Dangerous 2LP 33RPM & SACD announced

[Maxym]

Can someone who has now listened to both and who knows what they're talking about confirm(or not)/summarize if the SACD and vinyl use the same master? (@mjfp maybe?)

 

[MJbr2]

Can someone who has now listened to both and who knows what they're talking about confirm(or not)/summarize if the SACD and vinyl use the same master? (@mjfp maybe?)

They do, just like any other MFSL release. DSD transfer of the master tapes which is then remastered in an analog console (SACD is here) and a lacquer is made (vinyl is here).

 

[mjfp]

Can someone who has now listened to both and who knows what they're talking about confirm(or not)/summarize if the SACD and vinyl use the same master? (@mjfp maybe?)

Dangerous was first mastered for SACD, they then took that master and adjusted it for Vinyl (as with every other MoFi release)

 

[mjfp]

Hahaha believe me, I’m far from cool or knowledgeable! Devil’s advocate basically is when you argue an opposing opinion even though you yourself may not fully agree with it for the sake of debate.

In this case, some people were upset that they were releasing these SACD albums in a weird order. I played devil’s advocate by saying that they might be doing all of MJ’s albums and this was just the first one they finished. I don’t entirely believe that personally (given how Dangerous has exploded in popularity over the last few years, I can imagine the estate giving it a push), but it’s a way to keep the conversation going and throw some new material in the mix.

yeah all albums get a MoFi reissue

 

[Amaya]

I'm still debating on returning mine, though I'm not sure if I'm still eligible to do so given I pre-ordered in June, it didn't ship until July, and now it's early August. Not sure when they start their 30 day return window.

On the other hand, I could keep it then resell it... especially since it's a numbered copy. But it might be at a loss. Ugh... I shouldn't have pre-ordered. X_X

 

[aazzaabb]

I’m keeping mine. Haven’t received it yet so I don’t have an opinion on it, but I’m a completest and it would bother me too much. I’d hate to buy Bad next and be missing this.

I’m disappointed to read that Jam is effected because it’s such an important track on Dangerous -well, they all are- but geez, the first track.

But what can you do? It is what it is.

 

[Amaya]

I’m keeping mine. Haven’t received it yet so I don’t have an opinion on it, but I’m a completest and it would bother me too much. I’d hate to buy Bad next and be missing this.

I’m disappointed to read that Jam is effected because it’s such an important track on Dangerous -well, they all are- but geez, the first track.

But what can you do? It is what it is.

A good point. I am reading some comments that claim it sounds fine. Maybe certain batches/numbers are better than others?

I have a fairly low number on mine (123). Curious what the numbers are on the ones who are claiming they had issues.

 

[aazzaabb]

A good point. I am reading some comments that claim it sounds fine. Maybe certain batches/numbers are better than others?

I have a fairly low number on mine (123). Curious what the numbers are on the ones who are claiming they had issues.

Yes, there is also that.

Also, from personal experience in the past, I’ve felt certain pressings of vinyls and CD’s from certain years sounded great to my ears but was told “That pressing is absolutely awful” or “Thats one of the worst sounding CD’s” so I’m going to be my own judge on this.

I’m not an audiophile or expert but I know what I like, and hopefully there’ll be little to minimal issues.

At the end of the day all of the original releases of MJ’s albums are fire on CD in my opinion. This is merely a different experience. Not definitive.

Also, and not necessarily disputing that there’s issues, but everyone and their dog on the Hoffman forum is an “expert” in their own bedroom and quick to jump online with their “findings”.

If you want to be turned off of music, just spend a few days on the Steve Hoffman forums. lol.

 

[Maxym]

Based on the SACD CD layer, and I could not listen to a whole album recently so I skipped across tracks, comparing to the 1991 CD:

I find it interesting in the sense that it's got that MoFi "signature" that makes the album somewhat more intimate, you can feel a bit more as if "you were in the same room as the artists". Dynamic range seems maximised. You can hear more details. That said, it makes some songs sound like "deflated" (<- not sure if that's the correct English word, I mean they sound a bit "less powerful"). So, in my current opinion, it's interesting Dangerous with a different flavour. But I wouldn't say it should strictly "replace" the 1991 CD release (haven't actually heard the vinyl), especially if listening on lower quality equipment.

