Acoustic Sounds
Lyra

Steely Dan

Katy Lied

Music

Sound

"Katy Lied" UHQR

Label: ABC Records/Analogue Productions/Universal Music

Produced By: Gary Katz

Engineered By: Roger "The Immortal" Nichols

Mastered By: Bernie Grundman

Lacquers Cut By: Bernie Grundman

By: Michael Fremer

January 31st, 2025

Genre:

Rock Jazz Fusion

Format:

Vinyl

Steely Dan's Controversial 'Katy Lied' Gets the Analogue Productions UHQR Treatment

tried and true, or something new?

Once upon a time, when great recording studios were a “thing”, long before they became almost extinct—when no one thought such a thing was even possible—studio owners and sound conscious musicians competed with one another to find new and improved recording technology.

“Improved” came in many guises, some of which turned out to be worse. For instance, in the mid-1970s, the Aphex Aural Exciter grabbed the attention of both studio owners and musicians. It did what the name implied—adding “excitement” in the form of phase and frequency distortion when applied to vocals.

Properly used as a Band-Aid, it could “wake up” a multitrack tape that had “dulled out” from too many passes across the tape heads as fastidious perfectionists performed repeated takes. The Aural Exciter was so rare, precious, and sought after that, for a time, it was available only for rent by the hour.

Soon it became a craze. The Aphex Aural Exciter became a fashion employed to be heard; its spitty, bright sound ruining many an otherwise good production. Once recognized, its presence can’t be missed. No doubt many artists who got sucked into using it either by their producer or through their own desire to be au courant now regret it.

Later on, you could put Yamaha’s ubiquitous DX7 in the same category. It was the first programmable digital synthesizer and could produce an endless variety of unique sounds, but artists and arrangers, rather than learning how to create their own, used the presets. Almost half of ‘80s pop hits spotlit the same few “unique” and now obvious and tiresome sounds.

What does all of this have to do with Katy Lied, Steely Dan’s fourth album released in winter 1975? Read on!

The advent of tape recording was the most important studio development of the 20th century's second half, beginning with one mono track. Then two for stereo. Two recording tracks gave way to 3 for much of the 1950s, though first Les Paul in 1957 and later Atlantic Studios took delivery of 8 track recorders. By the mid ‘60s, 3 tracks gave way to 4, then 8, then 16, and by the end of the ‘60s, studios with money to spend and clients to impress went to 24 tracks on 2" tape.

More tracks meant narrower track width and more tape hiss. Ray Dolby introduced hiss diminishing Dolby Type A noise reduction in 1965—just in time for the multitrack tape boom. Six years later, in 1971, dbx introduced its noise reduction system.

In November 1974, Donald Fagen and Walter Becker entered what the duo would later characterize as the new “little” ABC Studios to record Katy Lied, produced by Gary Katz and engineered by Roger “The Immortal” Nichols. Pretzel Logic, the group’s previous album had been recorded at West Hollywood’s Village Recorders— still in business and the origin of dozens of superb sounding classics.

Summer of ’74, Becker and Fagen exited the road and found themselves in Los Angeles “…with no band, no manager, no plans to tour, no money, (and) some minor albeit possibly irreversible brain damage,” the reasons for the predicament not relevant here, though the decision to stop touring led guitarist Jeff “Skunk” Baxter to quit.

Nonetheless, what they did find in that “little” studio in addition to a brand new Bosendorfer piano was a double set of Magneplanar loudspeakers and a pair of Audio Research D-76 tube power amplifiers. Now that’s a system we can all relate to, though its utility as a studio monitor system is questionable. Perhaps then ABC Records President Jay Lasker was an audiophile and he was talked into using that as a studio monitor and perhaps he was also talked into some new, unproven “state of the art” studio gear.

Also in the studio and listed among the recording gear in the Katy Lied liner notes was a “specially constructed 24-channel tape recorder, a ‘State of the Art’ 36-input computerized mixdown console” and “some very expensive German microphones.”

