Badly recorded albums needing upgrading

For some people, yes. I think georgehifi from this forum picks his cds that way. Other people, including me, believe that there are other factors to consider.

As the post from mitchagain states, often early cds, which have higher dynamic range numbers, were mastered for vinyl. A new mastering for cd can sound better in spite of lower dynamic range numbers. If the bass is turned up in a remastering, it will lower the dynamic range numbers even if the album sounds better with a little more bass, for example.

It is generally agreed that a dynamic range difference of a couple of points is not significant. Albums with really low dynamic range numbers like dr 5, 6 or 7, should be avoided. dr 10 and above are generally OK, but you have to find out where your tastes lie through experience.

The dynamic range numbers for Lps are not directly comparable to cds. In other words an Lp that has higher dynamic range than the album on cd is not necessarily more dynamic. I can’t explain why but I have read this in discussions on the matter.

Often times Lps are more dynamic than cds because of the loudness wars though, which started in the 90s. Cds were and are often dynamically compressed because people listen to them in cars and through ear buds in noisy places.

Maybe this is the right time to ask.

There is a dynamic range of records database:
http://dr.loudness-war.info/

Is it possible to just look there for the widest dynamic range for either the CD or vinyl if that is what you want?

For example, there are 24 entries for Derek and the Dominoes "Layla and other Love Songs."  The maximum range goes from 10 which is rated a bit mediocre to 15 which is rated excellent.

When it comes to badly recorded CD's, I'm more likely to listen to them in the car instead of my home system. I agree about "Layla" and I always thought the Blind Faith album also sounded terrible.

I recently read Richard Barone's (Bongos) autobiography: "Frontman, Surviving The Rock Star Myth" and it contained the following:

"There was now a difference in mixing an album primarily for CD (even though "Primal Dream" would also be issued on cassette and vinyl).       In the past, when mixing primarily for vinyl, one had to exaggerate the effects a little. Tape or digital delay effects, and especially reverb, would often be eaten up by the vinyl surface noise. So we would always add a little extra. That's why, when you hear CD's of albums made pre - 1987 or so, they sometimes sound a bit too "wet." Those mixes were intended to be heard on vinyl. Digital reproduction gives a much more "literal" reading of the mix when played back.

When recording for a CD or any other digital format, we use the actual amount of effect that sounds right at the time of mixing. Paradoxically, when recording digitally, it is wise to add a little natural ambience or room sound when tracking, because the digital recording seems to eat up, or discard an unnecessary, much of the "natural air" in a recording (the way vinyl did with effects on playback). It seems to seek just the signal, ignoring the "space" as undesirable. The sound is often more "in your face" and, again, more "literal" than you would want. In my opinion, many current recordings are spoiled by this effect. For that reason, I make lavish use of room mics. Remember, when making a recording, we are creating an illusion. Use your ears and know the rules so you'll know when to ignore them..

The mastering, at the recommendation of Lou Reed during a lengthy and wonderful phone conversation about guitar tones, was by the legendary Bob Ludwig, and raised the end result to a new level for me. At one point, Bob even came downtown to my Perry Street apartment in the middle of a session uptown to hear how it sounded on my home system. That kind of dedication to one's work is what inspires me most."      [Page 134]

            

arctikdeth

Do not forget Anthrax.  Hell Awaits,  is considered the 1st great thrash album. Agree on Bathory. I will check out Dark Angel.

Happy Listening!

Also, forgot to mention, for cd’s try MArecordings.....they are among the best recorded. Just one example. On their webpage there are both stereophile and audiophiliac recommended selections...I would also highly recommend to you to try the Hana el or sl cartidges... they have Alnico magnets and sound absolutely wonderful with most anything at reasonably sane prices. 

Avoid most all records from late 70’s and into 80’s and 90’s. Unfortunately the quality started going down significantly, especially 80 and 90’s etc...as cd’s were the main focus. Plus they began making the records much thinner and started using the scrap vinyl remnants and recycled them into the new pressings. The quality or SQ went down from there. Most of the records pressed today $uck as well....unless you grab a decent mofi or something from maybe acoustic sounds or the like. Buy used, quality, well taken care of records from the 50, 60 and early 70’s, preferably 1st pressings, and you will find that the quality of sound is much better, and the engineers actually knew what they were doing and enjoyed doing it! Today, most records are engineered and pressed with little care...

Pgaulked, it sounds like you are on the right track and some research is required prior to making any album or CD purchases anymore. Years ago you simply bought what was in the racks at the record store. With Layla alone there are an incredible number of reissues to wade through. I’d rather not have to deal with that, but there it is and it can’t be ignored. Maybe geoffkait’s recommended DSD reissue of "Let It Bleed" would have provided a better Jagger vocal track on Gimme Shelter.

Funny you mentioned getting some Bach. I don’t have a ton of Classical recordings, maybe a dozen or so, but am developing an interest. I’ve
been similarly thinking recently that Bach may a good place to start. I remember enjoying some of his works from a course taken in college back in the seventies. Let us know how the QPR reissues turn out and if they’re good as you anticipated I’ll give one a try too.

