2. analog
  3. 1322157010

Vinyl. Is it me? the producer? cartridge? Record?

It's no surprise that some recordings sound significantly different than others. Different studios, engineers, musicians, arrangers and instrumentation.

I probably have over 1000 albums ranging from 50's jazz, 60's folk, jazz, rock, psychedelic, classical etc.. and I can probably find certain recordings that sound fantastic on my system from any genre. Others not so good.

I am running a Music Hall 5.2 Goldring 1012GX, Scott 340B Vintage Tube amp, Silver stranded cables, Custom Klipsch that would basically be similar to Forte 2, with a 15" self powered sub.

I enjoy the the treasure hunt vinyl offers. It's great when I find an album that:

1: I like the music
2: The album was properly recorded
3: It's a nice clean copy

Of the 1000 records, I probably have 30 real standout recordings that really shine on all levels. It's great to find them.

While I can still enjoy less than perfect recordings if I like the music, it's still much better to have the whole enchilada experience, especially when sharing my system with guests, friends, family etc.

While I have read some who feel the Goldring is a bit shrill or harsh at times, I tend to put the blame more on the session engineer for adding high EQ to the recording or not recording the lower frequencies properly.

If all my records sounded harsh I would blame the cartridge, or some other aspect, tubes, tonearm etc.. but this is not the case. Some recordings simply sound correct, and I would not want them any other way.

At times I feel some of the lesser quality recordings would sound better on a different kind of set up. Probably a system with a much more colored low end, with the higher frequencies rolled off quite a bit. But on the downside, the really good recordings I have would suffer tremendously.

Do some of you feel the need for two systems where you might say "these recordings sound best over here, and these ones are best played on this other set up?"

One thing for sure is that anytime I have both a vinyl and CD version to compare... vinyl wins hands down every time..unless it's one of these new vinyls that was cut from a digital source. (they can't fool me)

Thoughts anyone?
astralography
ptmconsulting
1,000 posts
 
I agree, especially within the "Contemporary Jazz" ("smooth jazz) category. The studio albums are too clean and the playing and sound are sterile. However, if you hear many of these artists live you may change your mind about them. Many of them can really play, but are at the mercy of their producers in the studio.

I would love to see more live albums by these artists, where they are allowed to control their own performance.
phasecorrect's avatar
phasecorrect
2,013 posts
 
I tend to enjoy mid to late 70s recordings...pre digital...pre pro tools...SOTA analogue multitrack...just before 80s hated drums and heavy reverberated...but still some quirky new wave/punk twists...anything at compass studios during this era is immaculate...early b52s, talk heads, etc.
astralography OP
51 posts
 
No doubt, a lot of these jazz guys can play. We saw Jean Luc Ponty recenty in Oakland and it was a real clinic. But the records are really over produced. To me it's like the difference between a photograph and a great painting.

A little grit, grain and texture can make all the difference.

But even live albums are messed with digitally in the studio. The producers just don't stop there. If they have the tools to fix something, they will use them...and that is the problem. They really don't get the idea that sometimes less is more.

My ear is trained enough that I can still hear the punch in and outs.
More to discover