Metamatic Forums John Foxx John Foxx John Foxx The Virgin Years 1980-1985

Was going to wait till end of month before ordering, but as this has come out early, my order has gone in and I await its arrival next week, fingers crossed!

Unbelievably someone is selling these sets for £39.99 on eBay already...

Well well well... I got my boxset today,
and I am intrigued enough (or anal enough) about this new master of Metamatic that I ripped WAVs off the new 2014 CD and the previous 2007 CD (using "Exact Audio Copy"), plonked them in my DAW and did an A/B listening comparison, to see what all the fuss is about.

First conclusion: these two masters are pretty definitely of the same stereo mix. I couldn't find a single instance of any different sounds or parts lurking in the new version.
They also definately come from different plays of analogue tapes, though, as inevitable slight different replay speeds means that the waveforms drift apart even after a few bars (the CR78 drum patterns lend themselves very nicely to time-aligning the waveforms!)

So - if these two tapes were of the same stereo mix, next question is: which one is the higher generation? And which one a copy?

Well, it is difficult to tell, because clearly Dallas Simponson has done different things to them at the mastering stage, obfuscating the differences in the originals - I can't tell for sure which differences are due to the tapes, and which are due to Dallas's mastering.
- How can I tell that *any* are due to Dallas Simpson? Well that's easy: because he's clearly taken a different approach to "loudness" between the two. On the 2007 edition, he's allowed some tracks to be louder than others (probably preserving their relative loudness on the original mix) - some tracks peak as much as 3dB off full scale, compared to the loudest (which peak at full scale).
However, on the new 2014 edition, everythings been given a bit of limiting so that the ALL the tracks peak at full scale, with no spare headroom.
This is definately something that's been done after digitisation of the tapes.

There is also more hiss and hum, in general, on the new 2014 edition than on the 2007 edition. Now, is this because there is *inherently* more hiss and hum on the tape used for the 2014 edition? Or is it because Dallas applied more noise and hum reduction plugins on the 2007 version? Hard to say -
but I hear next to no noise reduction artefacts at all on the 2007 version, so that suggests to me that the 2007 tape (from the Virgin vaults) was the highest generation master....

Sonically, the 2007 edition has more high end.
The new 2014 edition rolls off some high stuff (we're talking over 12kHz-ish, at a guess) but has noticeably warmer and fuller mids.

Again, it is very hard to guess whether these tonal differences are due to Dallas Simpson's mastering (EQ, multiband compression...) or stem entirely from the source tapes sounding different.
However, less highs, more mids (and warmer mids - i.e. with some subtle distortion) and more hiss is what you'd expect from a further tape generation (or, indeed, from application of a tape emulation plugin during mastering!)

... so, um - overall, I'm inclined to guess that the new 2014 edition, from the mystery 1" tape found in John's archive, is from a LOWER tape generation than the production master than Virgin had! And thus, strictly speaking, is "worse" audio quality than the 2007 CD.

But, I'd qualify that by saying that the 2014 edition has a warmer, slightly more compressed and ballsy sound - possibly from mastering, possibly from being from a lower tape generation, or both... many listeners may find it a little more appealing and less "clinical" than the 2007 CD.


Were the B-sides all from this same tape too?
I wondered if they'd shed more light on things...
To my ears, "My Face" and "Film One" were the only two tracks that I was more inclinded to guess that the 2014 version was the higher generation source - although this could just be cos Dallas Simpson gave them more welly.

"Young Love" still appeared to have a "drop out" on one side of the stereo in the middle... at the same place on both versions! This suggests it's not a "drop out" at all, but a hiccup in the mic, something getting muted that shouldn't be (or erased on the multitrack)


Auch, ultimately - after an hour or so of poring over them on expensive Sennheiser headphones I really am just guessing - without Dallas Simpson popping by to tell us his side of things, I am none the wiser. Probably the new version kicks slightly more ass as the expense of some high-end fidelity. To me the change is more one of subjective taste, rather than a definite "this one is clearly better audio quality".

The 2014 remaster is DEFINITELY NOT from a lower tape generation than the production master that Virgin had.

You said previously that it was usual practice to mix down onto a two-inch stereo tape. I replied by saying that this was not the case with Metamatic as the multi-track tapes were themselves only one-inch in size - and so there was no benefit in mixing down to a format that was larger than the originating multi-tracks. At no point did I confirm what size tapes were used for the stereo mix created from the multi-tracks - but you've assumed (incorrectly) that it was down onto one-inch tape.

