'Unlistenable' early digital recordings?

Obviously, today’s engineering of digital masters is far superior than the early years. Some say that many CD’s from the early years are ’unlistenable’. I used to agree. But, over the past couple of years, I’ve spent considerable effort to clean up the power to each of my digital components. Now, early CD’s are quite listenable. They might not be ’audiophile quality’ but the music comes across just fine. No more digital nasties. No more glare or etch in the HF. No more excessive boominess in the LF. I’m definitely a clean power convert. So much so, that I recommend cleaning up the power before upgrading to a new DAC. What’s your experience?

It was Ry's idea to record Bop Til You Drop digitally, and damn was he pissed when he heard the results. He eventually heard a Water Lily LP, and couldn't wait to be recorded by Kav Alexander (on A Meeting By The River). Kav's recorder's electronics were designed and built by Tim deParavicini of E.A.R.-Yoshino.
lowrider57 - completely agree.  I’m a classical music fan and have many DG recordings of otherwise great music and orchestras that are unlistenable. And, I don’t think it’s my DACs or lack of clean power.  It’s DG’s crappy recordings. I have a particular “demonstration” recording of Mahler’s 5th on DG. It’s so bad, it hurts to listen to it.  Unfortunately, it took me a while to learn to stay away from a label - so I have more than a few of them.  Thank goodness for high quality streaming - I now have access to a huge library and can usually find at least a decent recording of a decent orchestra or ensemble of a piece I want to listen to.  
Hey, coinkidink! The early CDs were unlistenable and so are the later ones! You owe me a Coke.