite album!!! Finally not just boring jazz-blues to test! 😊 I recently acquired the Alan Parsons Project - Eye In The Sky MoFi SACD and it is amazing!!! They used the analog master tapes and it is sooo cool. You should give it a try!

I found one of these gold disc at a Goodwill sometime back (alan parsons sound field teste or ?) Its still in collection, digitally backed up and gets spun on occasion to remember times past. thank you for producing this. It gave me history and affirmation concerning real media

The only MFSL I have is the Marc Cohn self-titled debut album and I prefer the original one. For the Wall and Nevermind in your video I also preferred the originals its what I know and love. Thanks for the video

You arrived at a well thought out, rational conclusion....Bravo.😊

Excellent video and explanation ! I took the (old) gold CD of my father, “crime of the century”. I confirm it is amazing 25 years ago I underestimated it! Also comparing with “Breakfast in America” in vinile. Thanks for this video!

Thanks for this comparison test! The MFSL stuff is hit-or-miss as you have observed. My favorite MFSL CD is Pink Floyd's "Atom Heart Mother" simply because its packaging was great - at least until the band reissued everything in the early 2000s. I'd love to see you test the DCC gold CDs as Steve Hoffman's touch is amazing. With these there is a direct comparison that can be done between multiple iterations: "Pet Sounds" by The Beach Boys was released on DCC, MFSL, and multiple iterations from Capitol. You would want to compare the mono mixes for proper track-by-track analysis, noting that the original CD used Sonic Solutions' NoNoise to try and "clean" the audio (spoiler: NoNoise butchers dynamics and EQ).

Interesting video. Experiment 1: yes they sound the same fidelity wise however on my system track 2 had a noticeably wider sound stage putting it head and shoulders over the first one. Experiment 2: identical, my preference was for the the normal CD but this is probably because it’s slightly louder. Experiment 3: track 2 is superior, first track is amazingly thin! Neither is great, but then these are not all analog. Experiment 4: track 2 blows track 1 away for detail. Experiment 5: track 2 has a beautiful EQ and a much thicker sound than 1. Track 3 was good too but sounded more brick walled. To sum up my preferences are just that, what I prefer. What is best? Nothing it’s just all subjective which is why selling anything as an “audiophile edition” is ridiculous. Music is emotional and you can’t sell a package based on that. For me 99% of the time I’d say analog is my preference and vinyl is the ultimate media…well apart from the master tape of course. I agree with your summing up

Hmm very eye opening. I have several Ultra Disc II CDs from Rush, U2 and Pink Floyd myself. Guess everyone falls for the Gold hype. Guess it only helps to prevent CD rot better but not really help the sounds. Oh well.

The Manhattan Transfer - "Extensions" MFSL Ultradisc II 24k gold CD 📀

I wish you had a soft cloth on top of that turntable lid to lay those cd's on ..... everytime you laid one on top, I screamed out "Noooo"

Great review, so I want to tell you about my Santana Abraxas experience, I have the flac files from HD Tracks 2013 remaster, the 2006 Japan Mini Lp Cd, the 2015 MFSL SACD, the 2020 Sony Rhino SACD, the 1998 SACD non Hybrid, the MFSL Lp, and the 1991 MFSL CD, I think the 2020 Rhino SACD sounds the best , wish I would have bought the One Step MFSL Lp back in the day but will not spend $2000 or more for it.

For the nirvana comparison, the original had a much higher noise-floor, but overall it did sound better.

Saturday Night Fever sounds good!

I bought the U2-War Ultradisk back when it came out. I couldn't discern a higher quality of sound, due to my crappy stereo, but I loved the fact that two of the songs on it had extra music content, compared to the commercial release. And now that I have a better sound system, I gotta dig that thing out of storage and listen again.

