Why so low?


Hi,I have some Sheffield Lab direct disc records. The sound is outstanding,but I really have to crank up the volume on all of them. Does anyone know why the recordings are so low on these?
Thanks
YOGIBOY
128x128yogiboy
Also since they could not remaster if they overmodulated they kept a larger then normal margin of error below maximum volume
They are really excellant sounding recordings
Alan
09-26-12: Rpfef
I haven't heard cd transfers of these records so I have no idea if their aliveness and thrilling tonal accuracy survives the big domain switch. Has anyone out there heard both?
I have two of the Sheffields in both formats, the Prokofiev "Romeo and Juliet," and the Sheffield Track Record. Both are combined with other releases in the CD versions.

I'll introduce my comments by saying that I have no ideological biases concerning analog vs. digital. I enjoy both formats.

The Track Record, which Harry Pearson famously described at the time of the Direct-to-Disk LP release as "absolutely the best sounding rock record ever made," I found to be very disappointing in the CD version. While reasonably good sounding in comparison to most rock recordings, in comparison to the D-to-D original it sounded dark, sluggish, closed in, and significantly compromised in definition. I suspect that a major contributor to that was, as indicated in the liner notes, that the digital master was created by playing back the LP using a Shure V15 Type V cartridge.

The Prokofiev fared somewhat better in the transfer to CD. In this case the liner notes do not indicate what source medium was used (LP, backup analog tape, etc.), or what equipment was used to play it. While the CD version sacrifices a lot of the magic of the D-to-D original, which IMO your post accurately described, it remains a very impressive recording. In comparison with the LP, I would characterize the CD as suffering a general loss of definition, but to a degree that allows it to remain highly recommendable. I'll add a couple of caveats, though, that are applicable to both formats. Those whose systems tend toward brightness, or that generate significant odd harmonic distortion, or that tend to homogenize massed string sound, will probably find the brightness of its string sound to be bothersome. Also, the dry (but I believe accurately captured) ambience will be a bit disconcerting to some.

Given those caveats, with respect to sonics I consider the D-to-D LP version of the Prokofiev to be an astonishing recording, and the CD to be simply excellent. And both formats IMO present a certainly serviceable performance of highly appealing music.

Best regards,
-- Al
Yogiboy, If you enjoy the King James version, you should try and acquire the other 2 LPs. My favorite is Still Harry After All These Years.

The beauty of Harry's trumpet playing is that he makes the instrument sing. It is what separates the most gifted performers from the excellent performers. You forget about the player and the instrument and get raptured by the melody and song.

The arrangements and the supporting musicians on Still Harry are spectacular. Every arrangement is superb. However, Satin Doll, Ciao, and, culminating in my favorite, Moonglow, are outstanding. I wish the song could keep going.

Enjoy.