2. music
  3. 1200328851

Best mastered recordings

I've noticed, here recently, that often times the difference in redbook, HDCD, etc, doesn't hinge as much on the final quality product/disc but more the way the recording was recorded and mastered. Specifally, I've found that I can take the same recording (Saint-Saens Symp No3) on three different labels (EMI, Telarc and Deutsche Grammophon), yet they all sound different, to some degree. I've noticed, for this particular recording, EMI and Telarc sound similar but distinctive. Yet, compared to DG, they don't match up. In fact, when compared to a borrowed SACD version of the same recording, the DG sounds more closely to its higher resolution counterpart.

To my point. Am I the only to conclude such a thing? If not, has anyone else found which recording labels produce the better recordings in comparison to others? What were your overall findings?

Regards,

Craig
cdwallace

Showing 1 response by tomryan

tomryan
797 posts
 
You have to be more specific as regards DG recordings, such as listing the ones you like. In the 70s and 80s DG produced some of the most irritating recordings on the market - harmonically thin, etched, bass shy, dry, no soundstaging. They changed in the 90s and have actually, I've heard, remastered some performances and completely changed the sound.

On the pop side of things, Columbia did the same thing in the 60s and 70s. Their pop and jazz recordings were awful, especially compared to companies like Atlantic and Warner from same period. I remember reading Rolling Stone articles in 1970 talking about the shameful quality of Columbia's Dylan and Santana releases. In the 70s I would try to find import releases of Columbia's stuff.

For the last 8-10 years Columbia (Sony) has been releasing some excellent sounding remastered albums
More to discover