I agree. I've never heard a reprocessing that sounds better than the original. One of the reasons those old 50's and 60's recordings (not all) sounded so great was because of the minimal processing (I love those direct to disc recordings), simple mic'ing, engineers respectful of sound over engineering. And in the end, no matter how many bits and kHz the reprocessing uses, a CD is still limited to 16 bits and 44kHz when it's delivered.
I've heard reprocessing using SACD and it's quite nice. I believe the original intent of Sony (was it?) was that SACD was to preserve detetiorating tapes. Even if it never makes it commercially, SACD is a good thing.
Imagine you took a picture of, say, the Mona Lisa with a 10 bazllion pixel camera and reproduced it on a printer with 12 gazillion dots per inch. Betcha could tell the difference in a nanosecond.
TRUST YOUR EARS!
TJ
I've heard reprocessing using SACD and it's quite nice. I believe the original intent of Sony (was it?) was that SACD was to preserve detetiorating tapes. Even if it never makes it commercially, SACD is a good thing.
Imagine you took a picture of, say, the Mona Lisa with a 10 bazllion pixel camera and reproduced it on a printer with 12 gazillion dots per inch. Betcha could tell the difference in a nanosecond.
TRUST YOUR EARS!
TJ