33.3 is now superior to 45


Personally, I've always preferred 33.3 records, as I think they sound just fine and you don't have to change the record every 10 minutes. But the industry insisted that you had to have 45 rpm and that it was totally superior and that you had to have two records instead of one to clean and store. Well - guess what? Now Acoustic Sounds is telling you that their 33.3 reissues are superior to the 45s. So now you can all go out and buy another copy of Sidewinder or Dark Side of the Moon when it comes out. I just thought I would let you know so you can rush to pre-order.

33.3 Reissues
chayro
I was just thinking the same thing. It seems like were producing the same 50 albums over and over. Thats to bad because there is a lot of great music out there. I wonder if it's because of the difficulty and expense of finding and licensing master tapes. Perhaps they want to avoid risk by sticking to their "hit" titles similar to what Hollywood does with sequels to hit movies.

Lewm, IMHO, those jazz musicians would think we are crazy. They wouldn't say it because at the end of the day, we're still buying their music.
Davt's wonderful epigram reminds me of these lyrics:

At the record company meeting
On their hands - a dead star
And oh, the plans they weave
And oh, the sickening greed

At the record company party
On their hands - a dead star
The sycophantic slags all say :
"I knew him first, and I knew him well"

Re-issue ! Re-package ! Re-package !
Re-evaluate the songs
Double-pack with a photograph
Extra Track (and a tacky badge)...

Best of ! Most of !
Satiate the need
Slip them into different sleeves !
Buy both, and feel deceived

-The Smiths, PAINT A VULGAR PICTURE

Not that I would accuse anyone of doing such things.
HaHa, just got back from Christmas shopping. Looks like Santa got me a mint Mobile Fidelity Rolling Stones box set ( the price was very very good ), to go with my entire collection of english pressings, that I play instead of the US issues I also have. Man, I have about 2000 LP's but am starting to realize only a few dozen separate titles.
Is a remastered version of an existing title conceptually any different than an equipment manufacturer trotting out a Mk2 or Reference edition of current production preamp? The purpose of a remaster is to improve upon an existing versions. How is that bad? Whether they actually succeed is a whole other question. I leave it to individual tastes whether someone should keep buying the same old songs.
I won a Mobile Fidelity Rolling Stones Box Set from Natural Sound back in the 90's. Since I didn't like the Stones, I sold it to Luke's Records in Pawtucket for around 60.00. The set even came with the Geotracker tone arm alignment platter. Should of kept it as Audiogon wasn't invented yet.