Rock and Roll Snobbery

Ben: It could be that many are comparing older vinyl to the CD version and come up dissapointed. In regard to the mention of Who's Next, I have purchased two copies and traded in both as I thought that there was something wrong with the first (they both sucked and I could not listen to either). I had the same thing happen with Clapton's Layla and finally settled on the MFSL version. But, anything that I have by Ry Cooder, Steve Windwood and a host of others are good recordings IMO. Just picked up The Eagles "Hell Freezes Over" CD and could not be happier. I do not own any "new" rock. The only new band CD's that I have purchased are The Cowboy Junkies and I like the recordings. I guess that it just depends on the artist and label. I have also noticed that old Elton John CD's are pretty rank when compared to the vinyl versions and Elton is a perfectionist, Guess he got sidetracked somewhere along the way.

i never bought santana's grammy-award-winning cd *supernatural*, cuz i read how dynamically compressed the recording was, so i don't know if it really is or not, but it's supposed to be. i bought it when i found it on vinyl, & the vinyl version seems ok, but not great. i've heard that it *is* much better than the cd-version, so i'm sure that the cd-version of this (and many other new *pop* recordings), get compressed like hell, in order to be played on circuit-city-type hi-fi & car-stereo rigs.

Dug-yes the supernatural CD is compressed sounding.I have it on loan from a friend.I was tempted to get a vinyl copy but I hadnt heard it yet at the time I had a copy in my hands and didnt want to pay the high price for it.I wish now I had! This is one fine accomplishment! Regardless of a compressed sound it still sounds pretty damn good.I have a cheap CD player due to the fact I only own 3 CD's and never buy them.But with my Rogue 99 this cheap CD player sounds MUCH better than it has any right to.Im just mentioning that cause I know how you feel about pre-amps and good digital sound and I agree with you 100%!! This is off course here,sorry...

Cme on guys one CD hardly proves the point.....I don't believe most serious artists would allow their albums to be over compressed just to sound good on radio/boomboxes...many acts have made mistakes with productions but...also the argument about CD issues is different..here we are talking about badly mastered issues..more and more remasters are being released and they sound great..take the early Zep releases to the remasters. Maybe the odd pop band or cash-in merchants might butcher their releases for commercial success but I would argue most modern releases sound very good indeed. Most big artists take their music very serious I can't see record companies telling these guys to overcompress their albums. Even independant labels now release very well produced albums with plenty of "space" between instruments.... Regards, Ben

ben,

this *one* cd, by a reknowned rock legend, is the only one i know about that seems to fit the model of what's being released to appeal to the *gen-x* crowd. not much new pop-music interests me, so i can't say i know one way or the other, whether or not it's compressed.

david99, i was gonna suggest ya pick up a dbx-3bx (the earliest versions sound the best, imho - all discrete transistors) to liven up compressed recordings, but then i remembered the rogue 99 doesn't have a dedicated tape loop - it would have to be in the signal path regardless of whether or not ewe were using it... :<( too bad, these things go on ebay for ~$100... and, careful of whatcha say regarding good preamps improving digital sound - yer buddy carl eber mite get riled-up! :>)

regards, doug