2. music
  3. 1137014225

Great music but poor recording recommendations.

It hit me that, when I visit most of my audiophile friends, that they are always playing Holly Cole, Pat Barber, Diana Krall, Kraftwerk, Dead Can Dance and other things that are well recorded but not very consonant with my musical sensibility. Most of the music I really enjoy is pretty badly recorded. So I thought that, in the interest of widening musical exposure, we could start a thread with great music that is not particularly well recorded but deserves a hearing from our audiophile friends. Doesn't have to be the worst recording ever or anything like that, just mediocre will do. I'll throw three out. "Introducing Roland Kirk", originally released on Argo and subsequently on Chess. This is Kirk's first record as a leader, before he became Rashaan, a real winner. Recording quality suffers in comparison to his later work on Mercury/Limelight and Atlantic. Robert Earl Keen, "Number 2 Live Dinner". OK, I said that I wouldn't pick the very worst recording, but this may be right up there, hey, it's my thread so I can cheat. Unbelieveable songwriting from this unsung Texas troubadour. Townes (who made a few terrible sounding recordings as well) would be proud. The Strokes "Room On Fire", their latest effort sounds like a direct-to-disc compared to this sophomore outing. More sludge than a Mississippi River flood. One can easily argue that, in this case, we are dealing with artisitic intent. For a brief moment, the only new band that mattered. Next.
128x128viridian
Post removed 
matt8268
92 posts
 
Oooh, I second Rush's Hemispheres. One of my favorites. You may want to try the remastered version of this album, some say it improved. I can't tell all that much.
onhwy61's avatar
onhwy61
5,229 posts
 
Duke Ellington's "Live, 1940 From the Crystal Ballroom in Fargo, ND". It's a transcription from a radio broadcast of a typical night on the road of the world's greatest dance band. It's very low-fi, the band is at times quite sloppy, but it's pure magic.

A more recent offering, Dwight Yoakam's "Acoustic.net". Just Doo-wight and his guitar doing what amounts to a greatest hits collection. Overly compressed, but great performances and outstanding song writing.
sugarbrie
3,854 posts
 
My whole music library is made up of music I like regardless of recording quality. I have only purchased two recordings in my life soley because is sounded so good. I only play them to show off my system to people who ask.

The reason I am into high end audio is simply to make whatever great performances I own sound as good as possible.

It is interesting because sometimes a record company will reissue a CD and claim it is improved because it was mixed at a higher resolution (the lastest digital gear). I many times find that these CDs sound worse to my ears, and I stick with the old CD and sell the new one on eBay.

They can't really improve on the master. I find they enhance the highs when they remix them to the detrement of the lows. I guess this will sound good on a portable devise, but it sounds like crap on a good system.

The new remixes sound better on first listening, then later become annoying as I realize they sucked the sole out of the recording. Kind of like the way Bose speakers sound good at first until you realize there is little or no bass detail.
Post removed 
More to discover