Latest on MJJC

Dangerous 2LP 33RPM & SACD announced

I wonder if more people would be interested if they called this "Dangerous 34"?!

innuendo141 said:
Is anyone aware of any Euro stores to get this? I got Off The Wall and Thriller from jpc.de but it's not listed yet.
Click to expand...
https://www.mcru.co.uk has it for £46.90

kai said:
Not sure if the releases are great.
T40, scream compilation, off the wall doc, TII10 ?

The strategy is to throw shit at us and put a good one in between every few years so we stay quiet.
Click to expand...
In the last 10+ years, there have only been 3 worthwhile MJ releases - ie MoFi Thriller, MoFi OTW and MoFi Dangerous. There's no point releasing anything else except MoFi Bad.

WolfMJJ said:
Just pre-ordered it, Dangerous is my fave album, I can't wait to hear the new jack swing songs, the snare samples, the non humanized programmed tambourine etc. Dangerous was recorded in QSound after all!
Click to expand...
Yeah, it's going to be amazing!
 
https://shop.roughtrade.com has it for £49.94

https://www.musicdirect.com for $54.78

https://www.jpc.de for €42.22

SmoothGangsta said:
Hopefully they'll be doing Bad at some point. I assume that'll be a one step vinyl as it's considered a bigger album than Dangerous
Click to expand...
The talk is both Bad and HIStory.

innuendo141 said:
Is the lack of one-step to do with the fact lot's of Dangerous was digitally recorded? Wasn't Bad 100% digital?

Open to correction!
Click to expand...
I know Like a Prayer was all-digital, but with Bad I'm not so sure.
 
innuendo141 said:
Just received from the MJ team

ADKq_NZSM_AqVLqGBn9G0BN9Diw7NlxpUrwTuBWFn6rXONW9ennCsKV0IuUGLDq5VbvNpvkB2NVlLw00vvrdV1rxw-0Mx1AfB1-PTMWWdLljYM1zEQVnfSjLD-q_VJNCufiRmx28OCGPl9jbiMIFUSgjL46dxM53Z0h3A4RkCQrrsuIWtCpgV5JMQ774vt3xzOmAcQ=s0-d-e1-ft
Click to expand...
As you can see, it will be available for the first time as a los folding cover
 
Ganesh said:
Why should I buy this?
Click to expand...
If you're asking yourself that then you're most definitely not the target demographic, which is totally okay and acceptable.

This type of releases MFSL makes are meant to be "higher quality" masters of music, essentially, they get access to the source material (the final "master/s" of the album) and then take care of it in their own detailed way.
In the case of MJ's music, I'd say this is a must for all his albums after Bad, but that's just me
 
Awesome that it's confirmed they will be continuing with these releases.

I'm curious how HIStory will sound as it was quite loud when it was released imo. Of course Invincible will sound better but how much I'm unsure considering how wrecked that was.
 
SmoothGangsta said:
Awesome that it's confirmed they will be continuing with these releases.

I'm curious how HIStory will sound as it was quite loud when it was released imo. Of course Invincible will sound better but how much I'm unsure considering how wrecked that was.
Click to expand...
I'm looking forward to HIStory, the CD release is the best sounding version of the album but it's still absurdly loud at times (imo)
I think there's hope for Invincible, there's a chance the actual masters for it aren't brickwalled, compressed? maybe, but not brickwalled
Which is great news actually
 
NeoGardiV12 said:
I'm looking forward to HIStory, the CD release is the best sounding version of the album but it's still absurdly loud at times (imo)
I think there's hope for Invincible, there's a chance the actual masters for it aren't brickwalled, compressed? maybe, but not brickwalled
Which is great news actually
Click to expand...
the chinese 2009 reissue actually has no brickwalling at all and is very dynamic
 
Invincible is definitely not ome my fav albums. Even so, a Mofi release would be awesome and make the better tracks on the album even better e.g. Butterflies or Whatever Happens!
 
I really hope they will get around to Bad at some point sooner than later, followed by HIStory. I'll be shocked if Invincible gets the MoFi treatment but who knows. You gotta scratch that completionist itch for some people too, and the fact that MJ released so few full albums its not outside the realm of possibility to do all of his main catalog at this point.
 
Fuzball said:
from SH forums:

It’s been confirmed that MOFI will be handling the rest of Michael Jackson’s catalogue, including HIStory.
Click to expand...
Yeah, I posted that previously. I'd be surprised if they did Blood or Invincible, but you never know.

Ganesh said:
Why should I buy this?
Click to expand...
Do you like Dangerous? If so, this will be the best version. It will sound much better than you've ever heard before, even on modest equipment. The definitive recording. You'll be able to appreciate MJ's Grammy-winning production work even more.

wonderouzmj said:
How would it sound in the car tho?
Click to expand...
There's an SACD layer and a regular CD layer. Even the CD layer will sound better than the version you already have.
 
tbh, high resolution on its sacd layer aside, I don't expect a huge improvement over the 1991 cd.