Please refer to my previous posts - One and Two - specifically the part where I said : The problem I have here is being able to confirm (without any doubt whatsoever) whether the tape used for the 2014 remaster is the same generation as the 'Production Master' (which is the version everyone is familiar with) or if it's the tape from which the 'Production Master' was itself created as none of the tape boxes are definitively labelled either 'Original Master' or 'Final Mix'. However, the dates on the box very strongly suggested the latter - but as I'm sure you'll appreciate any number of things could've happened to the tapes and their boxes in the intervening thirty-odd years.

Rob

Robin, I wouldn't get too hung up on the tape format (1" versus 2") ... the width of the tape isn't really the biggest factor in the audio quality it could provide (the recording speed is more important, as that most directly affects the frequency response ... 15 inches per second was a common speed for a mixing down to... 7½ips was a bit scuzzier.... tape brand, the type of noise reduction used - if any - and the quality of the tape machine used all are factors too.
Also, just because you'd multitracked on 8-track 1" doesn't mean it wouldn't be advantageous to mix down to stereo on, say, 2" 15ips ... it's not like digital where you can't increase the resolution or bandwidth beyond what's there: with analogue systems, EVERY copy and generation degrades the signal! So using high quality formats (e.g. 2" 15ips) for each generation can mean less degradation... but as I say, let's not get hung up on that! ...
.... although, having said that, can you confirm the size/speed/formulation/noise reduction used on the two tapes in question?)

All I can say is, my ears tell me that the 2014 edition sounds has less high end, and sounds "warmer" in the mids (e.g. has more mild distortion there) that the 2007 edition.
This is consistent with it being from a LOWER (later) tape generation... but it's not conclusive proof of that, as many people subjective PREFER that type of sound, and many mastering engineers commonly process mixes to deliberately make them sound a bit like that! So Dallas Simpson may have done just that...
(Any chance of you interviewing him? )

In any case, none of this is a criticism of anyone - the packaging of the boxset is lovely and I've certainly no complaint about the sound of the new Metamatic master on aesthetic grounds!
It just doesn't sounds like a higher tape generation source to me.

...ANOTHER thing which could affect the sound, of course, is the soundcard (A>D convertors) use to digitize the tapes. The 2007 edition sounds a TINY bit more "brittle", which could be due to less deluxe A>D convertors being used to capture it, compared to the 2014 one (as convertors have gotten better over the years).

Also, we must remember that magnetic tapes slowly loose their signal, starting with the high end ... so a tape digitized 7 years later than another one will probably have a bit less high end! (particularly if they have to "bake" it...)

Has everyone that has ordered this CD collection got there’s, I pre ordered it but still waiting on mines

Another wee thing about this boxset -
it has all the tracks from the 2-CD Edsel editions of John's four Virgin albums (from 2007), yes?

However there are still some stragglers released elsewhere this it doesn't have:

• Half a dozen 7" single edits from the 2001 Music Club CD "Modern Art - The Best of John Foxx"
• There's a few tracks on the 2008 Music Club double CD "Glimmer - The Best of John Foxx" (including an extended "Plaza"
• The 2010 Edsel 'Metatronic' compilation 2CD+DVD set has some extra Metamatic era out-takes and extended mixes
• The 2013 Edsel 'Metadelic' compilation 2CD+DVD set has quite a few 12" versions and Radio Sessions?

Is that pretty much all?
I was getting quite confused when tidying my iTunes library today - trying to figure out which CD I ripped which track from!

I would have expected your ears to be up to a differentiation there

I expect the 'missing tracks' were left out simply because of running time.
This 5x CD set is pretty crammed full in that respect

less of that, cheekychops!

What I mean is: in my iTunes library, I don't just rip CDs into it and keep the "album title" as the name of the CD they came from -
I'm afraid I am mad enough to have sat poring over discographies and sleevenotes and changing the album names and artwork to match the appropriate original release ... so I have things organised by such obscure labels as "Burning Car [Japanese mini-album]" and "No-one Driving [double single]" etc etc...
(I just find I enjoy it more that way - almost all the bands I like who released singles in the late 70s/1980s had a bazillion extra B-side tracks that weren't on albums, which have all subsequently come out as extra tracks on CDs... and I just find it nice to put them back in their original context on my iPod)
...in John Foxx's case, I was beginning to lose track of what CDs I'd gotten those extra tracks from, as there's half a dozen other CDs that have other ones, besides this boxset.
I'M NOT COMPLAINING (I bought all the damn things! And it's very nice to have all these extra tracks, thanks to the exhaustive archivist work Robin and others have done to curate all this stuff! There are other bands who have been so thorough, but there's plenty of others who haven't and lots of little tracks still languish, never yet put out on CD)

Personally I love your posts Feline. You're obviously a big fan of much of John's work but love to know about the technicalities. Keep those posts coming.