Lucky enough to say that I've recently been comparing different versions of RUSH's Permanent Waves. Between the 1st W. Germany Mercury CD (822 548-2 M-1) and the MFSL one, I would choose the Mercury one any day of the week. The Mofi one has greater detail presence, but imho the mastering lacks focus and feels disjointed, getting lost in the micro and unable to see the big picture. My vinyl copy (UK, 1st Press) is the winner, but the Mercury version is still very enjoyable. Great video BTW. I agree, they are not worth it, not even when they sound better than the normal CD, not at these prices. What is always worth it is listening to different versions and picking your favorite. They are always available if you know where to look. I will check that Crime of the Century CD asap!

I was lucky to obtain a few Pink Floyd CDs (90s license releases made in Hungary) and these used the same old matrixes as 80s japaneese or US pressings. They sound fantastic.. they were sitting and collecting dust for like 20 years but now I enjoy their sound a lot! Meddle version is the most interesting, because Echoes is the first track, not the last as it is supposed to be.. other than that it is a very early AAD version.

Being unpatiened and commenting before finishing the video the MFSL version of the Coltrane CD was clearly better in my opinion, recognized it when I played the files on foobar after secondes so ty for making me poorer I think iI have to purchase the MFSL version. 😃 The Ultradisc I and Ii were really very close, no need to pay extra money and I preferred the MFSL version in the other cases as well with oine exception but they were closer especially the Wall.

Hmm, thanks for doing this! Seems like you're still better off getting a better cd player and older cd versions than getting these fancy ones ..

I just heard an interview with Nivana's producer of In Utero in which he said that the gold remaster of In Utero was done from the original analog master and cut on equipment that was once reserved for orchestras and never used on pop/rock albums. Audiophile stuff that engineers thought was too good for pop music.

Awesome video, one of your best! I have two mfsl cd's, the first one you showed and STing's Nothing like the sun, different mastering, different EQ, I have read they usually have a U shaped EQ. They are worth having if you are a collector, only if you are a collector. 😁

Nice Video! Sam with DCC Cds by Steve Hoffmann?

Any audiophile needs to have these!!!

Recording of master tape: Master tape (Vinyl) or master tape pre-vinyl no EQ no compression? It is the question

I have the Half Speed Master of The Wall on Virgin Vinyl and I absolutely LOVE this pressing. It is solo fkg smooth, liquid and organic. Uh. Takes my breath away.

I thought track 1 on Nevermind sounded best and guessed mofi but no, it was the original. Original sounded fantastic.

Very interesting video I've been experimenting with CDs for so long I can't even remember sometimes you upgrade for the remastered version but I've never ever came across a remastered version that sounded better in fact worse than the original example (legend by Bob Marley and the remastered one complete rubbish) the funny thing is that i listen to this on a GGMM E2 MINI SPEAKER CLOSE 12 inchs away via bluetooth could have streamed via wi fi Im 64 and I can still differentiate between the tracks like this chap says. Many moons ago there used to be a green Marker you could buy to draw a round the CD outer and inner edge a lot cheaper I don't know if there is a RU-vid video demonstrating this. This video got me buzzing again so I listen to crime of the century album Supertramp on RU-vid music not as good as the gentlemans tracks but it didn't cost me anything.😂

I heard the John Mayal's Bluesbreakers album with Clapton was a terrible original transfer but the gold remaster/transfer is like a different record and reveals a lot more from the source recording. He said that the result is superior to the original.

I have the MoFi vinyl version of Crime of The Century. I bought it when they first released it. I always thought it was an excellent sounding album.

I have the only Mint, New, Never Opened, 1994 Pink Floyd 'Wish You Were Here' 24k Gold SBM Mastersound Limited Edition in known existence. It's currently listed for sale on Discogs for $4,400, which is actually $600 less than last year's market price. Amazing.

Files for me. I downsample 192/96k to 48 or 64 depending on importance. Also, dithering of the 48k files to bring down to 20 bps. This keeps sizes at sane levels, but still (in theory, not audible) superior to redbook.