Not mentioned in the liner notes and in the studio was “the world’s first and last dbx noise reduction unit with factory installed wings.” Someone convinced someone to install and use it instead of the more commonly used Dolby Type A noise reduction system. The selling point was an additional 10dB of noise reduction.

Yet, despite a strong set of ten smartly written, arranged and performed songs and a stellar cast of musicians Becker and Fagen hired to perform them (since there was no band)—including, among many others, Rick Derringer, Dean Parks, Hugh McCracken, Larry Carlton, Chuck Rainey, Wilton Felder, Hal Blaine, Victor Feldman, Phil Woods, and a very young Jeff Porcaro—sometimes it seems as if the real star here, at least among certain fetishizing sound conscious Steely Dan fans, is that dbx noise reduction unit!

It's a curious controversy set off by guitarist Denny Dias, who, other than Becker and Fagen, was the only remaining original band member appearing on Katy Lied. In an online story he titled “Katy and the Gremlin”, Dias recounts the problems encountered trying to mix the record, though it's unclear what his tech role actually was.

He writes: “Mixing was an absolute nightmare. Every song was mixed at least twice, and not because we were being fussy.” Becker and Fagen not “being fussy”? Right. Now there’s the first clue that something’s off here.

Next, he writes that the dbx system used to encode the multitrack tape channels couldn’t decode them and that the sound was “dull and lifeless”. Wait a minute. Both Dolby and dbx use pre-emphasis (in different ways) to boost frequencies, mostly at the top end of the frequency spectrum that are attenuated in the decode process. If the dbx couldn’t decode the tapes, the sound would have been “bright and harsh” not “dull and lifeless”. So if the tapes were sounding “dull and lifeless,” it would seem something else was at fault.

Then Dias writes, “We decided to remix the entire record using Dolby”. This doesn’t make sense. Dolby cannot be used to decode a dbx encoded multitrack tape. dbx encode was “baked into the cake”.

The Katy Lied Wikipedia post claims the dbx company fixed the problem and since the original pressing does not sound “dull and lifeless,” clearly it did fix the problem, but Becker and Fagen were still disappointed by the sound and supposedly didn’t want to listen to it. Fair enough. Musicians often don’t want to hear a finished record, preferring to move on to the next. And Katy Lied is not among the band's best sounding productions.

Sound obsessive Steely Dan fans continue to pick apart this record the way Kennedy assassination obsessives examine frame-by-frame the Zapruder film. Missing in the discussion are the contributions of the unnamed “state of the art” 36 channel computerized mixdown console so let’s stop right there: boards have a huge impact on sound quality! “State of the art” is a relative not an absolute term. Sometimes the "state of the art" is really poor! For instance, early "state of the art" solid state amplifiers and digital recorders.

We don’t know the computerized “state of the art” board’s provenance, but you can be sure it and the “small” studio acoustics had profound effects on the recorded sound.

So let’s forget the dbx conspiracy theories and whatever else may have contributed to how Katy Lied sounds and all agree that it is not the best sounding Steely Dan album, but once you get past the thumpy bass on “Black Friday” and a few other sonic cracks, it’s still a damn good sounding album (and I don’t care if Donald thinks otherwise!)—compacted and craftily mixed, with lots of keyboard and percussive magic going on within the mid frequencies—but clearly not as expansive or dramatic as Can’t Buy A Thrill or as crystalline clear as Aja .

This new UHQR absolutely destroys the 3 Kendun-mastered originals I have, as well as the bumpy and brittle ½ speed mastered Mobile Fidelity edition. That was the first Mo-Fi 1/2 speed mastered record I bought and I did so when it was first released hoping for a big sonic improvement. It was costly for me at the time and I remember being sorely disappointed though in some ways it was marginally better than the original, mostly because my system didn't have full bass extension nor was it fully extended on top.