I’m off the used vinyl too. It’s too expensive, judging from a used record show recently attended, and too often used records look in good condition, but are not. I’ve thought about building an ultrasonic record cleaner to see if that’s the issue, but right now am going with CD’s and trying some pricier SACDs for occasional splurges. Thanks for your interesting reply.

Mike

I totally sympathize with the OP.  Yes, listening to some of my LPs I bought way back in High School and beyond just don't sound very good.  So many variables in these pressings.  Was the master used? What pressing Plant?  reissue based on what source material? And So on.

Anymore, I focus on the reissue itself and what it brings to the release. So much of it is what company is doing the repressing, were the master analog tapes used for the pressing, and what vinyl is being used at what speed.  Just takes a little reading to figure out if it was done right.  I tend to purchase some reissues simply for the sound quality. Like the QRPs release of the Dusty Springfield's Dusty in Memphis. Or Hugh Masakela's Hope. Or Shelby Lynne and Diana Krall.  These pressing are excellent and make quality HiFi systems shine.

I just over indulged on the QPRs reissue on 6LPs of the Bach solo Cello Concertos.  Now I enjoy classical, but not excessively.  I read about it and I know these LPs are going to sound superb and put me in the front row of symphony hall when I listen to it.  It will provide immense pleasure.

More or less, I have decided to stop purchasing used vinyl unless it is something really rare and special.  I just don't enjoy the sub par sound that many used LPs bring to my speakers.

@jafant yup, grew up with he birth of thrash, still love all of it,
maybe a thicker sound of so,e of those older records might not be good?
 I love the early stuff, sodom. Dark Angel, nuclear assault, and the other 1000’s thrash bands from 83-90. 

\,,/

Dark Angel, darkness descends is one of my top albums ever released, it’s just amazing, as is hell awaits, first 3 Bathory albums,
heck, I can list 3000 bands.

 I’m a diehard metalhead!
i bleed metal

Tomcy6, actually that is very interesting and I’ll do just that. I enjoy reading about things like that by people who know what they’re talking about. Over the past year or two I’ve stumbled across some sites and Youtube videos where people like Michael Fremer and others have talked about different pressings, reissues and the like. I filed away some of that information, and now see what they were talking about and can put some of that information to use.

I went out and bought three of Fremer’s recommendations on the hundred best recorded album reissues recently, "Duke Ellington Masterpieces", the "Columbia Sound of Jazz" reissue and some Art Blakey CD’s. All of them were well worth every penny. I don’t like to get nutty about it, and bought a cheaper boxed set of Art Blakey than the one recommended, but the recordings were all terrific. So it’s really fun and useful to read up on things like that from those in the know, even if you don’t go crazy with it. Appreciate your feedback,

Mike

Mike, Do searches for stuff like "best sounding" "worst sounding" in addition to specific titles over on the Hoffman site.

It’s sometimes funny how fanatical some people over there are about the sound quality of various releases. I mean, they can list every flaw on a given release. I know that’s not what you’re interested in, but it can be entertaining and educational.

Tomcy6, thanks for the heads up on the Steve Hoffman Forums being a good source for discussions of different album releases. When doing a search on "Layla" that was one of a numberof sites that popped up. Next time around I’ll follow your advice and go there directly and search on their site. Thanks.

Slaw, I’ll look for your notes on that thread. Thanks for the invite.

Geoffkait, that Dynamic Range Database looks like a good source of information. I’ll have to go back and figure out how he’s coded that information for each album. It wasn’t obvious at first glance but didn’t look complicated.. He’s probably got that information on another page on his site somewhere. Thanks for the referral. I’ll be sure to check it out more thoroughly.

Ozzy, onhwy61, and noromance, I must have given you the wrong impression. I’ve maybe 1,500 recordings, most of which are fine so far. I have come across the two unacceptably poor recordings mentioned above, and a Joni Mitchell German CD remastering that was mediocre.

There are many more thousands of CD’s and records I would like to get in various genres. If I was a millionaire I’d spring for all audiophile releases, but that’s not the case. I have no intention of buying any audiophile recordings, except when absolutely necessary to make an indispensable album listenable. Audiophile recordings are for the most part quite expensive and inhibit purchasing in the quantities and prices preferred. I won’t even buy new vinyl as it’s exorbitantly priced.

What I would like to do is avoid getting any more unacceptably poor recordings, and to upgrade any other indispensable recordings yet to be uncovered in my current collection. And only those that are "must haves" as bad as the original "Layla" and "Let It Bleed" pressings in my possession. I need to find better ways to winnow out poor recordings before making purchases and finding out the hard way. So, if you have any suggestions along those lines or could mention albums I should avoid that would be appreciated.

CD318, thanks for the suggestion on the Sex Pistols. I’ll give the old "Never Mind the Bollocks" a spin today to check it out. And I’ll listen to my old Kinks and Hollies vinyl record albums too since you mentioned them. My sister kept our old Hemasn Hermits album when I left for college in 1970. Since you asked, I think I like remasters that are true to the originals, but more revealing and with less background noise or tape hiss when possible.