We still buy CDs for some years now again, also bought a new CD Player - we love CDs ❤❤ i only own one mfsl gold CD from queen, but I can't compare it to a standard CD i only cam say it sounds very good

Hearing the difference with Blue Train testing was a little challenging. I think if you gain matched the perceived volume to help with the lack of compression that would be helpful. I tried turning up and down the volume but that’s not really the same thing since I’m not measuring, just guessing. I have the DSOTM. I bought it on vinyl, regular CD, MFSL Ultradisc, the remastered CD, the SACD, and the recentl;y released BluRay version. I find the 192kHz stereo on the BluRay to be the ultimate version for me. Thanks for doing this video on 24k Gold Ultradisc though!

Someone at a certain bookstore recently clearanced -- likely by mistake or ignorance or both -- an MFSL gold CD for $1. I was lucky to be there the day it happened and scooped it up and ended up selling it for $70. It was not an album that interested me musically so was happy to make the profit.

Jazz at the Pawnshop... Proprius label... Can't beat that one... my god 1976...

With the Coltrane recording, the original sounded like it was loaded with reverb where the Mofi version Coltrane saxophone sounded more musical.

Is your "old" original COTC cd one of the AudioMaster Plus CDs?

I have an number of these as well the the original MFSL black plasticky versions from away back when they were new and (relatively) inexpensive. Crime of the Century, in both formats, has always been my go-to reference for a dynamic recording well mastered. So many good recordings are ruined in the mastering process!

Have you tried Sheffield Lab CDs, or even their direct cut discs?

My high schools radio program had one or two of these in the radio room, at the very least they look really cool

I also would like to thank you for this analysis And i agree that the best buy you can get is trying to get a copy of the first release of just about any album out there You asked for opinions or ideas Well i have some You can buy them on normal cd's but i believe they are worth mentioning Supertramp "brother were you bound" astonishing dr of 15 nominal 1st release Rickie Lee Jones "girl at her volcano" once again nominal dr 15 the vinyl version (EP) goes even beyond this the track "Under The Boardwalk":hits an astonishing dr 19 I remenber this ep very well because it was the one i took with me to a respected hifi shop in the early 80's i topd the guy be careful with the loudnes because i have never saw an album with this kind of recording He told me no problem this system can handle it Boy oh boy was he terribly mistsken at the end of the song it was also the end of the amplifier and speakers attached to it😮 The last album i would mention also Rickie Lee Jones "Fliyng Cowbows" nominal dr 19 with the track getto of my mind reaching dr24! There's another thing i would like to mention of wich i am not sure you know this happened The first release of dire straits "brother in Arms" on cd channels were reversed but als the premphasis flag was used with recording but not put on cd that's why this version seems to have a much higher dr value but also sounds a lot brighter then it should The same is true for the first Fleetwood mac release of tusk (edited song sara) this one als should carry the flag preemphasis but wasn't on the disc also this one sounds much brighter then the vinyl version or the later released cd version (2 album set) thankfully this version is not compressed and has the full album on it I am curious in your thoughts about this

The bells the bells! Great stuff! I can't hear any diff tho, I've been blasting heavy metal for decades.

You are right unless you have a more modern recording example Beck Sea change is bricked the sacd is bricked. But the mofi vinyl and gold cd are not. I do prefer the gold cd of that album to my original cd and sacd .

The only MFSL gold disc I have is Def Leppard’s Pyromania and it sounds GREAT!!

There’s a 92 or 93 release of Dark Side of the Moon that has the track listing on the disc. That has joined a personal speaker test suite with the ‘87 CD remix release of The Alan Parsons Project’s Tales of Mystery and Imagination and the ‘07 release of Eye In The Sky.

As someone that has a bunch of these, I would say that considering the high aftermarket prices on some of these discs, they aren’t worth it. If we’re talking sound quality alone and not price, I find it’s a case by case scenario. Some of them were the best version I heard, some I heard no difference whatsoever, some were actually worse than a regular cd. I saw another commenter mention that mastering is key and ultimately what matters, I agree with that person 1000%. One company i do recommend that isn’t around anymore is audio fidelity, them and DCC. I don’t have a ton of their cds & sacds but every one that I do have wound up being my go to version. They did incredible work.

