The CD/Vinyl Debate Part 765

[erwbol]

One of the most appalling (to me) RVG's is Time For Tyner. I'd be interested to know if that album ever sounded good in previous incarnations on Vinyl or CD.

[Scott Dolan]

Point of Departure would be mine.

ALA is correct about first gen cd pressings, though.

Just listen to the original 80's releases of The Beatles catalog.

[jazzbo]

Well, I have every US and many Japanese RVGs, not many would I say sound "thin and brittle."

Oddly, many collectors think the early cd pressings sound the best. I've never been of that opinion.

[A Lark Ascending]

You should hear some of the EMI classical issues churned out in the 80s. Very flat.

I recall buying some of my favourite rock recordings from the 70s in the late 80s as they came out and being bitterly disappointed.

[erwbol]

Most 'reissues' in the 80s were very poor transfers - thus the whole 'remastered' thing of the 90s that had many of us buying records for a third time!

I suspect this fed the idea that CDs were inferior to vinyl. Actually, it was the lack of care taken over remastering, not the medium itself (to my mind!).

Take Grant Green's Nigeria, recently reissued in the BNLT 999 series and compare it to its portion of the Complete Quartets With Sonny Clark (SBM, 1997). Guitar on the left, Blakey's drums on the right. It now sounds like angels continuously kissing your ears left and right vying for your attention with its beautifully detailed airy sound.

The music was always compelling to say the least, but now I just want to listen to that album over and over again on repeat. And it costs just ten bucks.

Edited March 17, 2013 by erwbol

[J.A.W.]

Most 'reissues' in the 80s were very poor transfers - thus the whole 'remastered' thing of the 90s that had many of us buying records for a third time!

I suspect this fed the idea that CDs were inferior to vinyl. Actually, it was the lack of care taken over remastering, not the medium itself (to my mind!).

I'll probably get flamed for this here , but many Ron McMaster Blue Note CD reissues from the 1980s and early 1990s sound pretty good to me. His later work not so much, though; I avoid his remasters from the late 1990s onwards as much as possible. Edited March 17, 2013 by J.A.W.

[J.A.W.]

Most 'reissues' in the 80s were very poor transfers - thus the whole 'remastered' thing of the 90s that had many of us buying records for a third time!

I suspect this fed the idea that CDs were inferior to vinyl. Actually, it was the lack of care taken over remastering, not the medium itself (to my mind!).

Take Grant Green's Nigeria, recently reissued in the BNLT 999 series and compare it to its portion of the Complete Quartets With Sonny Clark (SBM, 1997). Guitar on the left, Blakey's drums on the right. It now sounds like angels continuously kissing your ears left and right vying for your attention with its beautifully detailed airy sound.

The music was always compelling to say the least, but now I just want to listen to that album over and over again on repeat. And it costs just ten bucks.I have the Mosaic Green/Clark set that came out in 1990 and it sounds good to me. I don't need the Japanese disc. Like many Ron McMaster Blue Note CD reissues from the 1980s and early 1990s the Mosaic CD sets he did in those years sound good to me. Don't like his Mosaics from the late 1990s onwards very much, though, which is why I'm thinking of getting the 2 Stanley Turrentine CDs in the Japanese LT series.

Edited March 17, 2013 by J.A.W.

[erwbol]

Most 'reissues' in the 80s were very poor transfers - thus the whole 'remastered' thing of the 90s that had many of us buying records for a third time!

I suspect this fed the idea that CDs were inferior to vinyl. Actually, it was the lack of care taken over remastering, not the medium itself (to my mind!).

Take Grant Green's Nigeria, recently reissued in the BNLT 999 series and compare it to its portion of the Complete Quartets With Sonny Clark (SBM, 1997). Guitar on the left, Blakey's drums on the right. It now sounds like angels continuously kissing your ears left and right vying for your attention with its beautifully detailed airy sound.

The music was always compelling to say the least, but now I just want to listen to that album over and over again on repeat. And it costs just ten bucks. I have the Mosaic Green/Clark set that came out in 1990 and it sounds good to me. I don't need the Japanese disc. Like many Ron McMaster Blue Note CD reissues from the 1980s and early 1990s the Mosaic CD sets he did in those years sound good to me. Don't like his Mosaics from the late 1990s onwards very much, though, which is why I'm thinking of getting the 2 Stanley Turrentine CDs in the Japanese LT series.

