|
Register | Blogging | Today's Posts | Search |
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
02-21-2011, 12:47 PM | #21 (permalink) | |
Music Addict
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: The Netherlands
Posts: 2,206
|
Quote:
MFSL remasters almost always sound a lot better than the original. And then there's the original dire straits CD's, they sound completely crappy. There's the remasters that appeared in the half/late nineties, they sound almost as good as the vinyl records. And that's a compliment .
__________________
Click here to see my collection |
|
02-22-2011, 12:20 AM | #22 (permalink) | |
Music Addict
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 179
|
Quote:
Jon Astley = bad Vic Anesini = excellent There are excellent remasters out there and there are terrible ones out there. |
|
02-22-2011, 04:47 AM | #23 (permalink) |
Music Addict
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: The Netherlands
Posts: 2,206
|
Absolutely. Most of the time the original release is better.
But there are some very, very good remasters out there. I just can't stand how everyone seems to think those new Beatles remasters are brilliant. Yes, they are pretty good. But has no one realised that, after tons of Beatles remasters, this is the first time they actually made one that comes close to the original masters? They WERE good. Especially the later beatles recordings are really really good sounding. Just buy the old friggin' records people .
__________________
Click here to see my collection |
02-22-2011, 06:01 AM | #24 (permalink) |
one-balled nipple jockey
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Dirty Souf Biatch
Posts: 22,006
|
One of the things that I think is so sad is that so many people think newer technology is better. The best recording quality ever achieved was in the seventies. Whenever they 'remaster' those precious recordings they just straight destroy them. Rhino has absolutely butchered the Ramones' catalog. And for new artists it's also sad. I mean, how pathetic is it to think 'I'm gonna get that little edge by being a touch louder so more people will notice me'? I'm especially disappointed to see the Flaming Lips playing that game.
|
02-22-2011, 06:05 AM | #25 (permalink) |
Music Addict
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: The Netherlands
Posts: 2,206
|
I think there has been no improvement in recording quality since the fifties.
Listen to old brubeck and davis recordings, listen to old classical recordings. They sound just brilliant. And I don't mean warmer or some crap like that, I mean crisp, transparent, clear, just like modern day recordings. I do admit that making quality recordings has become a lot more convenient with digital media, but people tend to abuse digital audio. There's a sort of "You can do whatever you want, it's digital" mentality. Thing is, slight tape distortion and compression or tube distortion isn't such a bad thing. Yes it's a pity when a recording gets distorted, but it's still enjoyable. Whereas digital distortion or compression sounds just awful. There's no headroom at all. The best recordings I know are all done analog. I have a tape of Brubecks "Jazz impressions of eurasia" on my tapedeck right now. I made a copy from a friends' Record as I'm still searching for it myself (I found this one for him, now that he's got it I want it too ;D) and it sounds incredibly good. 1958 and it's pure audiophile quality.
__________________
Click here to see my collection |
02-22-2011, 06:21 AM | #26 (permalink) | |
one-balled nipple jockey
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Dirty Souf Biatch
Posts: 22,006
|
Quote:
Find the recordings conducted by Hermann Scherchen that have not been digitally remastered (in other words, on vinyl) Amazon.com: Beethoven: Symphony No. 3 In E Flat Major, Op 55 180g 33RPM LP: Hermann Scherchen: Music Yes Sir! |
|