Dr.Ebbet - what is the truth about his CD reissues?

[Ziggy C]

It's all about what sounds good to your ears. That's what we learnt in audio engineering class. The two best tools we have are our ears. If you like the way it sounds, then what else do you need to know?

I'd think twice about throwing a bunch of stuff away because someone said it was bunk. Does it sound like bunk to me? Does it bring on some great memories?

We can take this apart verbally, and digitally, and make comparisons, and deride folks who brought something cool to the marketplace. But, for me, in the end, it's all about how it sounds to me.

Albums are collections of songs. How deep do we want to go in digging up how it got that way?

My 2 cents.
-Z

[Lord Reith]

It's all about what sounds good to your ears. That's what we learnt in audio engineering class. The two best tools we have are our ears. If you like the way it sounds, then what else do you need to know?

I'd think twice about throwing a bunch of stuff away because someone said it was bunk. Does it sound like bunk to me? Does it bring on some great memories?

We can take this apart verbally, and digitally, and make comparisons, and deride folks who brought something cool to the marketplace. But, for me, in the end, it's all about how it sounds to me.

Albums are collections of songs. How deep do we want to go in digging up how it got that way?

My 2 cents.
-Z

That is a very valid point and I agree to some extent, but it's like the MOFI scandal a little while back: yes, those albums probably do sound great and their digital masters are probably just as good as the tape, but the point is people thought they were getting all analogue. Likewise, When I paid ten bucks for a cd of Oldies I thought that it was a vinyl rip and not just a compilation made out of the EP box set. I could have done that myself in 5 minutes.

[brainwashed]

Maybe this will help clarify things. I found an interview I did with him back in 2009 and he says:

"Were all of the Ebbetts titles mastered from vinyl
(as opposed to tape)?

Well, in the early days, I did source almost primarily from vinyl. To be clear, when I say “the early days,” I mean the late 1990s up until, maybe, the summer of 2000. After that, everything was vinyl - including the “U.S. Singles Collection.” So, to be as candid as possible, perhaps 95% of everything I did during that early period did come from vinyl sources. But in those days, I also had a reel-to-reel machine as well as copies of many of the Beatles LPs on reel-to-reel tape. Indeed, I had quite a few Beatles albums on vinyl, obviously, but not all of them - at least not any that I could realistically use as audio source material for the project. So, I had to borrow a lot of clean albums from friends, often mix and matching needledrops to create a finished project. For instance, my personal copy of, say, “Something New” in stereo might have been really clean - or even virgin (meaning a 1980’s unopened purple label release I got from E- Bay with a cutout hole) - but all the tracks just couldn’t be used, either because of age or due to years of storage that inflicted some sort of groove damage to the vinyl. As anyone who drops vinyl knows, there isn’t much you can do with that annoying “staticy” groove damage without compromising the audio. Thus, I’d wind up having to borrow two other copies of “Something New,” transfer them to my hard drive, and then mix and match the best sounding tracks from each drop. Sometimes, I’d have to use a track from the reel-to-reel release. It gives me a headache just thinking about that time. It was fun, but it was time consuming. It should also be noted that every one of those mix and match early versions, few as they were, disappeared by the fall of 2000 or thereabouts.

I think mixing and matching vinyl is fine, and even reels but these are tracks sourced from cds. On Oldies for instance "Bad Boy" is a rip because there was no digital mono version but most of the others are from the 1992 cd ep set. That had NoNoise added by Peter Mew, so i'm not sure what they are doing on there when for instance the Japanese red monos could have been used. Fans would already have owned the ep set. And like I said, one of the Revolver discs was all taken from the CD so pretty pointless aside from the artwork. I'm not saying he didn't do good needle drops. His japanese red mono was a go to source for me pre-2009 and they still sound really good. Unlike a lot of needle drops his had far less distortion which is the primary thing that annoys me about most drops.

Using cds though... that was a bit naughty of him.

I have a slew of test pressings that Doc did for the Japanese Red monos. They were all authentic, vinyl rips. How do I know? Well, he borrowed some of my source material, and also some titles from personal friends of mine. As far as I know, the released red monos are all true and authentic vinyl rips. They sounded amazing back then. Now, they still sound real good, but maybe a little lackluster in the low end. Could be I'm just use to new Beatles releases that are certainly NOT lackluster in bass.

Question to LR. Do you think some of the tracks on the mono "Collection of Oldies" I uploaded are CD-sourced? I'd be very, very surprised if this was true. I spent many hours listening to test CDs (thank goodness we listened to actual media and not digital files back then) pointing out anomalies, pops and clicks, distortion, etc... I don't think he'd have people helping him if he was just going to use CD sources. What's the point? What he did early on is beyond my scope. I wasn't involved back then and the few discs I bought at conventions or "certain" shops were always a welcomed addition to my ever-growing library. Ron

[20YearsAgo]

It's all about what sounds good to your ears. That's what we learnt in audio engineering class. The two best tools we have are our ears. If you like the way it sounds, then what else do you need to know?

