In Reply to: Re: "most SACD titles are poorly recorded" ? Hardly posted by Ted Smith on December 26, 2006 at 12:57:12:
I look at the tape made at the original session / recording as the master tape. Regardless of format, you are using that, whether it be digital whatever, 2 track at 30 ips... Provided the CD transfer wasn't from a second or third gen master that leaves us with the the mastering to the format as well as the format itself as possible points of altered sound, not the recording itself. So my point is that if they both use the same master tape, the master in and of itself is a moot point since they would both be using the same source, good or bad. A bad recording will not be improved by higher bit rates. Case in point "Jazz at Massey Hall." It sounds crappy on whatever medium you play it on: CD, SACD, LP... The performance however, Salt Peanuts.
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Follow Ups
- Re: "most SACD titles are poorly recorded" ? Hardly - Ozzie 09:17:23 12/27/06 (6)
- Re: "most SACD titles are poorly recorded" ? Hardly - Ted Smith 15:13:49 12/27/06 (5)
- Re: "most SACD titles are poorly recorded" ? Hardly - Ozzie 11:01:03 01/02/07 (2)
- Sorry that we are talking at cross purposes... - Ted Smith 11:44:58 01/02/07 (1)
- Re: Sorry that we are talking at cross purposes... - Ozzie 10:57:16 01/03/07 (0)
- Re: "most SACD titles are poorly recorded" ? Hardly - jazz1 11:48:47 12/28/06 (1)
- Re: "most SACD titles are poorly recorded" ? Hardly - Ted Smith 12:23:43 12/28/06 (0)