The issue on Jam is disappointing, but easy to correct if you listen to/manipulate files.

Someone told that they heard a "metronom" through the whole album on the SACD layer. True?

 

[NeoGardiV12]

so I skipped across tracks,

Gee, I wonder which tracks those were...

 

[@mjfanatic777]

Hahaha believe me, I’m far from cool or knowledgeable! Devil’s advocate basically is when you argue an opposing opinion even though you yourself may not fully agree with it for the sake of debate.

In this case, some people were upset that they were releasing these SACD albums in a weird order. I played devil’s advocate by saying that they might be doing all of MJ’s albums and this was just the first one they finished. I don’t entirely believe that personally (given how Dangerous has exploded in popularity over the last few years, I can imagine the estate giving it a push), but it’s a way to keep the conversation going and throw some new material in the mix.

ohhhhh got it thank you! : )

 

[innuendo141]

Ive edited my post advising "not to buy this". Originally this had the same writing on the wall as the David Bowie Heroes album from the A New Career in a New Town box set, which suffered an alleged "loss of energy" in the title track leading to a very noticeable dip in volume (seriously Viscontis reputation took a beating there) and they reissued discs. Now looks very 50/50 with regards to reviews, so ill hold my hands up for that one. It is still very disappointing because its clearly noticeable in Jam in that audio preview/comparison that was shared here.

The collector in me is being really annoying right now.

 

[SmoothGangsta]

Yeah, I'm kinda wondering if people have been a bit dramatic with their reviews in regards to it sounding awful. The other releases sounded different and "less aggressive" but I still liked those.

 

[GrandMaster-D]

I have the sacd and i really love the sound of this master, inclusing JAM. Yes, it does sound like it has a bit lower volume/different EQ than the rest of the songs, but if you crank the volume up for the song, you get a beautiful experience. I never liked the glassy/harsh sound the original 90's cd's had, so this is a warm welcome for me

 

[MJJuniorSinceMW]

Some more quotes from the Steve Hoffman forum:

„The biggest problem is there is a anti-MOFI coalition on this forum. Fair or unfair they start before its released looking for anything to complain about. The title choice, to much dynamic range, not enough dynamic range etc. Some of mofi's problems are self inflicted but with this group they can't do anything right. Yet they follow them keeping up with every release and start criticizing immediately. If you notice one person has a full time job with overtime dedicated to this thread dogging mofi.“


„I got the SACD yesterday (#148). I listened expecting disaster, but instead came away surprised and genuinely enjoying the disc. A few things sound a little different, yes, but I also noticed details and other nuances that I had never heard before. Sometimes it seemed to be the channel imbalances that brought out those details.

Looking at the files in Audacity, there do appear (at least to my eyes) to be very slight channel imbalances on Jam, Why You Wanna, She Drives Me Wild, and Dangerous. But when listening, nothing sounded “off” to me, per se. A little different maybe with the added separation and detail, but not “off” or “bad”.

I don’t know, as I said I was expecting to come away super disappointed, but instead ended up loving it. I love the mids and less harsh treble. Makes the songs over 78 minutes less fatiguing and more enjoyable.“

 

[MJJuniorSinceMW]

Yeah, I'm kinda wondering if people have been a bit dramatic with their reviews in regards to it sounding awful. The other releases sounded different and "less aggressive" but I still liked those.

See and that was my problem with the situation. Some guys jumped to conclusions.
Disregarded the release entirely. Sh*tting all over it even.
And haven’t even listened for themselves.

I get that it’s an expensive audiophile release.
And we would want it as perfectly executed as possible.
But:
- tastes & preferences are different, so who‘s to say what’s really the perfect solution (keep in mind that some like MoFi‘s job on Thriller & OTW, some don’t)
- I’m not sure everybody here has even the right equipment, to fully analyze & hear what is on the SACD layer of the CD.