I found an MFSL gold disc version of Thick as a Brick by Jethro Tull for $2 at a thrift store a couple years back. The MFSL locking jewel case was cracked, but I found a few undamaged ones in a pallet of used CDs I bought about a year later. BTW, those jewel cases alone are worth about $10-15 each if you can find them.

I have been collecting Mo-Fi CDs since the 90's. Upon initial release they are expensive but not so crazy where I felt they were a total rip off. I would purchase a few to treat myself, built up a sizable collection over the years. I eventually did take a hiatus from them though. What I found was an inconsistency in the quality of the remastering. A few were outstanding, but a lot more had a far away and recessed character where in order to hear everything you had to really crank the volume. So, I just skipped them and searched for a good mastering of a standard red book instead. Now, I find I am getting back into them. Really enjoy the recent Hybrid SACD releases (I never got out of CD and even still own a SACD player after they went the way of the Dodo.) of early Eagles, Chicago Transit Authority, Billy Joel, Santana, and Van Halen. Again, to benefit you have to get in on them early when they are first released. Too many modern-day carpetbaggers are out there buying them up and then resell them a year later where a CD that was initially a spendy $35.00. Now, never opened, will set you back10 times and up that initial price. People got no problem ripping you off with these things. $150.00 for a used copy of Eagles "One of These Nights"?! No Thank You. I will get the vinyl release instead and feel I actually got something for that kind of money. Even then, I would look for any and every alternative to the $125.00 Mo-Fi 45.

Totally agree about the Supertramp !!! Wish all cds sounded this good ....But true many of the gold disc's are essentially a money grab

@9:50 I hear a hum that is odd - maybe from the tape loop of the money sounds.. never noticed it before - very clear recordings !

There are even differences between "normal" CDs from different countries. A few decades ago I bought two versions of the same CD here in Brazil, one made here (from Microservice) and the other imported from the USA. There were noticeable differences in the higher volume of the recording and the more bass in the imported version...

Most of the time they are however not always ! I have a very expensive system I can usually here the difference. Understanding the process is key to understanding why they are usually better. You won't get digital drop out with gold platted Cds as well.

One thing that disappoints me in the MFSL editions is the cover size. The regular CD is already a small size cover of the albums, why do they have to make them even smaller on the MFSL editions? Why not just use that front MFSL cover as a "dust cover" for the regular CD booklet?

The minimum sample rate and bit depth for digital to adequately emulate analog is 80 kHz at 20 bits. The Nyquist sampling theorem requires a condition which is impossible to achieve in either software or hardware. That’s the 2x bandwidth rule. In actuality, the limit is 4x bandwidth because the clock driving the entire system isn’t perfect. Jitter in the clock results in distortion in the audio, at frequencies above 10 kHz. So to overcome the lack of a perfect clock we must sample at 4x bandwidth to get fully lossless recordings. The 20 bit resolution is because the human ear can perceive up to 19 bits of depth. Audiophiles and recording engineers can hear these differences.

I buy cd's and rip them lossless to itunes, which are kept on a massive external drive. I run itunes on my laptop through my Sansui G7500, then off to my 1961 Wharfedale W70's. I'm very happy with the sound and have quite a few MFSL discs ripped.

Great comparisons. I found that the Dark side of the moon, first Japan MFSL release (not the Ultra Gain II) had better stereo imaging. I own many MFSL gold CD's and even back when I bought them, they didn't impress me. Looking back, I should have not spent the money on them. Same goes with the DCC Steve Hoffman gold releases. They don't impress me and the differences do not merit the cost.

what is interesting on this ultra disc is that they are recorded from the original master, without modification (at least it is what is explained) . And they sound different than the regular CD for sure. To my hears for queen , a night at the opera, it sound warmer than the standard CD. The volume on this CD is also quiet low. After it is mainly a matter of taste. The remaster could be interesting in some case. It is a shame that it is no possible to get the original master recording for all the album recorded analog.

