2. music
  3. 137250-115924

How to find the good CD recordings?

I'm new to high end audio but have a decent system. One of the things I've noticed with this new (old) system, is that some of my CDs which I used to think sounded fine just don't sound all that good anymore while some of them sound great. A lot of these CDs are 30 years old and came from CD clubs (remember those?) and typical record stores.

I've noticed in particular that some of my Led Zep CDs just sound a little flat and a little shallow while some of the Pink Floyd and Rush CDs sound quite good. 

Is this just a matter of Floyd and Rush having higher production quality from the beginning? 

Would later "remastered" Zep CDs sound better? Is "remastered" always an indication of better or superior quality? Is it just marketing hype sometimes?

Anyway, with this new system I am inclined to buy the best quality recordings of any newer music I buy and possible replace some of my old favorites.

So is there a place on the internet where one can go to get reviews of the actual recording quality and not just the music itself. I don't see iTunes or Amazon as particularly useful here. At this point I am not interested in pursuing vinyl or high end audio files. I'm still just getting my feet wet and CDs seem like a cheap way to do that.

Any assistance much appreciated,

George
n80
fleschler
2,008 posts
 
My experience (and several of my friends in the mastering business) hear the differences of CDs pressed in the SAME pressing facility using the SAME mastertapes.  I consider this an unfortunate occurrence and really unknown to most CD owners.  As far as different pressing plants (German, Japanese, U.S.) of the same master, there's is even more room for sonic differences in pressings.

n80 I know quite of few people (men and women) who sold off or tossed their LP collections for CDs, for reasons of convenience.  Elderly people had the most need for convenience (I'm talking 75+ ages) and even Frank/Oregonpapa has infirmities which make it more difficult to spend long hours getting up and down to change record sides every 20+ minutes.  I am lucky to be young enough to still play 78s and lift crates of records let alone get up and down to change LPs and volume levels.
2channel8
758 posts
 
@goose , I second your observations. It sound like we are into a lot of the same treasures.
For older blues recordings Verve and EMI rarely, if ever, put out anything that was not excellent. On EMI. I especially like Long John Baldry. Also, Ricky Lee Jones, Cowboy Junkies, and Joni Mitchell always seem to deliver superior recordings. Some of Mitchell, Mark Knopfler and Patty Griffin CDs have an HDCD layer that is not hinted at on the packaging. Hidden treasure if your player can take advantage of this almost forgotten format.
gosta's avatar
gosta
839 posts
 
Ani DiFranco to that list! Maybe not the latest cd though. Thanks for Patty Griffin. Silver Bell for me unknown Daniel Lanois production.

Been studing this Dynamic range website. Interesting to see that "finer" SACD, bluray etc pressings seldom means better dynamics. Or is it the measuring method that does not deliver correct results? It compares as I understand average dynamic in a song with highest. So if the song is very loud all the time it could get a low rating, while actually beeing very good and destroying your hearings? Iggy Pop - Lust for life...someone. Also, there seems to be not that great correlation between a dynamic and a good recording. Look at ZZ Top Afterburner which has a good rating, comparable to Pink Floyd The Wall, but is completely unlistenable. And it seems to favor vinyl, which is not how I see vinyl in general. (Ok, I also played Telarc 1812 and Decca Carmina Burana and studied the tracks in the vinyl when I was a little younger :-) Interesting that older cd issues like Nephilim says seems to have the highest ratings (i.e Talking Heads). 
n80 OP
2,116 posts
 
I can't speak to audio, but in the photography world dynamic range is a big issue from film to camera sensors to monitors to printers. We obsess over histograms which show not only the dynamic range (as 'x') but also the amount of luminance across the dynamic range (as 'y'). And you want each of your components to have the widest dynamic range capability.

However, the dynamic range of the finished photo (or print) nor the histogram even, tells you anything about whether it is a good photograph or not.

I suspect the same is true of music but don't know for sure. I'd guess the dynamic range is just one element of what makes a song sound good. Could be totally wrong.
lostnamerica's avatar
lostnamerica
61 posts
 
For Gosta (and others): For what its worth;  be sure when checking the DR database that you are on the Specific release: (if near or complete data is avail), the barcode, origin of pressing, the date, etc, as there are many variants of album/compilations (as you know already), and of course not every recording is available unfortunately.  But you are correct in that some SACD releases/pressings are and can be terrible.  I found that out later as I have/had (copies of specific CD's/SACD's that attest to that.  For the most part, the database is what it is, and of course your system will show (or hide) the shortcomings in a respective recording/mix.  I don't believe that if a recoding/song(s) are inherently loud, has any adverse effect on the rendering of the dynamic response logarithm.   Although many LP's are decent, VG, to excellent, there are many terrible LP mixes also.   If it's a poor recoding/mix, then it will show as such.  I also agree with you on there yes to be a direct correlation to the "older" CD pressings generally tend to be more dynamic, as well as many Japanese and EU pressings.  Keep listening and, Enjoy the Music!
Cheers.
More to discover