 

[innuendo141]

This is barely a 7 month turnaround from Off The Wall to Dangerous, compared to the 2+ year wait between Thriller and Off The Wall. It would be great if Invincible was up next. A balancing issue could even improve the sound there

 

[MJbr2]

Yeah, I'm kinda wondering if people have been a bit dramatic with their reviews in regards to it sounding awful. The other releases sounded different and "less aggressive" but I still liked those.

It's just one dude saying the mastering is shit and everyone else, myself included, just mentioning the few errors.

 

[Fuzball]

This is barely a 7 month turnaround from Off The Wall to Dangerous, compared to the 2+ year wait between Thriller and Off The Wall. It would be great if Invincible was up next. A balancing issue could even improve the sound there

My crystal ball says:

Q1/2026: Blood, Invincible or History
Q3/2026: Blood, Invincible or History
Q1/2027: Blood, Invincible or History
Q3/2027: Bad (along with a Bad40 anniversary reissue by Sony/Epic)

 

[Fuzball]

kinda an OT info: MoFi's still pressing new sacd batches of Thriller

 

[JahirSGG]

my SACD has arrived and although now I can only listen to the cd layer comparing it with the original version of 91, my personal preference is the 91 because it has more bass, the mofi approach is clearer and if there is more dynamic range but it is a little flatter that you can solve with equalization I listened to it with my headphones and speakers both with DAC and if I notice the differences of the mastering, I still prefer the 91 one, although now this reaffirms me to buy the 91 vinyl but this does not mean that the MOFI release is bad, it is a matter of preferences and since Bernie's mastering is difficult to match, although this is not the goal, I will get a SACD player to reproduce the DSD layer and compare properly that surely has more details thanks to the dynamic range

 

[mjfp]

See and that was my problem with the situation. Some guys jumped to conclusions.
Disregarded the release entirely. Sh*tting all over it even.
And haven’t even listened for themselves.

I get that it’s an expensive audiophile release.
And we would want it as perfectly executed as possible.
But:
- tastes & preferences are different, so who‘s to say what’s really the perfect solution (keep in mind that some like MoFi‘s job on Thriller & OTW, some don’t)
- I’m not sure everybody here has even the right equipment, to fully analyze & hear what is on the SACD layer of the CD.

I just said that in my opinion, the release is trash because there's not any improvement in sound quality compared to any other release and has issues on top of it. For some reason, MoFi always reduces high frequencies and depending on the person who can hear up to different frequencies, some can hear up to 22kHz, some up to 17kHz, you hear the release differently. For me, who can hear differences in high frequencies, the entire release sounds dull compared all the others and simply not worth it. Still bought it and it will remain in my collection as I'm a collector

 

[SmoothGangsta]

I think I'll probably get this at some point because my collector brain is screaming and I want to hear the vinyl for myself. I do think it's unfortunate they didn't fix the channel issue on Jam, though.

 

[MJbr2]

I think I'll probably get this at some point because my collector brain is screaming and I want to hear the vinyl for myself. I do think it's unfortunate they didn't fix the channel issue on Jam, though.

This MoFi issue offers a different mastering style.

All of MJ's albums were mastered to sound "blunt", punchy and in-your-face, with most of the key elements of a track being mushed together on the center channel. That's how he liked it since he wanted his music to be infectious and make people dance.

MoFi is offering a counterpoint to that, which is a broader soundstage that allows you to perceive each element in more detail and, by that, making it sound "dull" and "flat" in comparison to the OG CD, for example, since it's a much milder EQ on the mid-low range.
The exact same happened to Thriller. Billie Jean is not as punchy, but that's the first time I could really hear the shakers on WBSS clearly. So, I liked it as a second option: instead of dance to it, I can sit down, put my headphones on and explore the recording and its nuances.

Flaws aside, I still think it's worth it for that.
Personally, I've listened to these albums hundreds of times and it's nice to be able to perceive the technical aspects of it now.

 

[GrandMaster-D]

This MoFi issue offers a different mastering style.

