Vintage LPs vs. ReMaster CDs

Maestro

Music Listener Gurus,

I'm curious: do you ever compare the original LP recording to the equivalent "re-mastered/HD" CD or SACD of your favorite artist? And which do you prefer?

I swear that I still love my Miles Davis "Kind of Blue" Columbia LP better than my "Digitally ReMastered From The Original Analog Tapes" CD. The LP seems to have more "presence", where as I find the CD version a bit brittle and bright - even with headphones. The acoustic uprite bass has more thump in the LP version, whereas the bass speaks lighter: there is thump but not as hefty. I didn't adjust EQ; everything is flat, no boost in treble nor bass.

Is it my hearing? Or do you recognize any differences with your music selections?

______________
Stereo:
Turntable: Technics SL-L1 Direct Drive (1985) w/Linear Tone Arm
Cartridge: Ortofon
CD: Sony ES-CDP208ESD (1989)
Cassette: Nakamichi CR-1A (1988)
Amp/Receiver: H/K 395i (35w/chnl; 1987)
Speakers: Boston Acoustic A60II
Polk R30
Headphones: Sony MDR-7506

Home Theatre:
Main: Polk R50s
Center: Polk CSi3
Surround: Polk R30s
Rear: Polk R15s
Sub: Polk PSW12
All Cherry Editions

Amp/Receiver: Harman/Kardon AVR635

Early B.

A more contemporary and higher quality CD player will breathe new life into your CDs and make for a better comparison to LPs.

Dennis Gardner

Digital apples to analog oranges. Too many variables to compare fairly.

Each time I upgraded my TT/cartridge or CD transport/DAC I played the leapfrog game with those type of comparisons. I realized that quality is in both the software and hardware. You have to choose both sides with an understanding of your intended goals. It is all about synergy and balance. Get both digital and analog playback to a point that the differences are smaller & harder to distinguish to enjoy both.

Then increase your enjoyment by trying your favorites on some Polk SDAs! Thats a whole new game!

Tour2ma

I often get the same impression, but the playing field is not always level, i.e, vinyl listening is less casual, more critical, more committed. I've read more harmonics are associated with LP playback that can give a listener that "warm fuzzy feeling".

For sure you cannot say "everything is flat, no boost in treble nor bass", because even though you did not turn any knobs, your cartridge and Phono Pre are going to add their own character to the playback.

danger boy

a few weeks ago. i got Journeys greatest hits.. remastered.. and while the sound is clean.. the low end is nearly non existant. I have never heard a Redbook CD with nearly no bass at all. No matter what CDP or system I listen to it on.

ANyone else who has this CD notice the same thing? It's the double greatest hits from Journey. ANd I like Journey alot.. and it's painfully difficult to listen to without cringing for the lack of any bass response. :mad: :mad: :mad:

Maestro

Early B. wrote:

A more contemporary and higher quality CD player will breathe new life into your CDs and make for a better comparison to LPs.

I know it is NOT the CD player. The Sony CD player may be old - 16 years - but its converters is still very good against many of today's CD players. I paid $700 for it - back in '89. I have had other players, i.e. Denon, HK, and Nakamichi, and new Sony ES lines; I still prefer THIS Sony.

I must have opened/closed several thousand times over the years with "the ol' boy" and it has never broken down. The Denon, Nak, H/K, and new Sony ES lines either have had the door chassis to fail, or stuck buttons, bad knobs, etc. And yet, I still prefer the sound of this unit. When you try to pick it up, it feels like a tank compared to some of the new line of CD players, and some of those are priced at the same price or more.

Maestro

danger boy wrote:

a few weeks ago. i got Journeys greatest hits.. remastered.. and while the sound is clean.. the low end is nearly non existant. I have never heard a Redbook CD with nearly no bass at all. No matter what CDP or system I listen to it on.

ANyone else who has this CD notice the same thing? It's the double greatest hits from Journey. ANd I like Journey alot.. and it's painfully difficult to listen to without cringing for the lack of any bass response. :mad: :mad: :mad:

I believe, like my "Kind of Blue" Miles Davis CD, that whoever remastered the CD was a little anemic with the bass.

SDA SRS 1.2

I've found that the CD's that used the master tapes that were originally mixed for LP's tend to have more of a "warm" sound while those original session tapes that are mixed for CD without having first been mixed for LP are much brighter.

Robbie

DarqueKnight

danger boy wrote:

a few weeks ago. i got Journeys greatest hits.. remastered.. and while the sound is clean.. the low end is nearly non existant. I have never heard a Redbook CD with nearly no bass at all. No matter what CDP or system I listen to it on. :mad: :mad: :mad:

LP's have a limited dynamic range because of the space limitations on the disk. In analog LP recording, the lower the frequency being recorded, the larger (wider) the record groove has to be. More low frequency sounds recorded equals less overall space on the disc. Some recording engineers recorded full range to the master tape and filtered out the low bass in the mixed down recording, while other recording engineers filtered out the low bass going to the master tape.

