Badly recorded albums needing upgrading

Wow.
Ozzy wrote:

The OP is one of those audiophiles that listen to the sound of their system rather than the music.
Sure, we wish all recordings were top notch and also would like there to be no stinkers in our collections.

The first seems rather needlessly judgemental, and the 2nd pretty much sums up why.  I mean, this place exists because we do strive for better sounding music, right?  And -- like HD lenses revealing flaws, this is simply an unfortunate fact -- a highly resolving system is more likely to accentuate some of the problems. In fact compressed eq'd music is often reverse engineered to sound good on crummy systems. Others are just over produced, alas.
The other unfortunate fact is that the most popular music is often the worst recorded - shrill, compressed, 32 tracks mixed down in pro-tools, etc.
The two largest contributors to sound are also largely out of our control - 1-the recording/mixing and 2-our rooms.  Yes, the latter can be addressed but its often either impractical or financially unrealistic. or maybe unacceptable to other members of the household.  So the room soften remains a "gravity issue".
I think the OP raises great questions and issues:

1. let's listen to good music, not just good sounding music. Too often its not the case.
2. If better alternatives exist, let's learn about them.  In the digital domain pressings matter little, so its really about re-masterings. And good for us, lots of artists realize this and have gone back, many times with excellent results.

Do some "hgih end" do more than reveal what's on the record, and in fact make them worse?  No doubt: anything with a rising top end will contribute to shrill sound, and there are MANY such cartridges.  Why? because on some recordings they "enhance" (ahem) the sound.  Its fascinating to hear about how un-flat pro microphones are -- with artists selecting a mic for "presence" or "sizzle" or "snap".  Which, if the arist already has hearing loss, is one of the many sources of bad recordings to begin with :-) or is it :-(  ?
G

Audioguy. I'll add MA recordings and Acoustic Sounds to a growing  list of sources for well recorded music.Maybe I'll even give Mobile Fidelity a second chance. I still get aggravated by their original "high (actually low) quality" Dark Side of the Moon pressing , which I still have from decades ago. I wasn't aware that the quality of vinyl records fell off so precipitously in the late seventies and eighties into the nineties. Thanks for that info.

Mitchagain, I'll have to dig out my old Blind Faith album today and see if its another recording disaster. Haven't played that in eons. Must be a first pressing since it was purchased right after it was released. Update: Playing it right now. It's definitely not an audiophile quality recording, everything sounds a bit muffled especially Stevie ?Winwoods vocals, but at least it's not in the unplayable, unlistenable Layla league.

The Richard Barone material you quoted was quite interesting too. The anecdote about Lou Reed brought to mind another current thread about about imaging where one of his recordings, "Street Hassle" maybe,  was recommended as a good example of well done imaging. I happened to have the recording mentioned   and was able to listen to how well it was done. 

The_treble_with_tribles, and tomcy6, I'll have to become more familiar with that site, and check out albums before making a disappointing purchase of ones that fall into lower dynamic range categories of 5,6 and 7. I need to start paying more attention to dynamic range as a significant part of the sound quality picture. Carver had designed some technology to address this issue on my old Phase Linear 4000 preamp. It was called a "peak unlimiter". I always left it in the "on" position. I wonder if that technology was any good or if it has simply disappeared for no reason.

Interesting too about dynamic range figures not being absolutely comparable between LP's and CD's. I'm definitely learning some new things here. Thanks

Plaw,  thanks for the recommends on the SACDs. I havn't much in the way of later Dylan and post Layla Clapton, although it would be interesting to compare my LP copy of Avalon with the SACD version.

Oregonpapa, you're absolutely spot on about the mono recordings. The Masterworks Ellington Masterpieces CD mentioned earlier is  mono and recorded superbly. I was afraid I'd bought a dud when I saw it was a mono recording, before playing it that is.

Glad to hear you recommend all those jazz labels you listed. I've many older jazz LP's on many of them and feel more comfortable getting more of the same knowing  they maintain high recording standards. That's good news for sure.

William 1957, I've had good luck with some of the multi-album sets so far, but I've researched each one beforehand. there a numerous ones to avoid thoufgh as you point out. That's one reason I started this thread, to winnow out the culprits on these sets. You mention some labels are not transparent. Would you mind saying which ones you are disappointed with in this regard to save me the work of having to find this info out the hard way.  

Thank you for the label recommendations. I've added them to my list, which is coming along quite nicely. Thank you for your well thought out and interesting post. I've read it twice now. You're right, there are a lot of variables to work out, but that seems to be the name of the game that keeps Audiogon going. It's great fun though when you do find a recording
that moves you, is well recorded, and you the gear to play it to it's best advantage. It doesn't have to be the case to enjoy good music , but it's hard to beat when it all falls into place. Appreciate your thoughtful response.

Crustycoots, I've all the records you mentioned, except the last and will take a listen to each as I revisit my collection on my new equipment. I'll especially check out the Hendrix Rainbow Bridge as we both have the 1971 pressing. Appreciate the recommendation on MA recordings that Audioguy likes too. 

Tuberist, I agree with you the music comes first, then the quality of the recording with the exception of real dogs like Layla which make the music unlistenable on good equipment. No reason not to get the best recordings you can reasonably afford, if it doesn't impinge overmuch on your overall number of purchases. I've so many recordings I'd like to acquire before I amble off into the great beyond, so I'm trying to find a reasonable balance.

In a lot of cases I'm finding the poorly made recordings cost the exact same as far better ones, especially in jazz reissues. So far the balance is the greatest albums have to be at least listenable In a good system, and the rest have to be both affordable and not second rate reissues or remasters. That sounds reasonable, doesn't it? Another thing to consider is, if you've spent a small fortune on equipment, it's kind of a waste to not have source material that brings out the best in your investment. 

Thanks again for all your thoughtful comments. And an aside to Jafant: If you're turning into a thrasher or metal-head, it's not too late. There's still hope.  

Mike 

skyscraper,Some of my favorite K2 jazz re-issues are:
Miles Davis Quintet:
Bag’s Groove
Cookin
’Walkin
’Relaxin’
Workin’
Steamin’
Collectors Items

Bill Evans
:At Shelly’s Manne-Hole
California Here I Come
Everybody Dig’s Bill Evans
New Jazz Conceptions
Explorations

Sonny Rollins Way Out West

Thelonious Monk:
Monk’s Music
Thelonious Alone in San Fran
Plays Duke Ellington
Thelonious Monk Trio

I could go on there are so many but that’s a good start I think.

For MPS they have some great Oscar Peterson recordings:
Hello Herbie
Reunion Blues
Walking the Line

Cd318, it is a shame vinyl records have declined in quality and almost went the way of the dodo. But finding reasonably good recordings in any medium is still something most of us can shoot for without heading towards bankruptcy if out current systems haven't already put us there. 

Itsjustme, there is a lot to sort out and understand about why any recordings sounds the way it does in any given setting, or because of what went into it while recorded or remastered. It's been interesting to learn about that here and other places from those more intimately involved or knowledgeable about the recording process, and those who know the ins and outs of various pressings and mediums.

Mike