Most CDs from '80s and early '90s aren't dynamically squashed as later version when everyone got onto Loudness War chopping peaks and adding distortions. Today only audiophile CDs are properly mastered and not compressed. Yes, Mobile CDs were the thing when CD evolution started and digital audio started to evolve - multibit multiple DACs, 8 x oversampling, then Bitstream with Noise Shapping, finally DSD. There are Remastered CDs, for eg. by Bob Ludwig which are a few dB higher in level, with chopped peaks. Some of the 'remasters of disaster' are also EQ'ued and don't always sound right. For audio editing and comparison I like Adobe Audition or Isotope more than free Audacity, as it displays real time frequency analysis. Still Audacity is a very good universal tool. Thanks for the samples, I'm going to take a look what's hiding inside tracks. P.S. The Wall regular CD has more high frequency content, with some peaking above 15k, while Mobile version is more laid back sounding. The max amplidute peak in regular version is at -0.5dB most likely because the extra high frequency content, while most peaks below -3dB. The Mobile version is slightly lower in volume, by 1-1.5dB. Supertramp, wow Regular CD sits around The Wall levels, never hitting more than -1dB safe limit. Mobile version is much quieter by some 5dB, but the peak content is different, so something was done to material 🤔. And the new version is a Loudness War usual disaster, with most peaks chopped down, but I had seen worse, eg. Bob Ludvig remaster versions. To paraphrase Forest Gump, " life is like box of chocolate, you never know which one you'll get" - same with music

If there was one recording I’d love to hear a comparison of, it would be Herbie Hancock “Headhunters”. The recording on the CD sounds phenomenal and I wonder if I have the best sounding version.

Great insight.I can only speak for myself and experience .I paid a lot on the Boston’s 24k gold ultra disc 1 and was very disappointed compared to Boston’s deput cd in the eighties .24 k gold dynamics and sound stage was lost what a waste of money .People save your money 24 k gold cd are not worth it ,,,,, it’s all in the final mastering that makes it sound great .

Nirvana is all about the cymbals for me, I noticed this when comparing vinyl to cd a while back. Not sure what cd version I have but it doesn’t come close to the vinyl. Might have to go find a 1991 cd.

Very interesting, thank you so much🙏👍

Wasn't Neil Young behind this format too?

on pretty much all the examples i prefer the standard release lol. from my ears there's slight volume changes on the mastertape tracks which just sounds off to me : dark side of the moon had the guitar effects lowered, wall had lower bass and less prominent background guitar/synth, the coltrane track had the hi-hat bumped up giving it all a tiny sound, nevermind sounds like everything but the drums has been taken down a decibel, and [might be due to the loudness adjustments] the original cd had a punchier drum track than the other two/the modern cd just sounds like the mofi when they both have loudness on it.

The first Supertramp track was so clearly the new remaster. There is some sort of noise reduction/gate happening that is very obvious with the solo piano in the beginning. It actually makes it sound horrible. The other two versions have more noise/hiss but the instruments sound way better.

I still buy cd's but i make AAC copies in the good old Itunes to store them on a SSD😊

I'm Sorry but Track One (Ultradisc 1)of Money had much better track separation.. crisper and cleaner sound..A tiny bit louder

The only two benefits of Gold plated CDs is: 1) They will last longer, since gold is chemically inert in most cases (unless you're going to put your dics collection into an acid, but why you could ever do that?), 2) Collectible value - these discs are usually printed in low quantities and rarely being reprinted. Othar than that Golden discs have no additional benefits over usual discs or even digital downloadable files. Moreover, since Gold have much lower reflectability these discs might have reading issues in some of players. It's a normal situation, it doesn't mean that your player is bad or faulty. Meanwhile, if you have a bitperfect copy of these Ultradiscs you can enjoy them with the same quality on any hardware player with any DAC you'd like to use. ^_^

Rush - Signals is one the best versions of the album IMO.

My Def Leppard - Pyromania gold CD is awesome to my old ringing ears.