As far as pop recordings go, one thing to remember is profitability of the record companies. Up until the early 70's, record companies signed artists to recording contracts where the artists had almost no control over payments, i.e. they were at the mercy of the record companies. Read about how many artists either faded from view or even became depressed to the point of suicide (witness Badfinger). In the early 70's artists became adept at gaining more control over record contracts, and as a result, began taking more and more of the profit. This left record companies looking for new ways to cut costs to recapture profits. One area in which record companies almost completely controlled costs was in recording, mastering, and pressing records. Since it appeared few people cared about how records sounded, there you have it. The recording quality suffered as record companies cut their costs and this is easily heard in the abysmal sonics in 70's and later pop recordings. This was exacerbated by the assembly nature of pop recordings allowed by multitracking technology. Yes, there are terrible 60s' pop recordings as in all decades, but it has been downhill since.
Recording quality by decade
As I've been listening to my records, a pattern seemed to emerge that prompted this question - did the recording technology advance significantly between the previous decades and the mid/late '70s? Most of the classic rock records I own pressed in the '60s sound like crap compared to the classic rock records recorded in the mid to late '70s.
My Cream, Doors, Led Zeppelin, Beatles, and Jimi Hendrix records, just to mention the biggest acts, sound awful compared to Pink Floyd, Foreigner, Supertramp, Kate Bush, Rickie Lee Jones, or Fleetwood Mac records I have that were released in the '70s (and '80s). There are arguably a few exceptions, such as good pressings of some of the Led Zeppelin records, but on average any record recorded and pressed in the '60s sounds just bad compared to most records from the '70s and '80s. All of the Cream records I have are just painful to listen to - muddled, veiled, flat, and essentially garage quality.
I understand I'm making a big generalization, but seriously, I can't think of one record from the '60s that sounds really good. This puzzles me as there is a plethora of superbly recorded jazz records from not only the '60s, but also the '50s. Has anyone else noticed this?
My Cream, Doors, Led Zeppelin, Beatles, and Jimi Hendrix records, just to mention the biggest acts, sound awful compared to Pink Floyd, Foreigner, Supertramp, Kate Bush, Rickie Lee Jones, or Fleetwood Mac records I have that were released in the '70s (and '80s). There are arguably a few exceptions, such as good pressings of some of the Led Zeppelin records, but on average any record recorded and pressed in the '60s sounds just bad compared to most records from the '70s and '80s. All of the Cream records I have are just painful to listen to - muddled, veiled, flat, and essentially garage quality.
I understand I'm making a big generalization, but seriously, I can't think of one record from the '60s that sounds really good. This puzzles me as there is a plethora of superbly recorded jazz records from not only the '60s, but also the '50s. Has anyone else noticed this?