stevers said:
Well some of the best classical recordings I have are made by Tony Faulkner
http://www.auracle.com/greenroom/files/recrec.html
Includes a good deal on the Hyperion label and a number of the Teldec British composer series. follow the link to see a complete list
However I also have some early stereo and even late mono transfers which to me sound very good. For example the DECCA Facade recording with Edith Sitwell sounds as if she is in the room, which for a mid 50's recording is testament to how well it was done.
The problem though is what do you do if the recording you want is not recorded to your liking ? As I type I'm listening to the RCA Previn recording of the Walton 1. I have 2 copies of this in case of emergency - it means so much to me. BUT The top end is thin and edgy, probably in the way you describe, it's a late 60's recording by DECCA engineers I think, and has a very dry sound.
carlosfm said:
I can't agree. None of my tweaks have been a 'fix' to hide nasties, the system is more open sounding than ever and most people would call it bright sounding but very clean. Even back in all-vinyl days my experience was that if you improved the system you suddenly had a lot less bad records, i.e. records you thought hadn't been recorded well turned out to be the opposite. My CD experience has been much the same, it's just the overproduction on more recent records that annoys me, heavy equalisation and compression applied in the studio especially to vocals has a lot to answer for and may account for a lot of complaints of gritty treble. My 'fix' for that is not to buy them!
sbrads said:
Yes, it can happen (and it happens a lot) that some recordings have hidden details that can be revealed when you improve your system. Those were always good recordings, you just didn't know it.
One fine example is Jeff Buckley's 'Grace' CD.
It is an 'indifferent' sounding recording until you hear it or a really good system. You will discover harmonics of the instruments and Jeff's voice echoing on the studio when he shouts. Also, one some tracks you can only identify all the instruments very clearly on a good system.
In my experience, although not brilliant, it's a very demanding recording, and a good test for a system, once you know it well in all it's glory.
Then there's the opposite. Really bad recordings sound beareable on midis and low-fi stuff, and horrible on a good system.
An example is any CD from Coldplay.
That's hard to argue.....if a recording is really bad it will obviously sound worse the better the system gets.
Recordings this bad are in my experience very few and can not be referred to as cd's in general or originating from a particular point or period in time.
They show up in any year or decade more or less independent of recording or reproduction technology.
With "Jack Johnsons In between dreams" i have experienced the same.
This afternoon i bought "Supertramp, Crime of the Century" for 8 Euro's, remastered CD. Have vinyl version also and must say: At some points i can agree with our Mr. Stevers, i can have a lot more fun with the vinyl version. The remastered CD has not the typical dynamical range of real analog recordings, this CD sounds a little compressed compared to LP, but CD has less hearable harmonic distorsion, at least to me.
Another fact: In the 80's i taped an LP: "Rush, Moving Pictures" on a Sansui cassette deck. (borrowed LP from a really very nice looking girl who lived next to me at that time
)Later got hands on the (remastered) CD, but still in some way, prefer the analog sound of the analog LP on analog casette with my Kenwood cassette deck above the remastered CD version!
But this will not stopping me tweaking with my digital project. There are other CD's wich can sound great.
Non Oversampling
Over the past few months I've been reading about the virtues of non oversampling, I won't go into the theory, let someone who understands it fully do that. Anyway to cut a long story short I ended up buying a completely rebuilt Arcam Alpha 5+ for £175, the unit has been rebuilt with a brand new Philips TDA1541A DAC, burr brown op amps, modded power supply & high quality caps throughout, did I mention it's also converted to non oversampling. Quite simply this is the best cd player i've ever heard, the sound is alive, not at all harsh, the bass has more definition than i've ever heard, & the detail is amazing, played through my naim gear it's been nothing short of a revelation, I am finding myself digging out cd's I haven't played in years. Ok this is not a miracle cure for a crap recording but if you're looking for a neutral non digital sounding player one of these could be your answer. There's a lot of info on google.
Over the past few months I've been reading about the virtues of non oversampling, I won't go into the theory, let someone who understands it fully do that. Anyway to cut a long story short I ended up buying a completely rebuilt Arcam Alpha 5+ for £175, the unit has been rebuilt with a brand new Philips TDA1541A DAC, burr brown op amps, modded power supply & high quality caps throughout, did I mention it's also converted to non oversampling. Quite simply this is the best cd player i've ever heard, the sound is alive, not at all harsh, the bass has more definition than i've ever heard, & the detail is amazing, played through my naim gear it's been nothing short of a revelation, I am finding myself digging out cd's I haven't played in years. Ok this is not a miracle cure for a crap recording but if you're looking for a neutral non digital sounding player one of these could be your answer. There's a lot of info on google.
80's CD's
What an interesting thread.
It is facinating that so many people think that early CD's suck.
