Question on FR 66s

Lewm, This thread is representative of life.
You never know what is around the corner.

Nandric, In order to repeat oneself, it is absolutely necessary to write or say the same thing twice. Otherwise, one is not repeating oneself. We have no choice. Three times is inexcusable, I agree.

Lewn, that's exactly what I am thinking as well.
There was a thread awhile ago I think on audio asylum regarding professional gear and recording studio. Supposedly someone talked to Bob Ludwig (I think it was him or may be another major recording engineer) who said that he had compared live mike feed, DSD recording and analogue tape recording from the same mike feed and found that DSD is the closest to live mike feed but analogue tape sounded better. However, he did not say which sounded closest to the actual event nor did he say how it was better.

I found some digital recording that was then made into LPs sounded slightly different from its CD counter part but did not add anything much more and I generally prefer CD just for the ease of use. Some digital recordings such as DG Zimermann's Chopin ballades sounded quite dreadful on CD but rather good on LP. The more recent SFO Mahler Cycle with Michael Tilson Thomas and Paavo Jarvi Beethoven symphonies cycle were recorded in DSD but I found the LPs more enjoyable eventhough the SACDs are already very good. I think Jarvi's recording was remastered again specially for LP so it is not exactly the same as SACD but not sure about SFO Mahler's one.

Or express a point on a 'reference', rather than keep talking about the virtue of a component several times.

Apologies for the double post.