While the sound quality varies from track to track and some are less than stellar, all sound better than the original pressing and the 1/2 speed remaster (I don't have the MCA 1/2 speed but few of those sound distinguished in my opinion). Here, if “Everyone’s Gone to the Movies” doesn’t sound stunning, don’t lay the blame on the recording or mix: the vibes, Fender Rhodes, bass, congas, marimba, sax and yes, the drum kit—including the nicely chiming cymbals—sound great! The drum fills that end the tune sound magnificent. And Fagen’s voice sounds as natural and “in the room” as you’ve ever heard it on record, especially this one.

Musically and compositionally Katy Lied is among the "band"'s best efforts (if you can call the rotating group of studio musicians accompanying Becker and Fagen a band), though it's emotionally kind of dry and anonymous. Still, there are no bad tunes and some great ones including the kind of creepy (but for many of us who reached adulthood around that time "universal") "Everyone's Gone to the Movies," the kind of sexy "Chain Lightning," the sort of optimistic "Any World (That I'm Welcome To)," and the "good times are gone" "Daddy Don't Live In That New York City No More." The album is "of a time." A time of cultural pessimism and decay that the album obliquely alludes to. That's all I'm going to say about the well-worn music everyone reading this surely knows

I don’t care how you’ve previously consumed this album, play this UHQR edition and you’re likely to have a “heard it for the first time” experience—at least on some tracks. I did, and I’ve been listening to this record for just short of 50 years. Not the best sounding Steely Dan album by far but the best sounding version of it that I've heard. Based on that, if we had a third knob for "reissue quality relative to previous versions," it would get a 10 or 11. But based on its intrinsic sound quality, 8 will do.

Music Specifications

Catalog No: AUHQR 0012-45

Pressing Plant: Quality Record Pressings

SPARS Code: AAA

Speed/RPM: 45

Weight: 200 grams

Size: 12"

Channels: Stereo

Source: Original Master Tape

Presentation: Multi LP

Comments

  • 2025-01-31 03:22:27 PM

    AnalogJ wrote:

    I don't know, Michael. I think you might be being too kind to the original in terms of its sound. The real problem always was with its top end, sounding squished or truncated. Cymbals, for example, lack air and bloom.

    The MoFi 1/2-speed, while not much better up top, has a more detailed and present midrange, and better image separation. Still not a stellar sounding pressing. (I'm not sure what you mean by the MoFi sounding "bumpy". We may agree on this, but I'm not sure what that means soundwise.).

    I'm on the fence as to whether to buy this new one or not. Or perhaps to just try the UMe (from digital files transferred from Bernie Grundman, but mastered and cut at Sterling).

    I was a bit disappointed by the UHQR of Aja. While more dynamic than my original, it lacks the air and freshness of my original.

  • 2025-01-31 04:56:55 PM

    Come on wrote:

    Great review and quite everything considered including a differentiation between absolute sound quality and remastering quality!

    I like the music and the sound of this one more than most, so for me, inspite of those weaknesses in the recording process, it has at least a 10 music rating and as far as I remember at least a 9 in sound quality, the latter just because I have the officially unreleased Alto test pressing, remastered by Bernie Grundman in 1997, which was far better sounding than anything else until now (did you hear it?). I preordered the UHQR long ago and expect it soon, hopefully it’s even better sounding than the previous Grundman remastering. The Alto will be good to have anyway as a very well done 33 RPM for playing with just once flipping sides.

  • 2025-01-31 05:30:16 PM

    VQR wrote:

    How do the Katy Lied songs on the RL-cut of Greatest Hits sound compared to the UHQR ones? I always found the versions on that Greatest Hits sounded the best, with the Kendun WLP I have just sounding awful and brittle. The WLP has so much blood pressure that you could burst a blood vessel.

  • 2025-01-31 06:08:02 PM

    Steve Edwards wrote:

    I think, at least on my system, "thumpy" (or bumpy) is a good way of describing the bass on Black Friday. Occasionally, I'll even skip over that track.

    Thank you Michael for, by far, the most definitive explanation of what did (or didn't) happen during the production of this great record.

  • 2025-01-31 08:19:18 PM

    William Cheadle wrote:

    I have a UK pressing that I’ve always thought sounded much better than the ABC US pressing I have. The piano on Dr. Wo is lush and authoritative to the point of feeling it. Though the highs could use a bit more air and definition. I preordered the UHQR as this - music wise - is one of my favorites and I see it’s on its way. From your description I’m really looking forward to giving it a spin. Thanks!

