Tom Fine writes:
>The LP has just too many limitations -- fuzzy midrange on peaks, ticks
>and pops, rumble
>and surface noise, poor channel separation at certain frequencies. It's
>always amazing to me when
>the things sound great -- I tip my hat to the mastering folks and
>pressing folks who make that
>happen. I'm old enough to remember the era before CD's. NO THANKS!
Iím right there with you, Tom. Iíd never go back.
I hope it was clear from my postings that I am not *advocating* using disc
restorations as the preferred method of transferring older recordings to
the digital realm. I am only noting that, in some cases when the master
tapes have deteriorated far enough, disc restorations can yield a more
listenable product than the bad masters. OF COURSE digital re-issues
should be made from original source materials if those materials are
well-cared-for and in good shape. However, I have heard (and own a few)
major label CD re-issues that suffer from all sorts of problems that the
same material originally issued on LP does not exhibitóand itís not just
poor quality-control at the digital remastering stage.
The LP as a medium has all kinds of problems that bug me (as LPs always
have!), but some of my old LPs when thoroughly cleaned and played through
the LT with DSP EQ, etc. yield a more listenable product than some of the
CD re-issues that supposedly use original masters. Properly manufactured
vinyl will generally hold up better than audio tape. Itís just physics.
I am booked up pretty solidly for the next little while, but if I can put
together a few A-Bs, Iíll be happy to share íem.
Charles Lawson <[log in to unmask]>
Professional Audio for CD, DVD, Broadcast & Internet