CD's have a much wider dynamic range than LP's and higher capacity, therefore there is no reason to strip off the lower bass (or upper treble) frequencies . Some recording engineers took (take) advantage of this. That is one reason why remasters of analog LP's sound better in CD format (provided the master tape was recorded full range or nearly full range and good recording techniques are (were) used). Regrettably, some recording engineers who came up in the analog era applied (and still apply) to CD's the excessive compression techniques necessary for LP's. This made (makes) for many, dull, lifeless, gazed over recordings.

Some of you may remember the 12" 33 rpm and 12" 45 rpm singles that almost always sounded better than the 7" 45 rpm single or the track on the LP. The reason: more space on the disk allowed for including more information.

Tour2ma

Slightly different info here, Raife...

I'd never read where room was the LF issue for vinyl, but rather that it was required to prevent stylus mistracking. Appears both are true, at least according to this source. To be honest I still cannot "see" in my mind's eye how frequency dictates groove width.

By contrast it is easy for me to see how dynamic range has groove width, as well as tracking, implications. Most LP's were limited to 55 to 60 dB dynamic range. Compression was really only an issue with classical music as most "modern" music has considerable less dynamic range with most in the 20 to 40 dB range.

RIAA (Recording Industry Association of America) equalization both:
- reduces LF for the reason cited above; and
- boosts HF signal strength to keep this information above the noise inherent in vinyl playback.
When played back through any phono pre-amp all is set to rights through standardized RIAA equalization circuitry.

In the rush to CD's many early ones simply took the LP mix downs and digitalized them, i.e., with the compression, HF roll-off and LF emphasis all in place. When played back in the absense of RIAA equalization, harsh highs and a lack of LF can be the result
.

DarqueKnight

Tour2ma wrote:

In the rush to CD's many early ones simply took the LP mix downs and digitalized them, i.e., with the compression, HF roll-off and LF emphasis all in place. When played back in the absense of RIAA equalization, harsh highs and a lack of LF can be the result.

I do not think this would have happened to the extent that it did if the introduction of the CD had not coincided with the corporate downsizing craze of the mid to late 1980's (i.e. get rid of all the highly experienced and highly paid audio engineers) and the mass retirements of many knowledgeable recording engineers who began their careers in the 1950's. Many record companies had no interest in retaining these people as mentors or even consultants for a new generation of recording engineers because the general public does not demand good audio quality. :mad:

outlander

Maestro,
I’ve definitely notice the same. Like a lot of the older guys in the forum I still have a good amount of vinyl that I bought in the 70’s and early 80’s but like almost everyone else in the mid 80’s I bought into the CD thing. Over the years I still listened to my LP’s but CD’s were my main media. About a month ago I pick up a new cartridge for my turntable and man, I’m all over the albums again. For me the album has to be in good shape, I really can’t take too much cracks and pops. I’ve even started buying new vinyl and I’m always on the look out for mint used. There are a few artist that make sure their CD’s sound pretty damn good though, Mark Knopfler, Neil Young and Mary Gauthiier, to name a few. But on the other hand I have some CD’s that sound so bad the only place I’ll listen to them is in the car, David Bowie (Ziggy Stardust) is probably the best example I can think of a great album that was destroyed when it was brought to CD.
O

Billm57

Maestro wrote:

Music Listener Gurus,

I'm curious: do you ever compare the original LP recording to the equivalent "re-mastered/HD" CD or SACD of your favorite artist? And which do you prefer?

I swear that I still love my Miles Davis "Kind of Blue" Columbia LP better than my "Digitally ReMastered From The Original Analog Tapes" CD. The LP seems to have more "presence", where as I find the CD version a bit brittle and bright - even with headphones. The acoustic uprite bass has more thump in the LP version, whereas the bass speaks lighter: there is thump but not as hefty. I didn't adjust EQ; everything is flat, no boost in treble nor bass.

Is it my hearing? Or do you recognize any differences with your music selections?

______________
Stereo:
Turntable: Technics SL-L1 Direct Drive (1985) w/Linear Tone Arm
Cartridge: Ortofon
CD: Sony ES-CDP208ESD (1989)
Cassette: Nakamichi CR-1A (1988)
Amp/Receiver: H/K 395i (35w/chnl; 1987)
Speakers: Boston Acoustic A60II
Polk R30
Headphones: Sony MDR-7506

Home Theatre:
Main: Polk R50s
Center: Polk CSi3
Surround: Polk R30s
Rear: Polk R15s
Sub: Polk PSW12
All Cherry Editions

Amp/Receiver: Harman/Kardon AVR635

there are a couple remastered versions of Kind Of Blue. Only one was recorded properly and in the proper speed ( the last one released)

Maestro

Billm57 wrote:

there are a couple remastered versions of Kind Of Blue. Only one was recorded properly and in the proper speed ( the last one released)

What CD version do you have? Mine is the ISBN - 40579 from the Columbia Jazz Masterpieces series.