I'd think twice about throwing a bunch of stuff away because someone said it was bunk. Does it sound like bunk to me? Does it bring on some great memories?
-Z

That is a very valid point and I agree to some extent, but it's like the MOFI scandal a little while back: yes, those albums probably do sound great and their digital masters are probably just as good as the tape, but the point is people thought they were getting all analogue. Likewise, When I paid ten bucks for a cd of Oldies I thought that it was a vinyl rip and not just a compilation made out of the EP box set. I could have done that myself in 5 minutes.

Totally agree with LR. If the whole point of buying a DESS disc was to get an authentic needledrop of a vinyl LP, whether that rip "sounds" good is in immaterial if the rip really isn't an authentic reproduction of the vinyl.

I have a slew of test pressings that Doc did for the Japanese Red monos. They were all authentic, vinyl rips. How do I know? Well, he borrowed some of my source material, and also some titles from personal friends of mine. As far as I know, the released red monos are all true and authentic vinyl rips. They sounded amazing back then. Now, they still sound real good, but maybe a little lackluster in the low end. Could be I'm just use to new Beatles releases that are certainly NOT lackluster in bass.

To be fair, just because you know that he borrowed your vinyl doesn't mean that you know he actually USED your vinyl. Or the vinyl your friends provided. All you know is that he SAID he used your vinyl.

As I said, I was out of the hobby during the DESS's heyday, but I got back into things in the late 2000s. Almost the first thing I remember was logging into forums (BZ etc.) and reading the complaints and counter-complaints about DESS. Some people swore by DESS, impressed by the physical appearance of his product and the merits of his high-end rig. Others though pointed to allegations of impropriety, fakery, and technical deficiencies of his rips. You didn't see these kind of allegations made against other needledroppers.

Later, when people discovered that his supposedly hi-rez rips 24/96 Archive Series rips were really just upsampled redbooks, I kind of figured DESS must've been a charlatan. To make that big of an error either speaks of a man purposely out to deceive, or someone who didn't know what they were doing.

I don't think he'd have people helping him if he was just going to use CD sources. What's the point? What he did early on is beyond my scope. I wasn't involved back then and the few discs I bought at conventions or "certain" shops were always a welcomed addition to my ever-growing library. Ron

Even with all I said above, I still think he probably started with good intentions. He wanted to rip vinyl. He needed vinyl. So he reached out to you and others for vinyl. Then, very possibly, he doubted his ability to execute the type of high quality needledrops that he wanted to produce. So he tweaked and tweaked and "supplemented" his vinyl with other material.

But if nothing else, borrowing people's vinyl was a good way of roping people in. If you lend someone your vinyl, you're more apt to believe him when he says he used your vinyl. You become his advocate. People become impressed with DESS because they know that others trusted him with their vinyl. DESS can boast that he borrowed the most flawless vinyl he could find.

BTW Ron, it speaks well of you that you would lend your prized vinyl to DESS's project. Thank you. It's actually pretty cool to think that, through DESS, thousands of people might've enjoyed a portion of your collection.

[Bombers_1969]

Have this DESS EP Collection date 2000. Alway thought it was needle drops but not so sure now - Lineage>(2) DESS-Cdrs>EAC(secure)>CUEs>WAVS>Logs>FLAC using Trader's Little Helper. Ripped & Posted August 2008 -

Just checked the waveform from the Million Sellers SLY that TEX has and the one on this collection - they are identical.

[zaval80]

It's all about what sounds good to your ears. That's what we learnt in audio engineering class. The two best tools we have are our ears. If you like the way it sounds, then what else do you need to know?

Er...to check for a trace of MP3 lineage?

[GeorgeD]

Don't know if I'm adding anything to the discussion here, but I just ran my own tests:

She Loves You - DESS Collection of Oldies UK Mono syncs perfectly with the Beatles Million Sellers EP CD, and nearly nulls except for brief glitches at the edit points and during the "pride can hurt you too" portion where they still remain in sync, but some EQ has definitely been applied.

I Want To Hold Your Hand - DESS Collection of Oldies UK Mono syncs perfectly with the Beatles Million Sellers EP CD but does not null due to an eq difference. Sync maintains through the entirety of the song.

Can't Buy Me Love - Ditto

I Feel Fine - Ditto

From Me To You - Syncs perfectly and nearly nulls to the Beatles Hits CD EP.

Yesterday - DESS Collection of Oldies UK Mono syncs perfectly to the Yesterday CD EP, but again eq differences prevent null.

Michelle - DESS Collection of Oldies UK Mono syncs perfectly to the Nowhere Man CD EP, but eq differences...

I think if I continued this test on Collection of Oldies I'd probably find them most of them. Maybe later, but i will say that the sonics on the original mono of that record are pretty sub-par. Not unlistenable but really not great.