The three Q albums on the other hand were originally mixed for a release on analogue media (different EQ settings than it would've been requiered for digital), and those 2track LP masters were used for all cd releases until Bruce Swedien made fresh 2track mixes in 1999. Unfortunately, as per Epic's request for a punchy sound, all cds (SE's and subsequent reissues) were overcompressed. (Invincible suffers from same overcompressing, too)

The MoFi SACD's of Thriller & OTW, even on their red book cd layer, provide a gorgeous sound. For the first time, these albums shine as they should have been since day one!

I'm looking forward for releases of Bad, History, Blood & Invincible. Not sure if I'd buy (again) the Motown solo albums.
 
Fuzball said:
from SH forums:

It’s been confirmed that MOFI will be handling the rest of Michael Jackson’s catalogue, including HIStory. This was from Jim Davis, the president of MOFI on a recent podcast.

www.caropop.com

Caropop Episodes | Caropop

www.caropop.com www.caropop.com
Click to expand...
Oops, I guess you and R1chard posted this info and I missed it completely before my post......my bad! Well I'm glad all of them are being given the MoFi treatment!
 
For those wondering whether Bad, Dangerous, or HIStory are even worth buying on SACD: around 95% of the material on those albums was originally recorded on analogue tape, then later transferred to digital tape - primarily so the final product could be marketed as fully digital (DDD).

Also, just because something is labeled "Hi-Res" doesn't automatically mean it'll sound better. The human ear can't hear anything above 22.05 kHz, which is already covered by standard redbook CD quality (44.1 kHz). What actually makes the difference is the quality of the transfer and mastering. That's what makes these versions worth picking up.
 
mjfp said:
The human ear can't hear anything above 22.05 kHz, which is already covered by standard redbook CD quality (44.1 kHz).
Click to expand...

I'm quite sur I read somewhere it is "approximately between 20 kHz and 22 kHz (variable from a person to another)", so they set the CD definition to 44 kHz + 100-Hz-just-to-be-safe.
I don't think such a precise measure as 22.05 kHz exists for this.

Yet, most significant sounds in music such as voices and instruments are below 16 kHz at most. Hence, MP3 cutting the higher end, in example.
 
Maxym said:
I'm quite sur I read somewhere it is "approximately between 20 kHz and 22 kHz (variable from a person to another)", so they set the CD definition to 44 kHz + 100-Hz-just-to-be-safe.
I don't think such a precise measure as 22.05 kHz exists for this.

Yet, most significant sounds in music such as voices and instruments are below 16 kHz at most. Hence, MP3 cutting the higher end, in example.
Click to expand...
Yeah, I just said you can't hear anything above 22.05kHz cause thats already the set CD standard and Hi-Res audio wouldn't sound better just because it is higher res
 
Maxym said:
I'm quite sur I read somewhere it is "approximately between 20 kHz and 22 kHz (variable from a person to another)", so they set the CD definition to 44 kHz + 100-Hz-just-to-be-safe.
I don't think such a precise measure as 22.05 kHz exists for this.

Yet, most significant sounds in music such as voices and instruments are below 16 kHz at most. Hence, MP3 cutting the higher end, in example.
Click to expand...
Most people don't even realize how little (or how high!) they can actually hear, in my case, I used to be able to hear all the way up to 18kHz when I was younger
However, nowadays I can only go up to 16 and a very faint 16.5kHz, around there. Did I lose some of my hearing? sure but at the same time I am also way more capable of recognizing detail in the music I listen to... before I couldn't even tell you the difference between a youtube video and a regular 320 MP3
 
mjfp said:
Also, just because something is labeled "Hi-Res" doesn't automatically mean it'll sound better. The human ear can't hear anything above 22.05 kHz, which is already covered by standard redbook CD quality (44.1 kHz). What actually makes the difference is the quality of the transfer and mastering. That's what makes these versions worth picking up.
Click to expand...
It's not just about of what the human ear is capable of hearing.

Higher frequencies beyond 22K have an impact on the entire spectrum.

Also the more sample rates (thus frequencies above 22K due to reciprocity) and more bit depth you have, the better you can recreate the original "input" signal.
 
Last edited:
Fuzball said:
Also the more sample rates (thus frequencies above 22K due to reciprocity) and more bit depth you have, the better you can recreate the original "input" signal.
Click to expand...

I once asked on an audiophile forum if hi-res bitrates could somehow make any difference about non-hires frequencies such , can theoretically sound around 12kHz be better in a 192 kHz file than in at 44.1. The answers we mostly like "good question, we don't know but likely not".

Regarding frequencies above 20~22 kHz, hi res files often don't even include any relevant data (a lot of blank and apparent "noises". Also, the artists have never heard them, the sound engineers have never heard them, so they're likely to be contain a lot of unpolished randomness/noise. (At least, that's my interpretation of it.)
 
NeoGardiV12 said:
I'm looking forward to HIStory, the CD release is the best sounding version of the album but it's still absurdly loud at times (imo)
I think there's hope for Invincible, there's a chance the actual masters for it aren't brickwalled, compressed? maybe, but not brickwalled
Which is great news actually
Click to expand...
I'm pretty sure a proper re-release of Invincible should be possible. I once heard a pristine non-brickwalled version of Break of Dawn that comes from a DAT tape. It's a whole different listening experience. Invincible definitely is the album that has the biggest need for a good remaster.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top