  • 2025-01-31 10:09:48 PM

    Chris O'Shea wrote:

    AnalogJ...You were "a bit disappointed by the UHQR of Aja"??? Yeah, right...

    • 2025-01-31 11:46:04 PM

      bwb wrote:

      I've heard all of the previous Steely Dan UHQR and while some are better than others, none deserve a 10-11 for sound if that rating is relative to what are truly reference recordings. My take is that Steely Dan fans are so thrilled to get a better sounding version they are overlooking all of the limitations inherent in the source. The UHQR may be the best they have ever sounded, but none of them sound all that great.

      So yes, I agree with AnalogJ, for a $150 record, Aja and all the rest of them are indeed disappointing when it comes to sound quality.

    • 2025-02-01 12:41:29 AM

      AnalogJ wrote:

      Yup. I'm not alone. My original (mastered and cut by Bernie Grundman from the original master tapes, the new one, also by BG, is cut from a tape copy.). The original is incredibly open and immediate in the midrange. The top is airy and it all sounds fresh. In contrast, while the UHQR is more dynamic and has more lower end weight, it's dark on top, lacking air. Also, in comparison to the original, it sounds a bit dry. I feel that the original is more involving. Each has their superior aspects, but I'm more likely to reach for my original.

      • 2025-02-02 09:21:02 AM

        Doors32 wrote:

        I also agree with bwb and AnalogJ

        I have the Aja AB-1006 Santa Maria Pressing that I bought in late 2023 in excellent condition. I was shocked when I heard it, it is excellent. It deserves a higher rating than UHQR. Since buying both editions my system has undergone several modifications and every time the original wins, which sounds smooth and natural, with perfectly bright top, low bottom and dynamics - there is balance. Any good and balanced equipment will show this. There is nothing there that is not heard on the original.So I wondered about the general enthusiasm for this edition? If your equipment cannot extract/show everything from the original release, then the enthusiasm for UHQR is understandable.

        The other Steely Dan albums I have are the first UK pressings, which UHQR will not improve. If UHQR were made in 33.3 rpm format, they would have failed from the start. In the 45 rpm version, they are saved by greater dynamics and emphasis on the top and bottom.

        Steely Dan UHQR not deserves a rating of 11 for sound and certainly not the price of $150.

  • 2025-02-01 12:07:21 AM

    michael plaut wrote:

    maybe consider that excellent studio players producing cheesy lyrics has limitations to enjoyment almost 50 years later. Again great musicians do not necessarily translate into songs that have any heart ....sounds like zappa with too much cheese....studio jams to cool for school jaded peeps and their cocaine?

    • 2025-02-02 12:53:00 AM

      Pretzel Logic wrote:

      Coming to the Tracking Angle comments section to be edgy is so edgy.

  • 2025-02-01 01:07:58 AM

    Chris O'Shea wrote:

    My Original US pressing is fantastic on THAT I agree with you.. On my systems the AP is very airy and open on top and sounds more like REAL instruments played by humans…. Both are great to have…I also have a clean UK pressing of Gaucho…Sweet and smooth but definitely artificial sounding… Love it anyway!!

  • 2025-02-01 04:27:00 PM

    tim davis wrote:

    I want one but I surely can't afford one just now. Other than the advantages of 45rpm, 200 gram, the more premium vinyl chemical formula, & a far more space hogging package jammed into my overcrowded record shelves, just what else I am giving up by settling for the basic new 180 gram edition on Geffen released the same day which BG also mastered? Are there different laquers for these 2 masters? If the lacquers are different was the Geffen also cut from analog tape or something else? Those last 2 items are the only reasons that would justify me spending an extra $120.02 that I don't even have right now.

    • 2025-02-01 04:59:45 PM

      tim davis wrote:

      I realize the lacquers have to be different due to the 45 vs 33 but other than that how much variance in Bernie's work & his sources was involved?