Jond, I’m familiar with the RVG remasters and we both like them. I’ll look up the K2 and MPS reissues. I’m unfamiliar with them, and will try some out. Thank you much for that recommendation. Would you mind naming one or two of those K2’s and MPS’ reissues you like to try out. Thanks.

Tablejockey, it could be my original London pressing of "Let It Bleed " was simply worn out. I bought it when it came out, and played it every day on my folks suitcase style "stereo" then, and lots after that over the years as my favorite record.

I got Layla too when it came out, but hadn’t played that nearly as much for it to be similarly worn out. I put it on the other night after watching Ron Wood interview Patti Boyd (Harrison), on TV. It sounded so bad I honestly I was scared I’d broken the stylus on the Ortofon 2M Black cartridge. Now that is bad. The band and the producer Tom Dowd, must have all been loaded when that all-time classic was recorded.

Thank you for the Ella Fitzgerald recommends and the Art Blakey Moanin’ one too. I just got a five CD Blue Note reissue set of his a few weeks back, but still do’t have the classic Moanin" album. I’ll look for a mono copy as you recommend.. I’ll check out the Julie London. you mention on Youtube if possible. I’ve heard of her but am unfamiliar with her work. Thanks for your recommendations.

If anyone else has any advice on which recordings to avoid or those that are preferable in the categories mentioned above I’m all ears. Thank you for all your replies.

Mike

I like reading threads like this- particular albums are mentioned, which I haven't played in awhile.

I pulled out the Sex Pistols-NMTB(1978 period press) while eating breakfast, before hopping on my bicycle for a spin.


That album sounds great. Plenty of  guitar, bass and drums. Not in an "audiophile" way-but perfect for the type of music it is. It wouldn't be the same if it were "perfect"


It 's ROCK AND ROLL, for heavens  sake!!

I’m an original, period press buyer.Some of those titles listed, I hear the opposite. This of course is my subjective opinion.

Eric Clapton:Layla-yes, that recording even on record isn’t the greatest, but as long as you have a quiet press, the music makes up for sonics.
Stones:LIB- my domestic London stereo press sound fantastic. Punchy and dynamic. I’d like to find the Brit mono press. Tough find.
Ella- I have several mono presses that I take to shows to hear the latest uber setups. Very nice. "Let No Man Write My Epitaph" "Clap Hand Here Comes Charlie" are two examples.
Art Blackey: Moanin - I have the period mono and an 80’s stereo reissue. Both great. The 1959 mono sounds more convincing.

The original press "stamper" copy is a debatable subject, like digital vs analog. I stay away from reissues.

Have you heard a period 1955 mono press of Julie London’s "Julie is her name? You don’t even need a mono car setup to hear the amazing sonics of that recording. The track "Laura" is hypnotic in a decent setup.

+1 @Ozzy

Agree with Ozzy62.  Something is wrong with you system if you think many recordings are unlistenable. 

In terms of jazz some of the best re-issues I've found are the K2 and RVG re-masterings. I also find the sound quality of MPS recordings to be outstanding. Also since the OP mentioned Let it Bleed, the Stones just released a 50th Anniversary edition that sounds great.

Some great advice posted so far. 

I would argue that the digital Sex Pistols back catalogue leaves a lot to be desired - especially The Great  Rock 'N' Roll Swindle. (Best comp might be Kiss This).

In fact a lot of music cut for vinyl often never made it into great digital form eg Kinks, Hollies, Herman's Hermits and though it pains me to say it - even the Beatles. Overuse of digital compression is a near constant bugbear.

Of course there are always differences in opinion as to what is the best.

Should it be an accurate (recording blemishes and all) representation of the original vinyl release? Preferably one made from the best source tapes available.

Or should it be a transcription of what someone now thinks the original artist may have wanted eg mono into stereo? Or even what some executive thinks might currently sell.

Or would you prefer a Giles Martin type of remix which is something different altogether?

The OP is one of those audiophiles that listen to the sound of their system rather than the music. Sure, we wish all recordings were top notch and also would like there to be no stinkers in our collections. Sadly, that will never be so. A good system will certainly tell you the difference between the two, but at the same time it won’t render half your collection unlistenable. If it does, you have chosen poorly.

So accept the good with the not so good. I can listen to less than stellar examples of music that I like and enjoy them for what they are. Don’t be one of those guys with a 50k stereo and 50 “audiophile” recordings.

Oz

For Stones CDs the 2002 ABKCO DSD releases are wonderful and can be gobbled up on eBay readily. A good tool to screen out those wretched overly compressed CDs is the UNOFFICIAL Dynamic Range Database.

The first 4 Overkill CDs need a huge SQ overhaul!
  Especially “taking over”:such a great album, yet the thin 80’s production, while amazing, as I love the 80’s thrash, a small remaster of so,e early albums would do wonders to the first 4 albums.  

Well I try to make note of SQ on the lps I listen to/post about,  on "What's on Your tt Tonight" thread. Be glad to have you there.

The best place to read about the quality of different releases of albums that I know of is the Steve Hoffman Music Forums.  You'll have to search around to find the right threads and the conclusions will not always be unanimous, but that's where people like to discuss sound quality.