jh901 wrote: > You will have to provide some examples of recordings from the 50s-70s > which you find "unclean" (poor). I wonder if you actually believe that > you remember the quality of sound that you experienced 40 years ago?! > LOL. Even if you could, which doesn't seem realistic, then you'd have > to consider that your turtable at that time couldn't touch an entry > level Rega from today. I do agree that some of your LPs would have > suffered from an old stamper or other pressing problems. But think > about that. Does that mean that the recording and mastering is to blame > or was it perhaps simply a pressing problem? So doesn't it hold true > that the tapes could sound quite good? If so, then there very well may > be a CD issue that will please you. > > Bottom line here is that if you have some favorite albums for which you > wish the sound quality was better, then there may be an answer.
First, I remember lots of things from 40 years ago. It's really not too hard to remember if you enjoyed an experience or not. That's not the same as sitting things side-by-side for a direct comparison. (Besides, I thought subjectivists didn't like A-B comparisons.) I spent some time listening this afternoon just to confirm my memories. Here are some examples for you. How about Julie London's 1955 Liberty album "Julie Is Her Name". Not only did they use a peaky vocal mike, it was far too close with lots of spit and p's popping. I know they were going for an extra breathy, sexy sound, but they got carried away. The fact that it was 1955 did not save them from over-doing it. Chet Baker's 1954 "Pacific Jazz Live" (converted from LP) - there is absolutely nothing special about this album's sound quality. The drums and piano are far too recessed and the trumpet sound is completely mediocre. It's a great album if you want to hear Chet play but the recording is poor. "Remastering" does not fix the type of problems in this recording. The same is generally true of Herbie Nichol's 1955-56 "Complete Blue Note Recordings" (also converted from the LP). The balance between instruments is better but once again the music is far better than the recording. The 60s is a generally good period for jazz recording, but they spent a lot of time trying to figure out what to do with pop/rock material. I found a 1965 Brenda Holloway song "Every Little Bit Hurts" that has some of the tizziest, most spitty vocals ever. The record companies also got carried away with the cheesy sound effects. I checked out some 70s material - Jeff Beck, Jethro Tull, Moody Blues and the like - and it was quite fashionable to make the drums sound like a wet blanket had been thrown over the drummer. Regardless of decade, none of the problems noted are fixable by remastering any more than you could take the hot sauce out of a scrambled egg if you'd decided you used too much. And, in listening to this material which was picked by recent decade, my comments about changing recording style fads was pretty evident to me. On a closing note, I'll just throw out a nomination for one of the most natural and excellent recordings I think I've heard. That's the Great American Main Street Band's "Silks & Rags" (Angel CD, 1991). It's the music of Scott Joplin and other American composers of the era. The musicianship is superb and the recording first rate. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ mlsstl's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=9598 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=98249 _______________________________________________ audiophiles mailing list [email protected] http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
