Thread: This sounds like it COULD be
View Single Post
Old 10-10-2021, 01:30 PM   #50
crane3
Guru
crane3 ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.crane3 ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.crane3 ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.crane3 ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.crane3 ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.crane3 ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.crane3 ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.crane3 ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.crane3 ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.crane3 ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.crane3 ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.
 
Posts: 608
Karma: 5007204
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Calif
Device: Fire hdx 8.9, Tab S2, Tab S5e, Aura ONE
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ekaros View Post
One argument with vinyls that I could realistically accept is that they were mastered with different goals. And thus that experience is more pleasing.

Now, for that to apply to new production is very questionable. But sure, with older vinyls I could see it.
Still true! The "newer" vinyls are touted to be heavy compared to the past vinyls, especially in the 1970's during the oil crunch where the recording companies started to use recycled vinyl. That's when I invested in a record clamp to 'flatten' any warped record.

RCA sold some SACDs that sounded nicer & fuller than the CDs of the same artist (Rubinstein) claiming that it was using the original masters where some had used a 3 microphone recording. Why the difference as both the SACD & the CD were digitals? The recording engineer and/or the producer wanted to create a certain sound to their tastes. I have a "producer's cut" recording where Emmy Lou Harris sounded from the front speakers while the guitar was coming from the back; does not make sense.
crane3 is offline   Reply With Quote