CD sound quality: original pressings vs regular remaster vs MFSL, etc
As @stilljim stated, some of the early US CDs were incorrectly mastered using the RIAA equalization for vinyl records. These CDs were pressed and sold by retailers. I believe these discs were recalled, but in any event, this hurt the public's experience with the new format. These albums were then mastered and released using the proper EQ for the digital standard. |
I find one cannot generalize on whether an original, a remaster or a audiophile version of a particular title is the best . I CAN generalize that when the mastering is brickwalled, avoid it like the plague. Sometimes the remasters are simply compressed and LOUD. What is the point of having a format that allows for much more dynamics than the LP to be so compressed? So do not assume just because a title is remastered that it will sound better than the original issue on CD. And there are many audiophile titles that are not as good as their regular issue counterpart. It is all in the mastering techniques and the sources used. It is hit and miss. It may take a LOT of research to find the pressings that you would prefer over the others. (the ones that have been almost universally recognized as the best typically are expensive). I feel for the "remastered" hype too many times. I have the 2008 Moody Blues remastered/expanded series. They HURT my ears, very harsh and grainy. I have ended up seeking out older issues on many CDs because of my foolish mistakes. |
I have the 2008 Moody Blues remastered/expanded series. They HURT my ears, very harsh and grainy. I have ended up seeking out older issues on many CDs because of my foolish mistakes.Just like I said above compressed loud s**t, get the one with the most "green squares" (usually the oldest) click on it for the cat no. search it on ebay for a $5 used one. http://dr.loudness-war.info/album/list?artist=Moody+Blues&album=Days+Of+Future+Passed Cheers George |
| Post removed |
