Analogue v. Digital...again (Washington Post)


This is an interesting article and it features a couple of A vs. D recordings so you can try to tell the difference. Michael Fremer had a brief remark in the "comments" section. Hopefully, this Washington Post link for non-subscribers works:

 

kacomess

Showing 1 response by relayer101

I would say that I have had pretty good luck with remasters but I have come across some when compared to an original pressing from the 60's or 70's where I thought the original copy sounded better and in some cases much better. Most of my collection is earlier pressings from the 60's and 70's of primarily rock and if the copy is relatively noise free and I am happy with the sound quality I usually will not order a remaster. I am pretty selective with the remasters I order and the record companies producing them and where they are pressed and also look to who is the remastering engineer and also who is cutting the lacquer if available. 

What I will say is that I have rarely if ever been disappointed with Analog Productions or anything pressed at QRP under different labels and I am referring to their more standard issues in the $25-$75 range and not just the premium remasters like the UHQR releases.