ralphpnj wrote: 
> For anything recorded since the beginning of the stereo era (about the
> mid 1950s) it's not the age of the recording but rather the quality of
> the recording that matters. There are plenty of recordings from the
> 1950s and 1960s which sound as good as anything recorded today. For
> example Miles Davis' "kind of Blue" is very well recorded and compares
> favorably with most "modern" recordings.

Yes , i agree completely but that was not the kind of quality i meant ,
the quality of excellent studio work is everlasting :)

But rather if you teleported a modern equipment back in time and hid
inside the equipment they used , would you not get something with less
noise ( you can hear noise cant you ) and more extended frequency
response in both bass and treble ? And these recording has a certain
tone to them don't you think , this is the "flavour" of the vintage
equipment or you could call it distortion .

I'm after the technical quality of the raw signal something 30hz - 15kHz
-70dB s/n does not take 24/192 to encode ( 0Hz - 96kHz -144dB s/n) .

As discussed you hear the limitations of the equipment of the era in
early multi tracking and other sound layering and effect passes . What
happens is that one iteration trough one of these vintage tape machines
is ok but it quickly detoriates trough generational losses mostly added
noise , that tells you something of these machines .

And yes it is completely possible to have completely horrible recordings
with perfect " technical quality " :)
The studio work and artistry can be hideous but in perfect 24/192
quality .
I rather see "sound of music" or any other technicolor flick than an
IMAX rendering of the city dump even if one of them have higher
intrisinic technical quality ?

And they knew what they did back then they rather used the limitations
artistically tape (machine saturation ) etc and knew to make it work for
the music , you can hear on voice recordings that special tone ,probably
due the microphones used .

But these recordings sounded better than delivery format of the era the
LP .
What I've also learned is that they knew that the LP would never sound
the same as the master so they tweaked it a bit so when cutting it it
would come out more pleasant in the end product . Therefore a "LP master
tape" migth not be the best choice for remastering .


------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mnyb's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=4143
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=97950

_______________________________________________
audiophiles mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles

Reply via email to