• Welcome to ASR. There are many reviews of audio hardware and expert members to help answer your questions. Click here to have your audio equipment measured for free!

Michael Jackson – Dangerous: Is the MOFI Edition (SACD, vinyl record) Magnificent or Disappointing?

Jean.Francois

Active Member
Joined
May 31, 2022
Messages
229
Likes
865
Hello,

MOFI did an outstanding job by working from both the analog and digital master tapes. Indeed, Dangerous was originally produced using a dual-format approach: recorded and mixed in analog, with a simultaneous digital transfer.


Dangerous-MOFI--small.jpg


This explains the presence of both analog and digital sources for this release. The album features 3 analog master formats and one digital format:
  • ½” / 30 IPS analog master with Dolby SR noise reduction, transferred to DSD 256, then through an analog console to lathe, for the tracks:
    “Jam,” “Why You Wanna Trip on Me,” “In the Closet,” “She Drives Me Wild”,“Remember the Time,” “Can't Let Her Get Away,” “Dangerous”
  • Mitsubishi X-86 HS digital master – ¼” 48kHz / 16-bit format, transferred to DSD 256, then through analog console to lathe, for:
    “Heal the World,” “Keep the Faith”
  • ½” / 30 IPS analog master, transferred to DSD 256, then through analog console to lathe, for:
    “Black or White,” “Who Is It,” “Give in to Me”
  • ¼” / 30 IPS analog master with Dolby SR noise reduction, transferred to DSD 256, then through analog console to lathe, for:
    “Will You Be There,” “Gone Too Soon”
A detailed examination of the master sources used for this MoFi reissue reveals a clear intent to prioritize analog lineage wherever feasible, in keeping with the label’s commitment to high-fidelity, archival-grade releases. The presence of multiple master formats — including ½-inch and ¼-inch analog tape, as well as digital — points to a hybrid production history and preservation strategy shaped by both technological transitions and the condition of the source materials.

For a thorough analysis of these MOFI editions, we will compare four samples, each sourced from a different master.
For each excerpt, we will compare the spectrum of the SACD version with that of the 1991 Japanese CD, as well as the spectrum of the vinyl version with that of the same Japanese CD.

The combined use of analog and digital tapes is clearly visible in the spectrogram below, where the green area indicates the digitally sourced tracks. These tracks exhibit a limited bandwidth of around 24 kHz, corresponding to the digital master recorded on a Mitsubishi X-86 HS ¼” 48 kHz / 16-bit format.

Une image contenant rideau, reflet, eau, fenêtre  Le contenu généré par l’IA peut être incorrect.

Spectrogram with master sources


The first track analyzed is Jam. For this track in the SACD version, two key points stand out:
First, the spectra reveal variations in the sonic balance between the SACD version and the 1991 CD version. This balance also differs from the vinyl version, where the differences are less pronounced, especially in the low-frequency range. This is explained by the fact that bass and sub-bass frequencies are mixed in mono on vinyl pressings.

Une image contenant capture d’écran, texte  Le contenu généré par l’IA peut être incorrect.

Spectrum : Jam ( SACD) (white) vs CD) (blue), sample rate 88.2 kHz.

Une image contenant capture d’écran, espace, nature  Le contenu généré par l’IA peut être incorrect.

Spectrum: Jam ( vinyl) (white) vs CD) (blue), sample rate 192kHz.


The analysis of the SACD’s stereo spectrum highlights variations between the right and left channels in the bass (green zone) and high frequencies (yellow zone), variations that are absent on the 1991 CD. These differences partly explain the listening discrepancies noted on the SACD version, as well as the criticisms expressed by many listeners. The discrepancies observed are mainly significant on the track Jam.
01. Jam.s_Concatened.jpg


The most notable positive aspect is the work done by the MOFI team, which has delivered the most dynamic version of Dangerous to date. However, and this is a key point, this dynamic range is accompanied by a certain inconsistency from track to track. Some songs, such as Will You Be There, sound exceptional, while others, such as Jam, are more disappointing. In the latter case, one wonders whether this is a SACD mastering error or simply the result of a damaged master tape. And if the master tape was indeed unusable, why wasn’t another source chosen?

This question has been submitted to MOFI. We are currently awaiting their response.

Find the analysis of all tracks and samples here (link)

Enjoy listening
 
Last edited:
How do you measure dynamic range? ...There's no one-perfect-measure and I don't trust crest factor (often used for "DR").

My MP3 of the song Dangerous (probably ripped from the 1st release of the CD) has an EBU R128 "Loudness Range" of 9.22 (measured in GoldWave). I don't have a WAV rip handy but I don't think MP3 messes-up EBU loudness range even though, like vinyl, it often makes the crest factor "better".
 
How do you measure dynamic range? ...There's no one-perfect-measure and I don't trust crest factor (often used for "DR").

My MP3 of the song Dangerous (probably ripped from the 1st release of the CD) has an EBU R128 "Loudness Range" of 9.22 (measured in GoldWave). I don't have a WAV rip handy but I don't think MP3 messes-up EBU loudness range even though, like vinyl, it often makes the crest factor "better".
As already mentioned regarding LRA (R128), this measurement is not intended to assess dynamics, but rather the distribution of loudness within a track, and is used particularly for TV and cinema. You can find all the explanations on the forum here.
 