    • 2025-02-01 07:12:42 PM

      PeterG wrote:

      If you're strapped for cash, definitely do not drop $150 on a record. For those who are not strapped....You can't dissect it by input specs and get an answer, the value is in the sound. Leaving aside the deeply flawed Pretzel Logic, the other Steely Dan UHQRs have gotten rave reviews compared to their UMe counterparts. So you are getting an extra $120.02 worth

      • 2025-02-02 04:28:04 PM

        Michael Fremer wrote:

        I agree! This new one on 180 will be different because it was cut at Sterling Sound by Joe Nino-Hernes from a flat transfer that he mastered....

    • 2025-02-02 04:26:45 PM

      Michael Fremer wrote:

      The previous cut from digital file 33 1/3 LPs were seriously inferior sounding. They were cut by a guy with an inferior sounding lathe on Long Island who I've never heard of and I suspect he landed the job because he bid low but I can't be sure. This new one was cut by Joe Nino-Hernes at Sterling Sound from a flat digital transfer by BG and not from a BG mastered file I'm looking forward to listening!

      • 2025-02-03 11:13:08 PM

        tim davis wrote:

        For so long ever since this TA spot launched, I've been seeing duplicate posts on the page in the comments column. I always told myself, it was just a glitch. A few hours later & the 1st post would have surely showed up on it's own. However, this morning in the 3-4 am EST zone I had a comment disappear on me. Here & now, I choose to repeat my vanished comment with all this preceding disclaimer content since it's 15+ plus hours later & there is no sign of it's existence...at all. "My heartfelt thanks to you fine gentlemen for clearing up my confusion about the 180 gm, 33 rpm edition. I want to make it known that the only reason I thought Bernie Grundman mastered the 33 rpm version is because the Acoustic Sounds listing for the item said so." FYI, as of 6:06 pm EST. it still says so. I guess this means Chad's retail outlet is nowhere near as commited to accuracy as his record label is?

  • 2025-02-01 07:23:20 PM

    Richard L Miller wrote:

    My UHQR of Katy Lied will be here Monday February 3rd. I've been on the pre-order list for a while, although not as long as I have been for the Royal Scam (October 2023). I haven't been disappointed by any UHQR so far. You can always find fault if you want to. To me, it's a way to look at that album you love in a different way. Could be good, could be bad. When I was a kid and had to pay 3 hard earned bucks, usually by begging, for a new release I loved it no matter what. Now that I'm older and soooo much more sophisticated, I've paid out 150 bucks. No matter what, when friends ask how I like it, I'll tell them I love it. But really, I know how these UHQR's sound, and I'm sure I won't be disappointed. The Royal Scam is my favorite, for personal reasons and now that Katy Lied is out, it can't be to many months, years or decades behind

  • 2025-02-01 08:59:57 PM

    Rick wrote:

    Aah the Aural Exciter! Bought one for the name but never lived up to its promise.

  • 2025-02-01 09:35:20 PM

    Silk Dome Mid wrote:

    Didn't the Aphex Aural Exciter turn out to be nothing more than a very finely-spaced comb filter? It's amazing how many producers and artists, especially singers, fell for it.

  • 2025-02-02 01:55:07 AM

    Buzz wrote:

    Call a spade a spade. It’s a fun album, doesn’t sound great. uHQR gives it a boost, but not worth $150. What is so hard to comprehend ya’ll?

    • 2025-02-02 04:28:55 PM

      Michael Fremer wrote:

      "not worth the $150" is a very personal decision.

  • 2025-02-02 04:26:33 AM

    Dave wrote:

    The version I'm most interested in is the also-new $30 reissue cut from Grundman's digital file.

    (Both new versions -- UFQR included -- reportedly have the same typo in one of the sleeve lyrics.)

    Here's the deal. It (the music) got remastered by BG. Some of that effort became a 45rpm version. Some of that effort became a 24/96 ... does it not stand to reason his digital that became a 33 1/3 would be expected to be competitive in there somewhere?