I'm contemplating getting some more BNLT 999 discs I otherwise would have passed on that are presently not in my collection in any form. Perhaps Hank Mobley's Thinking of Home and Ike Quebec's With a Song in My Heart.

These days I search the internet for info on which CD release of any classic album I am interested in has the best sound and then download FLACs if possible through a foreign bittorrent tracker to compare on my own system. I have wasted enough money in the past on rubbish releases. I do not keep the files indefinitely as part of any digital collection. Think of it as modern day in store listening. No way would I otherwise have spent €160 on an ebay auction of the 7 CD Andrew Hill Mosaic box.

This way I was able to compare all three releases of Nigeria a while ago. The BNLT is close to the Mosaic in character but adds a whole new dimension of presence and subtlety in my opinion.

Edited March 18, 2013 by erwbol

[BeBop]

I don't care so much HOW they do it, but...

[jazzbo]

This way I was able to compare all three releases of Nigeria a while ago. The BNLT is close to the Mosaic in character but adds a whole new dimension of presence and subtlety in my opinion.

I absolutely agree that the best thing about these new BN LT reissues is that "new dimension of presence and subtlety." Exceptionally nice transfers to listen to.

[JSngry]

I don't care so much HOW they do it, but...

...be sure to stick a significantly inferior and wholly irrelevant "bonus" cut smack dab in the middle of a freakin' masterpiece so that it totally disrupts the flow of the album, and while they're at it, pretend that the epic essay that originally came with the album never really happened (although, that eventually happened to the LP as well. But still...)?

[sidewinder]

Fifteen years ago I visited a store in Atlanta that sold Linn sound systems. Their thousand dollar turntable made late-1950s LPs sound terrific!

Can't beat the good old LP12 !

[Kevin Bresnahan]

The reason I started buying vinyl in recent years is two-fold. First, for many Jazz recordings, it's still the easiest way to get some titles. There are quite a lot of them that never made it to CD or if they did, it is on some ultra-rare CD issued in Japan that will cost you big bucks to obtain. Second - and this was the killer - many of today's CDs sound like shit, particularly in the rock domain. Most of today's mastering engineers are squashing everything. I can' t even listen to some them for more than 10 minutes before I have to yank them off my system. A perfect example are all of the latest Jimi Hendrix CDs issued by his family. I get a headache after listening to them.

So I'll continue to spin my old CDs but I'll continue to buy vinyl, particularly stuff I don't already own on CD.

Edited March 18, 2013 by Kevin Bresnahan

[jazzbo]

Interesting. I am more and more fortunate to have the system that I do because I can really enjoy those Experience Hendrix cds, they're not as bad as many new releases and they sound so much better than those digitally remixed ones MCA put out. (The newest ones are less "loud" than the earlier ones as well). I'm lucky that my system allows me to enjoy more masterings than most seem able too.

I'm buying vinyl for many of the reasons that Kevin states. I find in particular that "pre-tape" jazz sounds better to my ears on vinyl than on 90 percent or more of the cd masterings. And this material is not expensive to buy on vinyl. . . no one seems to covet the reissue lps of these 78 sides.

[J.A.W.]

Second - and this was the killer - many of today's CDs sound like shit, particularly in the rock domain. Most of today's mastering engineers are squashing everything. I can' t even listen to some them for more than 10 minutes before I have to yank them off my system. A perfect example are all of the latest Jimi Hendrix CDs issued by his family. I get a headache after listening to them.

Interesting. I am more and more fortunate to have the system that I do because I can really enjoy those Experience Hendrix cds, they're not as bad as many new releases and they sound so much better than those digitally remixed ones MCA put out. (The newest ones are less "loud" than the earlier ones as well). I'm lucky that my system allows me to enjoy more masterings than most seem able too.

