Here's a link from a 2012 Analog Planet posting where Michael Fremer discusses the various labels and what he could glean from them. http://www.analogplanet.com/content/reissue-labels-avoid-and-some-best-proceed-caution#lChAouWFUdChT... |
jeroot, regardless of record label, there are some glitches for sure even among prestige and high quality vintage labels. Even classic records label re-issues are really weak compared to original issues mostly. Same with Simply Vinyl. The original release is a true reference, the rest is just hit or miss indeed as general rule of thumb. So what really matters what kind of source they use even IF they tell? Does it make life easier if you know or not? Most of current vinyl pressing companies use digital files. |
czarivey- I certainly cannot disagree with any of your points. No, it doesn't make life easier. I'm just trying to minimize the disappointment I've experienced with some, but by no means all, new issues by trying to understand it with some empiricism. Is it DDA? Is it lack of quality remastering for the transfer to the vinyl space? I don't know for certain, but that theory at times seems to cover some data points. I know to "never say never", or "never say always"; and that there's no "end all do all". The good news? It hasn't kept me from expanding a music collection that is already probably too large. |
I heard a couple of their pressings and didn't like them at all. Purchased the "When Harry Met Sally" Soundtrack Harry Connick LP and hated it. Definitely was a digital sound and copy. I then bought an original pressing from 1989 on discogs and could instantly tell the difference. Can't comment on a lot of their pressings, but they don't seem to care about getting original master tapes which always concerns me with it not being an "analog" sound. |