I personally feel that the earliest CD's are the best. They are usually straight transfers from tape to Sony 1610 and have no compression, no EQ, and no noise reduction. By the mid 80's, CD's were being remastered with additional compression, treble boost and noise reduction - yuk. From there, it has only got worse with each new remaster.
As mark has posted above, a non-oversampling cd player will give a much more analog sound. Digital oversampling and filtering definitely contribute to the thin, wirey CD sound!
Cheers
David
What an interesting thread.
It is facinating that so many people think that early CD's suck.
I personally feel that the earliest CD's are the best. They are usually straight transfers from tape to Sony 1610 and have no compression, no EQ, and no noise reduction. By the mid 80's, CD's were being remastered with additional compression, treble boost and noise reduction - yuk. From there, it has only got worse with each new remaster.
As mark has posted above, a non-oversampling cd player will give a much more analog sound. Digital oversampling and filtering definitely contribute to the thin, wirey CD sound!
Cheers
David
Re: 80's CD's
I sort of have to agree with David, some of the early CDs do sound much better than the later remastered ones, the first one that springs to mind is Dark Side Of The Moon, this was the very first CD I bought back in 1986 I think, when the remastered one came out I got a copy & was dissapointed, the sound was dull & lifeless, it had lost it's soul!. On the other hand I bought Dire Straits - Love Over Gold at about the same time, this had been very badly transfered to CD, it was hissy & lifeless & I never played it, but I was round a mates one night & he played the remastered version, what a difference, it had 'life' & the guitar had a real twang to it, having now got my own copy I can compare them side by side & the remastered one is so much better, still a bit hissy though. If I hear a CD I like & want I generally try to get the same pressing that way I know what to expect.
The point i'm trying to make is this "If it aint broke don't fix it" some of the early CD's do sound better others do not. I suppose it's all about money at the end of the day, when sales start to fall Remaster it weather it needs it or not then they can put a new sticker on it & up the price. God i'm so synical!
Mark.
dcathro said:
I sort of have to agree with David, some of the early CDs do sound much better than the later remastered ones, the first one that springs to mind is Dark Side Of The Moon, this was the very first CD I bought back in 1986 I think, when the remastered one came out I got a copy & was dissapointed, the sound was dull & lifeless, it had lost it's soul!. On the other hand I bought Dire Straits - Love Over Gold at about the same time, this had been very badly transfered to CD, it was hissy & lifeless & I never played it, but I was round a mates one night & he played the remastered version, what a difference, it had 'life' & the guitar had a real twang to it, having now got my own copy I can compare them side by side & the remastered one is so much better, still a bit hissy though. If I hear a CD I like & want I generally try to get the same pressing that way I know what to expect.
The point i'm trying to make is this "If it aint broke don't fix it" some of the early CD's do sound better others do not. I suppose it's all about money at the end of the day, when sales start to fall Remaster it weather it needs it or not then they can put a new sticker on it & up the price. God i'm so synical!
Mark.
Well Stevers, I wanted to start out by saying that probably all CD's sound bad because they were engineered by CHRISTIANS!!, but that would be mean-spirited, so I won't say that.
On the other hand, you seem to have screwed yourself. You have a lot of nice equipment (better than mine by far), a lot more bottles of Right Bank than me (I have only 12 or so, but at least they are all 98's ; however, you have convinced yourself that all your CD's sound like crap. That's a pretty damning statement. You seem convinced that CD's will never sound right. You have painted yourself into a corner.
It's hopeless. You must either give up listening to music or switch mediums. I see no point in torturing yourself like this. What will it be, vinyl or MP3? Perhaps DVD would do the trick? I'm serious. You've poisoned your mind. Give it up now while you are still alive.
Of course, I am ribbing you somewhat, but why should CD's generally sound good to most people but not to you? That's the question that nags my mind.
A case in point: A friend and I were trying to integrate a sub I was trying out. He was adjusting the volume while I listened. I listened for a while and said "right there, perfect!" He said, "Doug, I haven't moved the volume yet"
Doug
On the other hand, you seem to have screwed yourself. You have a lot of nice equipment (better than mine by far), a lot more bottles of Right Bank than me (I have only 12 or so, but at least they are all 98's
; however, you have convinced yourself that all your CD's sound like crap. That's a pretty damning statement. You seem convinced that CD's will never sound right. You have painted yourself into a corner.It's hopeless. You must either give up listening to music or switch mediums. I see no point in torturing yourself like this. What will it be, vinyl or MP3? Perhaps DVD would do the trick? I'm serious. You've poisoned your mind. Give it up now while you are still alive.
Of course, I am ribbing you somewhat, but why should CD's generally sound good to most people but not to you? That's the question that nags my mind.
A case in point: A friend and I were trying to integrate a sub I was trying out. He was adjusting the volume while I listened. I listened for a while and said "right there, perfect!" He said, "Doug, I haven't moved the volume yet"
Doug
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.