In Reply to: what a load of crap! posted by wazoo on February 25, 2010 at 19:22:52:
There were quite a few crimes committed back in the day in the studios.I'm not saying that there aren't today, either.
But technology has improved. Some, not all but a significant number of recent remastered stuff has been strikingly better than the originals from a technical standpoint. My experience has been that the newer digital transfers are getting to the point that the strengths now outweigh the weaknesses. As long as it's done right.
Or maybe my equipment is better or my hearing is deteriorating...
I'm thinking specifically of "Dusty in Memphis" and "Nevermind", which I heard again last night on my headphone rig (too late to engage the speakers). Just excellent. Way better than I remember. in fact.
And two more different recordings you could not easily find.
I don't know for a fact if they were actual remasters or just transfers. but either one can hold its own with "Soldier of Love", which sounds excellent by any standard, and which like the Dusty Springfield 1969 production puts the vocals clearly in front of the band without swamping anything in the subtle arrangements.
Very different music, but Sade and Dusty are both obviously pop of different flavors, both taste good, though.
Nirvana is in a class by itself. Clearly rock, clearly ground breaking, totally unique for its time and place.
So my feeling is it isn't just technology, a good recording is supported by that but it doesn't stand on its own because of it. It needs a lot of elements working together to come together as a bona fide work of art.
Finding the jewels is half the fun.
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Follow Ups
- Quite correct, but... - esande 02/25/1021:30:31 02/25/10 (4)
- an example makes a point - wazoo 05:12:18 02/26/10 (3)
- Vas - esande 20:03:15 02/26/10 (2)
- I never mind when the discussion turns to music - wazoo 07:20:59 02/27/10 (0)
- RE: Reggae ... - andyr 00:19:35 02/27/10 (0)