As already mentioned regarding LRA (R128), this measurement is not intended to assess dynamics, but rather the distribution of loudness within a track,
Variation in loudness is the definition (or a definition) of dynamics! (Wikipedia) The thing that makes it tricky is that short-term waveform peaks aren't necessarily heard as loud, and there are all kinds of variations between short-term dynamics like a loud drum or cymbal hit, or long-term dynamics like a song that starts-out quiet and ends loud.

I like the term "dynamic contrast" for the program/recording as opposed to dynamic range of the equipment or medium which is limited by the noise floor, or the lower limit of the digital range (which also makes quantization noise). CDs obviously have more dynamic range capability than records and both have more dynamic range than normal music, we need it to be better because we don't want to hear the noise.

Dynamic compression reduces the dynamic contrast by bringing the loud and quiet parts closer together. In production compression (and limiting which is a fast-kind of compression) are usually used to "push down'" the louder parts and then make-up gain is used to make everything louder or "constantly loud"... and boring!
 
Variation in loudness is the definition (or a definition) of dynamics! (Wikipedia) The thing that makes it tricky is that short-term waveform peaks aren't necessarily heard as loud, and there are all kinds of variations between short-term dynamics like a loud drum or cymbal hit, or long-term dynamics like a song that starts-out quiet and ends loud.

I like the term "dynamic contrast" for the program/recording as opposed to dynamic range of the equipment or medium which is limited by the noise floor, or the lower limit of the digital range (which also makes quantization noise). CDs obviously have more dynamic range capability than records and both have more dynamic range than normal music, we need it to be better because we don't want to hear the noise.

Dynamic compression reduces the dynamic contrast by bringing the loud and quiet parts closer together. In production compression (and limiting which is a fast-kind of compression) are usually used to "push down'" the louder parts and then make-up gain is used to make everything louder or "constantly loud"... and boring!
LRA (Loudness Range)
  • Definition: LRA measures the variation in loudness dynamics over a given period — that is, the difference between the quietest and loudest parts, excluding extreme values.
  • Example:
    • A heavily compressed podcast will have a low LRA (~2–4 LU).
    • A film or classical piece with wide volume variations will have a high LRA (~15–20 LU).

This should not be confused with LUFS and True Peak, which are used to define dynamics (rather than loudness over a period). This is what streaming operators and Dolby use to define the criteria for releasing an album in Atmos. We are not trying to measure the same thing as LRA.
These are two complementary measurements, but they do not have the same objective. The results using LUFS integrated and True Peak are consistent with DR.
 
Hello,
Following the analysis of the album Dangerous Michael Jackson – Dangerous: Is the MOFI Edition (SACD, vinyl record) Magnificent or Disappointing?” (link), I sent an email to MOFI (MFSL : Mobile Fidelity Sound Lab) to request some explanations. After exchanges, Bridget Citro Davis (COO & Co-owner) put me in touch with Krieg Wunderlich.
I would like to thank Krieg Wunderlich for his warm welcome and the time he devoted to our discussion.


MJ-Dangerous-Answers-MOFI.jpg


We had a very interesting and insightful discussion regarding the issues observed on the SACD. Krieg Wunderlich told me that he handled the mastering work for the vinyl (LP) version. We discussed his working method, particularly how he ensures proper channel balance so that the lead vocal is centered, as well as the possibility of subtly enhancing the vocal presence through fine EQ adjustments.


Regarding the diversity of masters used, Krieg Wunderlich explained that this was due to the album being mixed in different studios. For the Dangerous album, first-generation masters were used. All master tapes were transferred to DSD256 in order to capture the full detail of the original recordings and to deliver the most faithful possible reproduction of the master on both LP and SACD formats. The same master was used for both releases.


As for the issue observed on the SACD, it is not present on the vinyl version. We discussed several possible causes for the difference between the two version which is particularly noticeable on “Jam” and “Why You Wanna Trip on Me”, such as a damaged tape or a misalignment of the tape heads during the transfer of the ½” / 30 IPS analog master tape with Dolby SR noise reduction. However, we cannot draw any conclusions without more information.


Krieg Wunderlich specifies that the SACD is in fact more true to the master tape than the LP, and both were approved by representatives of the Michael Jackson estate and Sony
. The decision of whether to more precisely match the master tape or to make changes is an aesthetic one.


Krieg Wunderlich also mentioned that he did not work on the SACD, and that it would be necessary to speak with the person who did the mastering in order to clarify the difference between the SACD and the vinyl.


I asked Krieg Wunderlich to get back to me if he was able to obtain more information.

To be continued...

Enjoy listening,
Jean-François
 
Bonne Année Jean-Francois

Thank you, any news from MoFi?

Sorry, I asked that question in an other thread as I didn’t see this one!
 
Bonne Année Jean-Francois

Thank you, any news from MoFi?

Sorry, I asked that question in an other thread as I didn’t see this one!
Merci beau beaucoup, je vous souhaite une très bonne année ainsi qu'à vos proches.

I haven’t heard back from MoFi. I will follow up with them. However, in their last response, they indicated that the SACD version is the most faithful to the master tapes used. If the source of the issue indeed lies in the tapes themselves, I’m afraid there may be little they can do.
 
Merci beau beaucoup, je vous souhaite une très bonne année ainsi qu'à vos proches.

I haven’t heard back from MoFi. I will follow up with them. However, in their last response, they indicated that the SACD version is the most faithful to the master tapes used. If the source of the issue indeed lies in the tapes themselves, I’m afraid there may be little they can do.
Looking forward to reading their responses
 
Back
Top Bottom