All of MJ's albums were mastered to sound "blunt", punchy and in-your-face, with most of the key elements of a track being mushed together on the center channel. That's how he liked it since he wanted his music to be infectious and make people dance.

MoFi is offering a counterpoint to that, which is a broader soundstage that allows you to perceive each element in more detail and, by that, making it sound "dull" and "flat" in comparison to the OG CD, for example, since it's a much milder EQ on the mid-low range.
The exact same happened to Thriller. Billie Jean is not as punchy, but that's the first time I could really hear the shakers on WBSS clearly. So, I liked it as a second option: instead of dance to it, I can sit down, put my headphones on and explore the recording and its nuances.

Flaws aside, I still think it's worth it for that.
Personally, I've listened to these albums hundreds of times and it's nice to be able to perceive the technical aspects of it now.

You are talking about mixing differences, not about mastering differences. The mixing has never changed (except the early release ones). The mastering however had a few different ones during the Quincy era. And to be honest, later on during Michaels life, the (re)masterings of his albums already went to shit because of the loudness war. Thriller 25, the special edition, Ultimate Collection etc. are all OK'd by Michael and mastered at Bernie Grundman, but are one of the worst causes of the loudness war. I don't think that the MOFI releases have a sound that Michael wouldn't like. History and Invincible can only improve with their releases, because with History, the loudness war really kicked in

 

[MJbr2]

You are talking about mixing differences, not about mastering differences. The mixing has never changed (except the early release ones).

I'm referring to mastering differences, mate. MoFi doesn't remix stuff. That's what I meant. Every remaster done by Sony has the OG as reference, so they're not that far off, whereas MoFi's aim for a different sound, highlighting certain elements in the mix.

 

[GrandMaster-D]

I'm referring to mastering differences, mate. MoFi doesn't remix stuff. That's what I meant. Every remaster done by Sony has the OG as reference, so they're not that far off, whereas MoFi's aim for a different sound, highlighting certain elements in the mix.

I understand now. I thought you meant they have changed the mixing of individual sounds in a song

 

[innuendo141]

For anyone in Europe and interested, shipping was on €5 to Ireland from jpc.de for the SACD. I'm pretty sure it was around €15 for Thriller and Off The Wall - it certainly was a nice surprise. Looking forward to listening for myself, hopefully I'll be a fan.

Has anyone else gotten it in the meantime?

 

[R1chard]

Ok, based on mixed opinions, I decided not to cancel the pre-order. My SACD arrived in the UK today. I've listened once, at home at low volume. Comments incoming.

Jam: didn't notice any obvious issue with L/R balance. WYWTOM seemed less electronic and more musical - in particular the bass guitar was clearer. ITC was the opposite - more percussive, there seemed to be more anticipation in the intro and during breaks.

SDMW the kick drum seemed more powerful, deep and with more reverb, as if there was one guy who's only job was to stand there hammering the thing. His voice on RTT was very smooth, you could hear the breaths more. During CLHGA you could hear multi-tracking more obviously during the chorus, and I noticed some strings or something in the background that I never noticed before. HTW had great final sibilants, and something about the song kept building nicely as it went along - I don't know exactly what it is, maybe it's just because I didn't used to listen to this song as closely when I was younger.

The intro to BOW sounded great - even though I knew it was coming, it almost makes you look around because you think somebody is at the door. And then at the very end of the song you can virtually hear the fingers on the fretboard. WII, not a lot to say - maybe some higher frequencies than the original version. On GITM you can hear individual strings during the bridge section, and the notes no longer blur into one during the 2nd solo.

Something about WYBT sounds even more magical than it did before. KTF had good channel separation with the drums and other stuff. Previously with GTS I used to concentrate on the instruments and effects, but here I found myself concentrating on the vocal delivery. Dangerous itself always sounded like a wall of noise to me before, but it's a bit easier on the ear now.

Overall it was a great listen. A couple of the gaps between songs seemed to be a tad too short. As discussed previously, the improvement with this album is probably less than it is with OTW and Thriller.

I'll definitely need to put this on at a higher volume and listen again soon.

 

[mjfanboy27]

My vinyl is coming today I'm curious how it sounds