Here is the deal, from what I have read in the vinly asylum at audioasylum.com (where I post as Mark Maloof, why I chose the goofy "He who records voices" moniker here I dunno. Well, it is what I do for a living....) Also, at remastering engineer Steve Hoffman's site (stevehoffman.tv). DMM results in more high frequency info, and the potential for quicker transients. However, some folks find DMM records sound "bright". I know some folks who hate DMM, esp. reissues Blue Note did in DMM (tough I think early digital crap had something to do with that as well.) Also, I have read that music with extreme bass (think dance, or super heavy industrial/metal) may cause the stylus to skip out of the groove!
Ok, here is something I founnd <
http://www.dccblowout.com/showpages.asp?pid=1130> And if you don't want to read the whole thing (one person's opinion, but it is interesting), here is that person's take on DMM:
"What is DMM Mastering? ? "With Direct Metal Mastering, the groove is cut directly in copper metal. High-frequency loss, distortion and pre-echo associated with conventional lacquer mastering are eliminated and transient response is greatly improved. DMM record pressing sound brighter, cleaner, more detailed, with 15% more playing time than with lacquer technology. Stampers are plated directly from the DMM Copper Master, eliminating two of the three plating steps required for lacquers."
Sounds good, right? No it doesn?t sound good. DMM mostly makes records that sound like CDs. Brighter, cleaner and more detailed are what CDs do, at the expense of warmer, richer, sweeter and more tonally correct. I avoid DMM records like the plague. Try some DMM Blue Notes if you want to hear some of the worst sound ever committed to vinyl.
"What is DMM Mastering? ? "With Direct Metal Mastering, the groove is cut directly in copper metal. High-frequency loss, distortion and pre-echo associated with conventional lacquer mastering are eliminated and transient response is greatly improved. DMM record pressing sound brighter, cleaner, more detailed, with 15% more playing time than with lacquer technology. Stampers are plated directly from the DMM Copper Master, eliminating two of the three plating steps required for lacquers."
Sounds good, right? No it doesn?t sound good. DMM mostly makes records that sound like CDs. Brighter, cleaner and more detailed are what CDs do, at the expense of warmer, richer, sweeter and more tonally correct. I avoid DMM records like the plague. Try some DMM Blue Notes if you want to hear some of the worst sound ever committed to vinyl.
I also happen to know of a few recordings that were originally Direct Metal Mastered, then reissued, and made the second time around with lacquer cutting equipment. Those are the copies to buy! They KILL the DMM versions. Just another good reason not to be fooled by the idea that "original is better". Original badly mastered records can?t compete with later properly mastered records. This seems obvious on its face, but I talk to audiophiles and record collectors all the time who find this difficult to understand. What is there to think about? Just play the record and listen. My question is, if you can?t tell a good record from a bad one, why collect records at all?"
I have one of thos Blue Note DMMs he mentions, and it sounds AWFUL! He is also right about a properly mastered and cut record sounding better than a "first pressing" if that first press was not done right, or the reissue had greater care taken with it. A friend and I compared a first pressing of Led Zepps' third LP with the Classic Records reissue, and thought the original sounded thin/lacking in body in comparison.