I'm glad you enjoy your current system, but it can't undo any compression that was added during remastering to make CDs louder and the resulting loss of dynamics, as for example on the Experience Hendrix CDs Kevin mentioned. I had some of those CDs and have to agree with him. Even some classical CDs suffer from this kind of manipulation, like for instance the Beethoven symphonies cycle by Emmanuel Krivine/la Chambre Philharmonique on the niche Naïve label. Mastering artefacts like that can't be undone by simply turning the volume down, what's lost (dynamics) is lost. Edited March 18, 2013 by J.A.W.

[The Magnificent Goldberg]

And this material is not expensive to buy on vinyl. . . no one seems to covet the reissue lps of these 78 sides.

Is that because the CD reissues are able to provide a more encompassing selection of the material than were LPs? There never was an LP series, for example, like the Chronological Classics. In particular, in the R&B field, there are numerous artists whose work just wan't collected on LP anyway, except maybe as the odd track on a various artists compilation. That was partly the taste of the companies involved but mostly, I suspect, the plain limitations of the format which insisted on choices being made. The digital era has freed listeners to be able to make their own choices about what to listen to; eg only Bloggs' masterpies or the rubbish, too? (Or even just the rubbish.)

MG

[The Magnificent Goldberg]

A further thought into what makes the old LPs reissuing 78 material unsatisfactory is that they were, mainly, limited to the company that owned the copyrights. The opening up of that can of worms has enabled a more comprehensive approach to be made to the work of artists like Milt Buckner and Marion 'Blues Woman' Abernathy, who recorded for many labels in the forties and early fifties.

MG

[jazzbo]

Second - and this was the killer - many of today's CDs sound like shit, particularly in the rock domain. Most of today's mastering engineers are squashing everything. I can' t even listen to some them for more than 10 minutes before I have to yank them off my system. A perfect example are all of the latest Jimi Hendrix CDs issued by his family. I get a headache after listening to them.

>>>>Interesting. I am more and more fortunate to have the system that I do because I can really enjoy those Experience Hendrix cds, they're not as bad as many new releases and they sound so much better than those digitally remixed ones MCA put out. (The newest ones are less "loud" than the earlier ones as well). I'm lucky that my system allows me to enjoy more masterings than most seem able too.

I'm glad you enjoy your current system, but it can't undo any compression that was added during remastering to make CDs louder and the resulting loss of dynamics, as for example on the Experience Hendrix CDs Kevin mentioned. I had some of those CDs and have to agree with him. Even some classical CDs suffer from this kind of manipulation, like for instance the Beethoven symphonies cycle by Emmanuel Krivine/la Chambre Philharmonique on the niche Naïve label. Mastering artefacts like that can't be undone by simply turning the volume down, what's lost (dynamics) is lost.

I've heard all this before, and I didn't just give up. There are things that can be done. I can make the most of what dynamics are there, and there are more there than most think. And I can adjust the tonality to be more comfortable. And I can enjoy the recordings. (Maybe others can't, but I find I can). I can adjust gain on DAC/preamp, preamp and amp, I can roll tubes, and my power conditioning does an awful lot to lower noise floor and thus make what dynamics are there more noticeable. Power cords help the dynamics as well, and my cabling is neutral and revealing. I have treble reduction on both my speaker tweeters and my amp speaker output (outside the signal path) and can adjust the bias of the tubes for "relaxed" or more heft and dynamics. All this allows more productive flexibility than the purist approach I tried (and believed in) before. In short I found this sort of flexibility to be key to enjoying digital releases. I think if I didn't have the power conditioning, the ability to "ride the gain" and the ability to adjust tone I'd be as unhappy as others, but with this flexibility I truly can enjoy these releases. If others can't, I guess I understand, I just feel fortunate.

And this material is not expensive to buy on vinyl. . . no one seems to covet the reissue lps of these 78 sides.

Is that because the CD reissues are able to provide a more encompassing selection of the material than were LPs? There never was an LP series, for example, like the Chronological Classics. In particular, in the R&B field, there are numerous artists whose work just wan't collected on LP anyway, except maybe as the odd track on a various artists compilation. That was partly the taste of the companies involved but mostly, I suspect, the plain limitations of the format which insisted on choices being made. The digital era has freed listeners to be able to make their own choices about what to listen to; eg only Bloggs' masterpies or the rubbish, too? (Or even just the rubbish.)

