Mapman, I would suggest that the re-release of the Beatles material doesn't "fly in the face of the mantra often heard that all newer loudness wars CDs are bad recordings...", it further confirms it. Remember that even though these re-issues may have come from earlier re-releases, all those earlier versions were done without digital clipping so prevalent today. The newer versions are just able to use the greater dynamic range of newer technologies, just as todays well recorded classical recordings can. I don't think anyone is saying that all new CDs are bad, just way too many of them are bad.
Why do the new 2009 Beatles CDs sound so good?
It seems a small (maybe big) miracle what they've done with the Beatles 9/9/09 cd box. These were always piercing and grainy (since 1987), and now they are just about the best CDs I have (and this includes SACDs). If it can be done here, it seems like this could be done with other popular music discs.
It seems that the problems in digital are not in the medium itself, but the way the recordings are made.
Companies like DCC and MFSL tried to improve things, but the Beatles box seems to surpass these by far.
A lot of people are quick to criticize digital vs. vinyl, but, to my ears, the Beatles now sound better than vinyl ever did. Anyway, if anyone could shed light on how this was accomplished, I'd be curious.
It seems that the problems in digital are not in the medium itself, but the way the recordings are made.
Companies like DCC and MFSL tried to improve things, but the Beatles box seems to surpass these by far.
A lot of people are quick to criticize digital vs. vinyl, but, to my ears, the Beatles now sound better than vinyl ever did. Anyway, if anyone could shed light on how this was accomplished, I'd be curious.