Side-by-side comparison between this 2021 release of the 25th Anniversary Abbey Road half-speed master and the 1996 Essig master (DJ Shadow - Endtroducing.....)

Note: There's no What Does Your Soul Look Like Pt. 4 on the original pressing, whereas the Abbey Road version has included it. As such, the Abbey Road packs more audio across the A and B sides, and the track numbering is different between the two. I have noted both version's track numbering where it differs, with the Abbey Road track numbering first.

* A2: Mids have been brightened a little, vocal details enhanced; low-end has definitely been reduced, but not necessarily to the detriment of the song; DJ shadow's beats are dusty samples and come through quite murky on this track on the Essig cut (and every version I've heard). That remains the case here, but it feels tightened up a bit, shoring up some of the murky bottom.

* A3: Abbey Road version definitely suffers from loss of low-end. The Essig presents with a wall-of-sound during the refrain that isn't felt on this remaster. Similar to the comment below, the drums lack punch here. The breaks and vocal samples honestly don't come in much different between the two pressings.

* A4.a/B1.a: Drums might come in crisper on the Essig. Similarly, the mids actually come in quite clear on the Essig and sound fuller. The Tangerine Dream sample, taken from a song that itself had notably muddy mastering, is clearer on the Essig. Low-end is a no-contest once again, and while it's a murky, mildly-distorted bassline, I prefer the heaviness of the Essig to the shored-up Abbey-Road master.

* B2.a/B2: The Abbey Road master has cut this track pretty quiet comparative to the Essig, and comparative to preceding tracks. The Essig is perhaps a bit quieter than preceding tracks on that cut, but the difference isn't as pronounced. There's not a lot of low-end on this track, but the bias of the Abbey Road master deprives the drums of their impact. The details come in clearer on the Essig, if for nothing other than volume, and the Essig is all-around just a better version.

C1/C1.b: The drums come through bouncy and relatively clear on the Abbey Road. Not a complete loss of bottom end. There's more "airiness" and "soundstage" to this version. But, again, quieter than the Essig, which comes through with more force. I also don't hear an improvement in other aspects with the Abbey Road, and argument could again be made the Essig has clearer details.

C2: Abbey Road is flatter, and again quieter.

C4: If you listened to the Abbey Road version in isolation you might think the track sounds pretty good. Volume is improved. However, once you play the Essig you realize the former is missing an entire swirling bottom-end in the refrain. Additionally, the last third of the Abbey Road cut has channel noise/distortion in the vocals. Not sure if that's my copy.

D1: Volume appears to have been permanently restored to Abbey Road cut and, frankly, pretty comparable between versions. However, detail is lost on the Abbey Road through cutting the bottom-end.

D2.a: Surprisingly, the bottom end is mostly present in the Abbey Road, comparative to the Essig. Mids and highs are also clearer than Essig (more "airiness" again). This is the one track where I'd say the Abbey Road is as-good-as if not an improvement over the Essig.

Overall, and despite the absence of What Does Your Soul Look Like Pt. 4, I prefer the 1996 Essig over the Abbey Road and while my copy has some surface noise, I think I'll be unloading my 25th Anniversary copy.

The original pressing is far more dynamic. Not to say this is a bad copy but low end is lost in this mix. Side by side comparison is an easy win for the original.

While this sounds great, imo it is not the way the album was intended to sound. With a lot of these Abbey Road Half-Speed Masters, they usually lose a lot of the low end. With this album specifically, it lessens the experience as this album isn't meant to be an audiophile experience and the low end is important (I mean c'mon it's Hip-Hop we're talking about). There's definitely more clarity and space. I fs noticed more than I ever have, but it doesn't make for a better experience. There's like no punch to anything either, which almost ruins some of the tracks imo. It's definitely cool to hear the album like this, and I recommend picking it up; as it's the only somewhat affordable pressing with all the tracks, but I prefer the 20th Anniversary reissue completely

The sound is absolutely amazing. Much better then the original pressings or any other repress/reissue !

Great pressing of a seminal work. This is an absolute treasure in my collection.

It sounds lovely, more than I expected given the source material. Few too many clicks for my liking - plenty that don't blend into the material =) but still, loving it. It sounds composed, measured, and musical.
It's really driving me to pull out some other records and at the same time gagging to be played again from the start.
I don't have any of the earlier vinyl releases for comparison..I will be content with this one for a while

I don't know if a half speed mastered process is needed with an album based on 12 bit samples. But it does sound fantastic. Very happy with it. I also have the OG cd from way back and a 2002 repress with bad pressing quality. At last a clean and quality pressing.

It sounds great, don't get me wrong, and the pressing is high quality with very little surface noise. I just prefer the original mastering. This is the kind of album that does not benefit from re-balancing, equalizing, and whatever other adjustments are made in the Half Speed Master process. The original (I'm talking the pressing from the 2016 box set, which I consider the definitive version) is more bass heavy, and just more raw sounding. This HSM is too balanced (to my ears) if that makes sense, gaining perhaps more detail but sacrificing some of that deep bass. I can only speculate that this is not how Josh Davis intended this to sound, but instead is more of a re-imagining of this classic.

Great reissue of a classic! The sound is amazing… couldn’t be happier with this LP.

If I had a (long) sit down to think about what albums would make my personal lifetime top ten, Endtroducing would be in there, sounding as fresh now as it did all those 25 years ago. An absolute masterpiece.