    It's rhetorical, but you get my point. I'm interested in growing the hobby $30 at a time if it makes sense to do so. I understand that $150 is a different game altogether.

    • 2025-02-02 12:33:16 PM

      Mark wrote:

      I got the digital sourced Geffen/Ume - cut in Czech Republic - vinyl yesterday. Compared to my Canadian first pressing, and the Greatest Hits (Mr Fremer a big fan of) I think the new BG mastered album is very good. Excellent separation, the percussion has a clear and distinct personality I had not heard before, Fagen is as clear as a bell, the bottom end is more prominent. Yes, there is an element of brightness to the overall sound but I see this as the result of both modern technology and modern tastes.

      Long story short - excellent VFM.

      • 2025-02-02 04:30:55 PM

        Michael Fremer wrote:

        You will see a STERLING stamp in the lead out groove area. This new 180 was NOT mastered by Bernie nor was it cut by the guy who cut the previous 180s that were mediocre at best. This one was cut by Joe Nino-Hernes from a FLAT digital transfer. I'm looking forward to listening..

        • 2025-02-02 04:59:46 PM

          Mark wrote:

          I stand corrected. I can see STERLING and JHN in the runouts.

          If I have one gripe it was the mammoth task to get the damn thing out of the inner sleeve. Foul language abounded!

          Just had another listen today - sounds great.

          Rega P10/Aphelion 2/ Rega Aura/Naim pre & power/PMC 12s

          • 2025-02-03 09:11:10 AM

            tim davis wrote:

            I guess I'm going to go with the 180. I appreciate the heads up about the sleeve. I'm already struggling with lp extraction due to my reduced finger spans. After cleaning I'll store it in a new inner from Bags Unlimited. I always found their paper poly lined sleeves to be much easier to deal with. Speaking of cleaning, here's a little tweak I use that may benefit anyone who has a Record Doctor vacuum cleaner. Cut out a circle of that rubbery anti slip kitchen shelf liner material and place it between the record turner & the lp label. It helps you spin the record with far less downward hand pressure.

  • 2025-02-02 07:32:23 AM

    Zaphod wrote:

    I guess it is true, Katy Lied.

  • 2025-02-02 11:07:51 AM

    David Martin wrote:

    Did any Steely Dan album breathe and feel spacious with a strong sense of dimension and movement? Aja feels sharp and clear with plenty of angles. Some Steely Dan is a bit muddled and crowded. They captured a slightly dark urban/suburban culture in their early albums and a perfectly pristine "cleaner than life" sound with Aja. Pointed the way for digital recordings.

  • 2025-02-02 02:10:17 PM

    Tom wrote:

    I was never a fan of Steely Dan however I have a good friend that is a hard core Jazz fan that adores them. He possesses great hearing and had amassed an amazing collection of Steely Dan pressings.

    About 10 years ago I asked him to put together a collection of their best pressings of their albums for me. His infectious love of them brought me an appreciation of them. We both agree that Chad has done a great job with the series. He still prefers a couple of his originals over the reissues but says even for those, they come really close. Because of his intimate knowledge I will defer to him.

  • 2025-02-02 08:04:10 PM

    Matt Gregory wrote:

    Michael I bought the 30 dollar version of Katy Lied it sounds wonderful. The EngineerAt Sterling Sound by Joe Nino-Hernes did a great job on the mastering. I compared it to my 1975 copy it sounds more wide in the the stereo mix. It’s worth the listen!

    • 2025-02-05 07:52:19 PM

      Michael Fremer wrote:

      I agree! I got one and played it last night. I'll post a review ASAP...

  • 2025-02-03 03:31:45 AM

    Scott Richards wrote:

    A minor but geographically important correction. The Village Recorder is in West Los Angeles not West Hollywood. A couple of blocks west of Interstate 405 at Santa Monica Blvd. and Butler. Also, that is the Village Recorder pictured on the back cover photo of Countdown to Ecstasy. And even more esoteric the eponymous LP Eric Clapton, that front cover is taken at the Village Recorder during a remodel of one of the studios. Very true that a lot of great and great sounding music has been created in that building.