MG

Allen, when it comes to early jazz and big band there are thousands of lps to choose from. RCA put out comprehensive collections of Shaw, Barnett, Berigan et al that sound very very good. Several labels leased and released Commodore sides with very good mastering. Columbia has released comprehensive series of lps of Bessie Smith, Lester Young, Billie Holiday et al. All this material I've sampled shines on vinyl and is very enjoyable to listen to.

Edited March 18, 2013 by jazzbo

[Scott Dolan]

Oy...

Thanks for being so understanding.

[The Magnificent Goldberg]

And this material is not expensive to buy on vinyl. . . no one seems to covet the reissue lps of these 78 sides.

Is that because the CD reissues are able to provide a more encompassing selection of the material than were LPs? There never was an LP series, for example, like the Chronological Classics. In particular, in the R&B field, there are numerous artists whose work just wan't collected on LP anyway, except maybe as the odd track on a various artists compilation. That was partly the taste of the companies involved but mostly, I suspect, the plain limitations of the format which insisted on choices being made. The digital era has freed listeners to be able to make their own choices about what to listen to; eg only Bloggs' masterpies or the rubbish, too? (Or even just the rubbish.)

MG

Allen, when it comes to early jazz and big band there are thousands of lps to choose from. RCA put out comprehensive collections of Shaw, Barnett, Berigan et al that sound very very good. Several labels leased and released Commodore sides with very good mastering. Columbia has released comprehensive series of lps of Bessie Smith, Lester Young, Billie Holiday et al. All this material I've sampled shines on vinyl and is very enjoyable to listen to.Only the major artists were ever treated that way. The costs and consequent retail prices would have made similar approaches to the work of minor jazz artists unsellable. But even R&B artists of the stature and commercial appeal of Louis Jordan and Ivory Joe Hunter weren't treated that way.

MG

[jazzbo]

Allen, I really am not that interested in collecting R&B artists. And there are many small labels that collect "lesser artists" on vinyl, such as Jazzum, IARJC, The Old Masters, Shoe String, Stardust, Sandy Hook, Archive of Jazz and many more that release airchecks and studio recordings of many sorts. I can find in an hour hundreds of lps I'm interested in on auctions or musical vendor sites. And they're not expensive, as for one thing far more people interested in this material are disappearing than are appearing newly interested in this work, and most of the newly interested are buying cd versions. There are enough out there for me to explore and purchase for the next decade.

[J.A.W.]

Second - and this was the killer - many of today's CDs sound like shit, particularly in the rock domain. Most of today's mastering engineers are squashing everything. I can' t even listen to some them for more than 10 minutes before I have to yank them off my system. A perfect example are all of the latest Jimi Hendrix CDs issued by his family. I get a headache after listening to them.

>>>>Interesting. I am more and more fortunate to have the system that I do because I can really enjoy those Experience Hendrix cds, they're not as bad as many new releases and they sound so much better than those digitally remixed ones MCA put out. (The newest ones are less "loud" than the earlier ones as well). I'm lucky that my system allows me to enjoy more masterings than most seem able too.<

/p>

I'm glad you enjoy your current system, but it can't undo any compression that was added during remastering to make CDs louder and the resulting loss of dynamics, as for example on the Experience Hendrix CDs Kevin mentioned. I had some of those CDs and have to agree with him. Even some classical CDs suffer from this kind of manipulation, like for instance the Beethoven symphonies cycle by Emmanuel Krivine/la Chambre Philharmonique on the niche Naïve label. Mastering artefacts like that can't be undone by simply turning the volume down, what's lost (dynamics) is lost.I've heard all this before, and I didn't just give up. There are things that can be done. I can make the most of what dynamics are there, and there are more there than most think. And I can adjust the tonality to be more comfortable. And I can enjoy the recordings. (Maybe others can't, but I find I can). I can adjust gain on DAC/preamp, preamp and amp, I can roll tubes, and my power conditioning does an awful lot to lower noise floor and thus make what dynamics are there more noticeable. Power cords help the dynamics as well, and my cabling is neutral and revealing. I have treble reduction on both my speaker tweeters and my amp speaker output (outside the signal path) and can adjust the bias of the tubes for "relaxed" or more heft and dynamics. All this allows more productive flexibility than the purist approach I tried (and believed in) before. In short I found this sort of flexibility to be key to enjoying digital releases. I think if I didn't have the power conditioning, the ability to "ride the gain" and the ability to adjust tone I'd be as unhappy as others, but with this flexibility I truly can enjoy these releases. If others can't, I guess I understand, I just feel fortunate.

