2. analog
  3. 1183295043

Does digital mastering/remastering "ruin" LP's?

I'm fairly new to the audio world, and looking at getting into vinyl. I've read, of course, of the benefits that analogue proponents cite, i.e. a more organic and natural sound, and about some of the downsides of CD's, i.e. a harsh or metallic presentation (at least for early digital). I know that companies like Telarc started recording in digital in the late 70's, and then did some sort of D/A conversion to press their LP's. I would imagine other labels did so through the mid-80's. I've noticed some 80's DG LP's that proclaim on the label that the recording was "digitally remastered".

So my question is this. If digitizing music introduces undesirable artifacts, has the music on such LP's been "ruined". That is, do these records sound like early 80's CD's? Or do they still sounds like analogue recordings (if so, why?). Just curious about this, and wondering if I should stay away from such records as I start to buy used LP's. Thanks!

John
john_adams_sunnyvale

Showing 1 response by mothra

mothra
110 posts
 
the 80's would be a bad way to judge anything digital.

Your answer is that it depends. Like analog mastering you can get something that sounds great or terrible. there is no hard rule. The best way for people to judge this is if they don't know how the material was sourced and mastered.

Sometimes you get a mixed bag. The soul-jazz label reggae issues certainly seem digitally mastered and god knows where the masters are from. They are enjoyable enough though as the originals are often quite muddy and distorted. So, you trade one evil for another.
More to discover