  • 2025-02-04 12:51:12 AM

    JP wrote:

    I don't know, I just listened to it. Sounds pretty friggin' awesome to me. (And I have a very, very, very good sounding origninal. They are definitely different beasts.) I also gave it a deep cleaning before throwing it on. If it's an 8 so be it. To me it's well worth it.

    • 2025-02-04 03:45:08 PM

      Mr. Audio wrote:

      I agree! I've listened to my copy several times through now. I would bump the rating up (1) each...10/9 IMHO. It really is a FANTASTIC version. Highly recommended and well worth the investment!!!

  • 2025-02-04 07:17:25 PM

    It’s a trap wrote:

    Okay, I 'think' I have the first miss on a UHQR. Top end is super shiny, a bit compressed here, at least to these ears.

    System: CH L1/P1 with X1s, also tried on my VAC with late 40s Amperex. Deck is techdas, Kuzma 4pt, Koetsu sig platinum.

    I dunno, Its on the shelf now, number768, PM if you want it.

  • 2025-02-06 02:36:23 AM

    bwb wrote:

    One has to wonder what this would sound like if it wasn't mastered by someone with 80+ year old hearing ??

    • 2025-02-06 08:52:47 AM

      Doors32 wrote:

      Exactly. I've been wondering the same thing for some time. It's noticeable in both Mr. BG and Mr. CB. Considering their work from even 5 years ago, you can see where the hearing degradation is occurring.

  • 2025-02-06 10:01:57 AM

    Doors32 wrote:

    I have the UK first pressing of Katy Lied, which sounds very nice, natural and very balanced. It's not as quiet as I would like, but the UHQR pressings is not perfect in this regard either. Given the rave reviews of the earlier Steely Dan UHQR pressings, which lacked scale in their assessment of sound, I bought it to check it out.

    The Aja AB-1006 Santa Maria pressing is perfect in every way. Period. UHQR is not as smooth and natural as the original and does not give the pleasure of listening to AB-1006. Similarly, CBAT, when I heard the UK pressing of Probe, I went crazy. Honey to the ears. Did I go crazy after listening to UHQR? No... although I think it sounds much more balanced and pleasant than Aja UHQR. I won't say I don't like this pressing, but it doesn't have something that the original pressing has. In both cases, there is nothing on UHQR that is not on the first pressings, which beat UHQR in their naturalness, musicality and balance. If you notice things on UHQR that you have never heard, invest in your system and you will not need these or other reissues. I have been down this road and I know what I am talking about. The previous turntable I had showed greater differences between these pressings, BUT it was still not the case that UHQR was much better. My love remains with the first pressings with soul, which I recommend and which lack nothing and do not need to be improved.

    No offense to Mr. Fremer, whom I respect, but his ears are also old and this admiration for the release of e.g. Aja UHQR may also be partly due to this. Of course, such reviews influence our assessment even subconsciously. Then there is a snowball effect. And although I fell into this snowball, my assessment is different. That's why I'm skeptical about another super edition for the amount you have to pay for it in Europe. I prefer to search and hunt for early pressings. May the music be with you.

    My system: Bat Vk50se, Vk55se, Vk P12se, Sikora Initial max+kv12, Karat 17dx, Sound & Line Medius Excellence, Grandioso Unicorn Audio cables, Unicorn Audio Professional 9000 conditioner

    • 2025-02-06 06:27:39 PM

      bwb wrote:

      I think it is a fair observation. MF is or will be 78 this year. Grundman is 81. I'll be 70 and definitely do not have the ears I used to. And even though someone may legitimately claim that their hearing may not as good but they listen better, at some point it becomes impossible to properly master an album or to judge the quality of the end result if you can't hear it very well.

      Has that point passed?

      • 2025-02-08 10:15:50 AM

        Come on wrote:

        I have a few opinions (doors32 and bwb):

        Better listening skills and long experience beat/compensate better hearing ability with less experience

        Our setups, even if on similar quality level, are still so different that we may agree on different releases all the time when listening on same setups, but disagree when listening on each‘s own.

