Rushton: thanks for responding- I wasn't limiting myself to the RCAs, in
fact, I don't know that I have originals and Classics of the same record- I
have the Royal Ballet 45 set on Classic, but don't have the original to
compare against. In other cases, I have the old shaded or white dog, but
not the Classic. My comment may be limited to the pop releases that were
done on Classic. For example, Neil Young- Greatest Hits- was done by
Chris Bellman at BG and has some cuts from Harvest, among others. If you
compare it to the old Lee Hulko mastered version, it sounds bright, almost
strident by comparison. Interestingly, the Bellman re-master of Harvest from
a few years ago is closer to the original, just a tad 'clearer,' a little less
organic.
Other records where the Classic is very bright sounding, to my ears,
compared to better original cuts: Aqualung, an admittedly horrible sounding
recording; the Classic 45 on Clarity, one sided is good, until you compare it
to an old WLP. Same on the Zep Classic 45s I have, of I and IV. Brighter,
more detail, but not as balanced sounding. I know all of these are not
'audiophile' records to begin with. But, at least in the case of pop/rock that I
have on Classic, including Classic 45, they sound a little fiddled with. As I
said, I'm not dissing BG, or the re-do labels, but wonder if it is an artifact of
mastering on more modern equipment, or simply a sonic choice by the
mastering engineer.
fact, I don't know that I have originals and Classics of the same record- I
have the Royal Ballet 45 set on Classic, but don't have the original to
compare against. In other cases, I have the old shaded or white dog, but
not the Classic. My comment may be limited to the pop releases that were
done on Classic. For example, Neil Young- Greatest Hits- was done by
Chris Bellman at BG and has some cuts from Harvest, among others. If you
compare it to the old Lee Hulko mastered version, it sounds bright, almost
strident by comparison. Interestingly, the Bellman re-master of Harvest from
a few years ago is closer to the original, just a tad 'clearer,' a little less
organic.
Other records where the Classic is very bright sounding, to my ears,
compared to better original cuts: Aqualung, an admittedly horrible sounding
recording; the Classic 45 on Clarity, one sided is good, until you compare it
to an old WLP. Same on the Zep Classic 45s I have, of I and IV. Brighter,
more detail, but not as balanced sounding. I know all of these are not
'audiophile' records to begin with. But, at least in the case of pop/rock that I
have on Classic, including Classic 45, they sound a little fiddled with. As I
said, I'm not dissing BG, or the re-do labels, but wonder if it is an artifact of
mastering on more modern equipment, or simply a sonic choice by the
mastering engineer.