Vintage vinyl or new reissues?

Interesting thread. As audiophiles the sound quality as opposed to performance quality is often a main concern and sometimes our primary concern. As I see it, the reissue market is a very healthy and positive development in that it frees us from the clutches of the mercenary collectors and E-bay pirates who prey on those individuals who beleive that anything new cannot be good and that old and original (and therefore exclusive) is the way to go.
Sometimes these mouldy figs are correct and sometimes they are not. I for one do a little research and try to CHOOSE WISELY.

I really enjoy my repressing of Hendrix Axis Bold as Love (mono) pressed by Classic at RTI. Sounds positevely psychedelic and it cost me 30 bucks. Of couse I could pay 500 or more for a suspect original. The Dylan mono on Sundazed are generally excellent with the possible exception of Blond on Blond which seems to have had some pressing issues (noisy vinyl). Of course we could look around for some early originals ($$$) or mediocre mid eighties flexi discs that sound like bad cassette recordings !!

The OJC jazz re-issues were without a doubt the bargain of the decade but now seem to be disappearing as Concord Music take control of the Fantasy / Riverside catalog.

What does it all mean? Simple. Choose wisely. And if possible try and borrow a friends shiny new re-issue to see if it makes the sonic grade. Oh yeah, one last thing. For those of you hoarding and saving those limited edition re-releases as a possible investment? Sad, very very sad........

*This thread is not about price but about which, if executed properly, will deliver the best SONIC results.*

Welcome back Verigo. Sure hope you have received an answer to your question. You have quoted my statement regarding sound quality as opposed to performance quality and that sound quality is *sometimes our primary concern*. My comment should not be taken out of context since it may be misconstrued that I am only concerned with sound quality. My comment reflect the general consensus that most of us prefer the best sounding pressing of a particular artists performance and that repressings can if chosen wisely, give us that choice. Of course I would choose to listen to Bob Dylan on a lesser system rather than Britney Spears on a higher end stereo system. In fact if given the choice I would see Bob Dylan live (which I did last week).

My point is that lets compare Bob to Bob. Not Britney to Bob. Or transistor radios to turntables. Music lover first, audiophile equipment hound second.

The quote above is from your original post that started this thread.

Emenel

You make a very good point. The remastering of an original masterpiece can often lead to creative interpretation regarding the mastering and can change the "sonic character" of a great performance. I don't want to open up another can of worms but George Martin's remastering of the new Beatles album "Love" is an example of creative interpration taken to the limit. I am not talking about the overdubbing and fade ins and outs but the actual mastering of the actual songs which sound different from the originals (which of couse he mastered in the first place.)

This is a risk that must be weighed when making a purchasing decision. I try to stick with known commodities such as Steve Hoffman who has been responsible for a large number of recent (great) repressings or solid labels such as Pure Pleasure and Speakers Corner. Some folks may argue that any deviation from the original is blasphemy. I can't argue against that logic. I am however, grateful to at least have the choice between purchasing a repressing or waiting for a pristine original to come my way.