Do classical CDs made from early analog tapes sound better on your system than new CDs?


I find that classical CDs produced from analog recordings originally made in the late 50’s and early 60’s really make my system sing, and, by far, give me the best sound staging over most modern recordings.  This is especially true in those produced in the pre-Dolby era.  The overtones are just there in abundance and the space is endless and real.
 I’m wondering if others have that experience.
128x128rvpiano
Al,
If I can find the Chesky Jascha Horenstein I’ll buy it, thanks. I really like the classical recordings without the multi miking. Two or three good microphones was the better method IMHO.
Charles

The Cheskys Al mentions are indeed great recordings and very well-made CDs.  I think that while many of the analog recordings have been well-transferred to CD, many were not, particularly early on when the major labels started reissuing their old recordings in a rush to sell CDs of their old catalogs without taking much care in what they were doing (like using original masters, paying closer attention to the analog to digital conversion, etc.).  Specialist companies like Chesky and Classic Records took the plunge on doing quality reissues of excellent recordings, and eventually major labels like RCA and, especially, Mercury, started to reissue their old catalogs with quality in mind.

I do find that many current all-digital classical recordings can be excellent as well, as digital recording has come a long way.  However, I do think that certain instruments, solo piano, in particular, sound better on recordings that were originally analog recordings--to my ears the overtones and decay are better preserved, as the OP notes. 

Just my two cents.


I don’t share that experience - for me the picture is far too mixed for that. There were great recordings in the old days, but there are also great modern recordings. The problem with old recordings is the limitations of the technology (not enough headroom so a need for manual compression, higher distortion levels, tape saturation etc). The problem with modern recordings (though less so in the classical genre) are intentionally limited dynamic range (the loudness wars), excessive manipulation of the original sound in the mastering stage, and as Shadorne observes, lower budgets for classical recordings. There are quite few Youtube videos that demonstrate all this (both the limitations of old recording technologies and the evils of the modern mastering). Seeing a graph from an audio spectrum analyzer can be a sad experience.
My listening tells me that in fact the ""old technology"" was actually very good quality, I just have too many excellent sounding recordings to say otherwise. Here’s a handful of jazz labels from the 1950s thru 1960s that consistently sound terrific on CDs.
Columbia
Riverside
Prestige
Contemporary
EmArcy
Blue Note
Atlantic
There are others. The tape recorders and microphones utilized captured the numerous jazz musicians of that time period splendidly!
Charles

I don't want to freak anybody out but another variable is absolute polarity, for which there is no (repeat no) standard in the industry. CDs that are in reverse polarity often sound bland, unfocused and bass shy. Ironically, many audiophile recordings and sometimes even the entire catelogues of premier labels, according to the Polarity List compiled by the Polarity Pundit, are in reverse polarity. The Polarity Pundit concludes that 92% of all CDs are reverse polarity. Freak out! 😳