Jump to content

The_K-Man

  • Content Count

    241
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About The_K-Man

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. The_K-Man

    Relative importance of differences in stereo systems

    Then you're ok with adding thirty incongruous stories to the Empire State Building to keep it 'up with the Joneses' of Dubai, Hong Kong, and other cities with taller buildings? Because that's what remastering, in the sense of what I've experienced, has been in terms of what was done to legendary albums by Pink Floyd, Michael Jackson, and others. Enjoy your remaster collection. I'll even sell you a few remaining ones for a buck each - since that's all they're worth compared to the originals in my cabinet.
  2. The_K-Man

    Relative importance of differences in stereo systems

    Again, the sound of the early CD releases of things like 'THRILLER' and 'DARK SIDE OF THE MOON', is more faithful, I feel, to the sound of those albums as released on vinyl, and the artistic intent in general. It might not be high fidelity sound, but it is more faithful to the intended sound of the release. IE: If an early CD release of a certain early 1970s album happened to contain the same background hiss as the original release on vinyl or 8-track, then I'd still rather have that CD than a 'remaster' that has the hiss removed, and in the same token much of the original dynamic range squashed out in the name of loudness. Am I clear now?
  3. The_K-Man

    Relative importance of differences in stereo systems

    Are you serious? Context! Of course: proximity to sound characteristics of original release.
  4. The_K-Man

    Relative importance of differences in stereo systems

    Proximity to the sound of the original release takes precedence over overall SQ(sound quality) of an album or single for me. That's why I seek out and maintain a collection of earlier, original CD releases.
  5. The_K-Man

    Lies about vinyl vs digital

    All of the above text are mostly accurate of what went on in the early CD era. It is true, that during CD's earliest years(1980-1984) LP master tapes were sourced for many - not all of them. And there is nothing really wrong with that, as long as it is understood that modifications were made to the low end content - 50Hz rolloff and below 100Hz pan to mono/center. The early remastering era also did some processing - which I disagree with as much as I do with the more eggregious loudness-era remastering. I would rather have CDs of vinyl master transfers than over-processed, loudified CRAP, to be honest. As for HD tracks and High res, all one has to do is read this: https://www.audiostream.com/content/high-resolution-downloads-nevermind to understand why they will never occupy my digital collection!
  6. The_K-Man

    Lies about vinyl vs digital

    I wholly disagree.
  7. The_K-Man

    Lies about vinyl vs digital

    After careful reading and review of the data and visual represenations in the article you attached, I feel that the biggest differentiator between all of those versions is the mastering, especially as shown in the waveforms of the original vs remastered CDs of the soundtrack of "CHARIOTS OF FIRE". The quality of A/D conversion on the earlier CDs might have some role in the "harshness" some listeners claimed, but beyond that, the actual formats themselves contributed infinitesimally to any differences encountered.
  8. The_K-Man

    Lies about vinyl vs digital

    I never read it that way, so, no harm! When you mentioned HF emphasis, my first thought was: Minor error in application of RIAA emphasis during cutting of the vinyl master, or, during de-emph at the phono preamp stage during playback.
  9. The_K-Man

    Lies about vinyl vs digital

    I'll take ORIGeq or EarlyVinyl - or an early release on CD for that matter, over the others since they are *closest we can get* to the intended sound at the time that single or album was released. Anything else - a 'remaster', or the dogs breakfast represented in my before/after avatar, might sound better to some, but it is far far removed from original compared to the ones I mentioned. It is that originality I aim for, and what led me to raid the Goodwills, Savers, and Salvation Army stores, and browsing sites like Discogs, for original CDs to replace the ones labeled 'Digitally Remastered!!' in my collection.
  10. The_K-Man

    Relative importance of differences in stereo systems

    That's why 'God made equalizers!!' 🤣 Seriously, you want your recording, production, and playback equipment to be as flat as is possible, over as wide a bandwidth as possible. I would take 50Hz-16kHz +-2db over 10Hz-22kHz +-6dB any day. See what I mean? Then, for playback reproduction, you can EQ to any established standard you want, or to correct a room, or to personal preference. The reason flat does "not sound good" to many folks is because of how we hear. On a flat tuned system - I would consider 20Hz to 20kHz, maximum +-2dB - our hearing would not be as sensitive at 50 or even 500Hz, or on top at 10 or 15kHz, as it would be between 2-4kHz. It's the way we're made! And a decent EQ(at least five bands), can help compensate for that, if one knows which frequencies have the most impact when adjusting. As to your previous inquiry regarding FR/distance, yes, the FR can, and usually will, change with distance, or from side to side between, IE two stereo speakers.
  11. The_K-Man

    Lies about vinyl vs digital

    You're not the first individual on here to mention such a system. Can you describe this system "developed explicitly for Redbook"? I'll describe mine: A Sony 2001 model year CD carousel, and a JVC model year 1995 80W/Ch receiver. Sounds pretty adequate for Redbook to me!
  12. The_K-Man

    Lies about vinyl vs digital

    I'm not misreading you at all. But you seem to insist a well - or even adequately - mastered vinyl record has no chance of sounding better than a loudness war or otherwise compromised master on CD. "No LP can be tried because they have no chance at all..." Your exact words! "War" - 'Low Rider' War? 'Why Can't We Be Friends' War? I'm quite familiar with them. I was young, but definitely around when War was in the charts.
  13. The_K-Man

    Lies about vinyl vs digital

    I don't want to use the word 'delusional' to describe this statement, but at this point I know of no alternative. I could think of, and probably own, at least a dozen pop albums from the '70s or '80s on vinyl that are downright pleasant to listen to, compared to pop releases on CD from the late-'90s or later, because of loudness war era mixing and mastering processes executed during production of the latter releases. Not to mention more enjoyabale to engage with, not just listen to, than so-called remasters, on CD, of those '70s pop albums. Peter: Do some reaearch on how a song or album is made, from concept to writing to performing to recording, mixing, and mastering, etc. An artist or band doesn't just go into a booth or room on the beach boardwalk, drop some coins into a slot, and perform their song and have it cut directly to a record or CD and release it in stores. Seriously.
  14. The_K-Man

    Lies about vinyl vs digital

    But you have to agree that mastering does make the *biggest* difference between one issue of an album and another reissue.
  15. The_K-Man

    Lies about vinyl vs digital

    More natural than a low-bitrate mp3, for sure! But Red Book, and higher bit depth and sampling rates will kick analog's a$$.
×