        Example Grundman: I listen to his remasterings since decades. Their tonality style changed occasionally depending on the contractor, but I don’t hear differences on average between the decades, which should be obvious if remasterings would have gotten worse.

        You may say I aged together with Grundman and that’s why I don’t hear differences. Wouldn’t that be perfect? ;-)

        But then the remasterings of his younger colleagues would be difficult for me, which they are not ;-)

        • 2025-02-08 04:01:21 PM

          bwb wrote:

          "Better listening skills and long experience beat/compensate better hearing ability with less experience"

          I'm sorry, but that is nonsensical. If you can't hear it, you can't hear it.... no amount of experience or listening skills will compensate for that. Would you say the same if an audio engineer or reviewer was 99? That their experience makes up for their deafness?

          At some point, unless they die first, everyone has to retire due to a deterioration in their abilities. I'm just saying it is a fair concern. Would you get on a plane with an 80 year old pilot?

          • 2025-02-08 05:32:16 PM

            Come on wrote:

            As far as I know there’s something going on with compensation in the human brain which enables us to perceive more than we meanwhile hear in terms of frequency extension. Furthermore these very high frequencies have an impact in lower regions that can be heard by those with a cut off top level, too. By the way, this is valid for all of us in terms of frequencies well above 18kHz.

            Furthermore I think Bernie has some younger guys around him in his studio whom he could ask to check if his mastering is off above 13kHz or so. I think it’s a very limited frequency spectrum and not the most critical area where the skills of those engineers play a role.

            I think you theoretically have a point which in practice is seemingly not very relevant when hearing Grundman‘s later remasterings.

            The thing is…if he would produce problems due to a high frequency hearing loss, they would mean too much top end on the recordings. What I experience is rather the opposite. He masters a bit less bright than many years ago.

            • 2025-02-08 06:16:35 PM

              bwb wrote:

              or the possibility you alluded to previously.... that you hear a bit less bright than you did many years ago :)

              Many (most?) of us don't realize our abilities have faded until well past the point that they have. . My grandfather fancied himself an excellent driver. I want to die in my sleep like he did, not die screaming in horror like the passengers in his car.

              • 2025-02-08 08:34:52 PM

                Come on wrote:

                Yes but my point was: hearing less bright would lead to brighter sounding remasterings, not less bright ones. And his late remasterings in my experience sound the same as before or rather less bright if anyrting. So there’s no hint of a proof of implications of hearing loss.

                • 2025-02-09 02:46:52 PM

                  Doors32 wrote:

                  I have different experiences with remasters. This is most noticeable in CB's work. Just compare the work on Neil Young ORS 1-4 and ORS 22-25 reissues. Similarly, Genesis SEBTP (Atlantic 75 series), where side C is clearly different from the earlier, enjoyable BG work, where his matrices made during the Classic records edition were used for the other three sides. Bernie's work, which he did for the Aja AB-1006 edition, is excellent, balanced and unbeatable. On UHQR you can see an increase in the upper range (unnecessarily), it is not big, but still. It disrupts the balance he achieved in the original. I have always liked Bernie's work and I value it very much. I have worse experiences with CB, whose work does not always suit my analogue taste. That is why I think the age of the engineer matters. Of course, each of us has a different equipment configuration, which affects the final result. But I think that UHQR do not bring anything extraordinary that would justify their price. I will say more - they are more technical than musical, and the better and balanced the equipment, the greater the differences in favor of the original will be.

                  • 2025-02-09 07:41:11 PM

                    Come on wrote:

                    I agree with you about BG‘s differences in remastering tonality. But I disagree that they are depending on his age. I recognized this already during the Classic Records era, even when working for this one label but also between his work for different labels, where the tonality is also, if not mainly defined by the influence of the client. But as I said, even when working for Classic Records alone, he produced overly bright, neutral and quite recessed sounding remasterings. Other engineers like Kevin Gray seem to produce a much more evenly result during their work for one or different labels.

                    Anyway I very much appreciate BG and his work.