Now, She Said She Said - DESS "Blue Box' Revolver stereo does NOT sync with the '87 cd, not the standard issue nor the Disque Americ pressing.

[Lord Reith]

Question to LR. Do you think some of the tracks on the mono "Collection of Oldies" I uploaded are CD-sourced? I'd be very, very surprised if this was true.

I haven't checked all of that disc (the one with the black label) but I checked SLY and it was not from the offcial cd. It also has a very different eq from the other one, much more like the original vinyl. A cursory listen to that black cd and the general presence of slight amounts of distortion makes me think it is sourced from a vinyl copy.

I don't think he'd have people helping him if he was just going to use CD sources. What's the point? What he did early on is beyond my scope

Well I'm not saying everything was cd sourced. It couldn't have been when a lot of the stuff hadn't been on cd pre-2009. But clearly some of it was. Maybe that changed later, I dunno. There's no transparency about it so we don't know. It looks as though the criteria for inclusion was "What sounds best?" regardless of whether it was an analogue or digital source. If he thought the digital source sounded better than the analogue, he used that instead.

Have this DESS EP Collection date 2000. Alway thought it was needle drops but not so sure now - Lineage>(2) DESS-Cdrs>EAC(secure)>CUEs>WAVS>Logs>FLAC using Trader's Little Helper. Ripped & Posted August 2008 -

Just checked the waveform from the Million Sellers SLY that TEX has and the one on this collection - they are identical.

Crikey. I'll have to check some more of that one later. That was one set of his I really liked, but now I think about it the eq was very like that 1992 cd set wasn't it.

Now, She Said She Said - DESS "Blue Box' Revolver stereo does NOT sync with the '87 cd, not the standard issue nor the Disque Americ pressing.

No, the blue box is okay I think. But I have a list of the matrixes for that box and it's one of those with an assortment of tube and transistor cuts, often with a 60s tube cut on one side of the album and a 70s transistor cut on the other. For me the best blue boxes are the ones made in the early 80s, which contained consistent late period cuts by Harry Moss from 1979-1984. I think Harry's later cuts are better with more bass and less distortion. But that's another thread...

(and just to make it clear: I have no agenda here. I am not judging the guy, just trying to identify sources)

[Moptop]

Having read this and many previous threads on Dr Ebbetts' output, it is clear that he is a 'marmite' producer, some like his output and others don't, what seems apparent to me is that with the odd exception, his output is considered as a whole and also includes many reviews/ comments about counterfeit releases. I think this approach is wrong and leads to this division and does little to accurately consider either his output or what is worth keeping and what to ditch or archive.

If I can be presumptions to suggest an alternate approach, which is more constructive to collectors, fanatics, and analysts, with a simple adjustment, thinking of his output as that of three different producers:

199xThe fan, whose first title was Meet the Beatles more than two decades ago, also created mix-and-match releases for a small group, from multiple formats and sources.

~2002-2009 The vinyl ripper/pirate who now has access to more resources starts to produce a higher quality product, including dozens of new rips and titles and starts issuing free upgrades of artwork and audio. Unfortunately, numerous titles were not updated before he closed shop.

2010-12 Club/ Archivist New vinyl rips with new formats issued on a subscription basis, starting with the UK catalogue and some bonus titles, regrettably as this was incomplete, and he rushed out two batches of US albums on 2-4-1 on what he called the American Archive Series.

Whilst the output for each should be considered on merit by title, It is fair to say that the first period and titles not updated, should be considered with a pinch of salt, post 2002 or maybe 2004/5, new and updated audio sources as more likely to contain' genuine mixes' and the Club subscription new rips worthy of the effort to locate either originals or ripped sources with the appropriate logs.

So the only issue now is how many titles are there and how you identify them.

I have currently logged 345 DESS, ignoring minor artwork, audio tweaks, and variations so there is plenty to go at.

What does a DESS disc look like, well the easiest to tell, is other than Club and MFSL titles he didn't use full-face discs.

Post 2003/4 he primarily used Prodisc printable silver dye CDRs and the disc chronology is easy to identify before this.

Specific production dates can be identified by using Nero's infotool , to maybe work out which was the free upgrade, that was kept rather than binned.

Oh, and if there was a forum where a collection of analysts could enjoy the hunt, that would be even better.

That's my rambling thoughts, please be kind.

[Track06]

Question to LR. Do you think some of the tracks on the mono "Collection of Oldies" I uploaded are CD-sourced? I'd be very, very surprised if this was true.

I haven't checked all of that disc (the one with the black label) but I checked SLY and it was not from the offcial cd. It also has a very different eq from the other one, much more like the original vinyl. A cursory listen to that black cd and the general presence of slight amounts of distortion makes me think it is sourced from a vinyl copy.

How about 'From Me To You'?