Sorry, but I don't believe for a second that the dynamic range of a CD that's been reduced or even squashed can be restored. And if I'd have to do with my system some or all of what you describe to enjoy CDs, my listening pleasure would have been long gone. To each their own.

[jazzbo]

Hans, we've been through this before, no worries, I don't expect you to believe me, believe what you will, I know your mind is not open to this idea. The point that I would like to emphasize is that there's more there than is generally believed, and if you have a system that can allow you to get to all of what is there, there's surprisingly more enjoyment. Also, DACs in players and separate of this century are better than those of the previous century and can yield better results this way.

As for doing to your system . . . it's fun for me to do this, and I got my start and my cue from my several years of recording bands that I played in at the close of the 'eighties. A perfectly flat sound recording can be really really dull. Engineers do all sorts of things to make recordings sound better to them on their systems, and remastering engineers do more in their turn. To just passively playback what they release is not the only option. Judicious and careful use of tone, balance, gain, and certainly cleaning up one's power is a viable route to better sound. I was tired of just being a prisoner to what they release, experimenting led me to find some more enjoyment. I guess it's not for everyone, but I don't believe all these blanket condemnations of masterings, remasterings etc. are a stopping point.

Anyway, I think I've made my ideas clear and I'll go back to some enjoyable listening.

[The Magnificent Goldberg]

Allen, I really am not that interested in collecting R&B artists. And there are many small labels that collect "lesser artists" on vinyl, such as Jazzum, IARJC, The Old Masters, Shoe String, Stardust, Sandy Hook, Archive of Jazz and many more that release airchecks and studio recordings of many sorts. I can find in an hour hundreds of lps I'm interested in on auctions or musical vendor sites. And they're not expensive, as for one thing far more people interested in this material are disappearing than are appearing newly interested in this work, and most of the newly interested are buying cd versions. There are enough out there for me to explore and purchase for the next decade.

Yes, I get that Lon. But sticking to jazz artists for a minute, where was there a comprehensive LP issue of Cab Calloway's work in the thirties (over 200 tracks - a 17 LP set)? Or McKinney's Cottonpickers? Or Buddy Johnson's Orch; or Andy Kirk's; or Lucky Millinders? (To take a few bands I love).

I'm just saying that no one could DO this stuff for most jazz (or any other kind of music) artists until the CD era. Partly for cost/price reasons and partly because people switched labels.

Note that even Ray Charles didn't get all his Atlantic material out on US LPs in the sixties - the period when he could do no wrong commercially. You have to find 'A bit of soul' on the French edition of 'Ray Charles sings the blues'. (I know Ray is an R&B artist you DO have an interest in )

MG

MG

[jazzbo]

Okay, I get that, but it's the best of both worlds. Can't fix the past and supply what wasn't there. I neither listen exclusively to lps nor cds, I listen to both. I don't like pesky digital files, so I don't have to worry about not listening to lps on the go, or needle-dropping. I can buy the JSP Calloway material and the IARJC Kansas City lps and enjoy both. For the rest of my life. Life is good and music is a great part of it and I'm no longer limiting myself to digital. There's enough in both formats to seek out and enjoy the rest of my days.

I think for the next few years I can track down lots of Chicago Style stuff from Wild Bill, Eddie, Pee Wee, Max, Jack, and so many others, a good portion of which have not appeared on cd. I love this stuff, and it sounds great on vinyl.

Now I'm off to lunch with my gal, another wonderful aspect of life. You've met her, I'll tell her you say hi.

Edited March 18, 2013 by jazzbo