deus62.com

Preferred CD-Editions:

Preferred CDs - Introduction

Some tips & tricks on finding good-sounding CDs.

Music has to sound good to your ears.
That's really it.We all get and got used to albums that sounded a certain way when we first listened to them and are perhaps baffled when we encounter a reissue that sounds (completely) different. People will always tell you that they prefer this or that (re)issue, a "super deluxe edition", a new remix, or whatnot.In the end, when all things are said and done, you really need to trust your own ears ... only. The music has to sound good to you, on your music equipment, in your room. Nothing else should count, although I often meet people online who trust other people's ears more than their own..Still, you need to be careful.When CDs became a thing, labels poured their catalogues onto the market and then, years later, started to "remaster" what they had released earlier. And then they remastered the same music again ... and again. Then SACDs, HiRes downloads, 5.1 mixes, and whatnot became a thing and the music was offered again, in newly remastered editions. And then again. There are some albums out there that have gone through so many remasters that any decent database needs several pages to show each and every edition.

Luckily, I made a bit-perfect copy of each and every CD I ever owned (between 25000 and 30000 in my lifetime), especially if I sold them at some point.THAT was a lifesaver for me as I discovered that I had often sold the better-sounding versions when I - like millions of others - fell for the "remastering craze" (especially middle/end 1990s, and the 2000s) and was hit squarely in the face by the "loudness war" that raged for all too long (and continues to ruin otherwise good music even today).

What happened in the 1990s was that music suddenly became "jacked-up" as audio levels were constantly increased. After the CD had become an established medium by the 1990s, engineers suddenly started increasing loudness beyond the maximum peak amplitude by adding more and more dynamic range compression and equalization until the music became nothing but peak amplitude. "Brickwalling" then lead to clipping and audible distortion. A subtle guitar chord suddenly became as loud as a drum hit and dynamics, so important to engaging albums, disappeared almost completely.You don't have to be an audiophile (I am not) to notice this. The music becomes harsh, bright ... and loud. Cymbals start to sound like bells, snare drums like cardboard boxes or kitchen tops and, if you are unlucky enough, a CD might even start to sound like it was put through a phaser, constantly wobbling. Definition was lost, the balance between louder and quieter passages was lost, the dynamics between different songs were lost. It all became a static drone of music.In the end, even at a low setting on your equipment, everything was already at maximum volume and listening to this sonic garbage at any volume above that was and is extremely tiring. Your ears quickly start to hurt, as well as your brain.

Many people have stated that the "loudness war" has peaked and is (or will be) over, but it is not (and won't be). The effects of it might have been tamed down a bit, but altogether, I guess for the long term, dynamic range has been corrupted by it. The average CD release today might be more dynamic again, but it is far removed from what music used to sound like on new and well-produced albums.After about three decades of this, I've simply had enough. Life's too short to waste it on sonically ruined albums. I'm retired today and have the time to go through my entire collection to search for albums that have not been (fundamentally) compromised.As I embark on this journey, I thought I'll keep track of what I'm doing and put it out there. If even one person profits from what I'm doing, I've already reached my goal.

Some Thoughts & Tips

In my opinion, which is that of an average consumer (but also avid collector), you simply cannot buy an album anymore today without researching it first.Mind you, if you have been happy with the music you have and oblivious to what I wrote above, that's absolutely fine. I know tons of people who shake their heads at what I wrote and write. They prefer to listen to their music in the car, on their small home stereo, Amazon loudspeakers, their smartphones and Bluetooth earbuds, and it all sounds great. If you belong to that group, stop reading and enjoy the music ... which is really what it is all about.If you are wondering if there are better versions of music you love out there, you might perhaps find some suggestions here and on the corresponding lists.

***

(01) "The Original:" Aside from the engineers who were present when an album was recorded, nobody really knows what the original masters of any given album sounded like. Yes, early LP releases and first CD issues gave us a hint (depending on your system), but I've encountered many releases that changed their fundamental "sound signature" each and every time they were redone by someone. Many reissues today are akin to "reimaginings" of past releases, sometimes even with totally new (sometimes fresh and interesting, but also, at times, totally botched) mixes.

(02) "The Source Material:" The source material always determines how good or how bad an album sounds. If the original mix sucked, subsequent reissues will suck as well. They can be tweaked here and there and sound a tad better, but nothing short of a complete remix (which is not the same as remastering) will be able to fix what went wrong with the original release. In an age in which master tapes were lost or simply disappeared and in an environment of "fans" who yell and scream every time a fundamental remix changes (even in the slightest) what they have come to love, there isn't much leeway for an engineer to do right by everyone.

***

(03) "Opinions:" Nobody will ever agree on a "perfect" mastering of any album. Never, ever. If you hit any forum, you'll soon realize that people have their preferred "sound signature", their preferred mastering engineers, their preferred formats, their preferred sound system, etc. Or they have an album they simply can't compare to anything else because they don't have other editions. Or they simply don't care. The only solution is to "latch onto" people who have similar tastes to your own "preferred" sound and follow their comments. That's how I found (re)masters of favorite albums that I still massively enjoy today.

***

(04) "Worth it?" Often, there is no reason to spend excessive amounts of money. As my experience has shown, those 5% of increased sound quality in comparison to another mastering that is almost as good aren't worth it (unless you have lots of money at your disposal to throw out the window). But, for your handful of favorite albums, it might well be worthwhile to dig in to get that perfect version you desire.

***

(05) "Reduced hearing capabilities:" Age, age, age. The older we get, the more reduced our hearing becomes. Yes, there might be people who are 60+ (like me) and have excellent hearing, but I have noticed the degradation (especially in regards to highs and mids) in mine. I have adapted my sound system accordingly (see below). Unfortunately, formerly legendary engineers and musicians can't hear squat anymore today and decide to boost frequencies their hearing lacks. Or, worst of all, the labels force them to submit (re)masters that are beyond bad. It's their livelihood and, of course and understandably so, most of them will comply.

***

(06) "Dynamic Range:" Dynamic range (DR) is something many members of the most diverse forums adhere to, sometimes slavishly. When the "loudness war" hit everyone, DR became a measurement of choice for many. Do remember though, although in the majority of cases I have encountered it was the #1 value to check first, that a CD with a "good" or even "excellent" DR value does not always have to be the best mastering. Still, in most cases, it does solidly hint at a more than average or even "best" mastering of a CD. As is often the case, the CDs with a high DR value are usually ones released in the 1980s and early 1990s, plus a few recent carefully remastered releases.

***

(07) "Errors:" There are many faulty (re)masterings out there. Digital glitches, volume "jumps", switched channels, incorrect indexing, mislabeled songs, incorrect track lengths, missing or added fades, misprinted covers, incorrect liner notes, recording dates and, at times, even incorrect personnel. I'm often surprised about how badly some releases have been impacted by corporate greed, carelessness and factual ignorance. It's akin to buying a novel in which a few pages are illegible, some which have been switched around and in which the climax or denouement are missing.

***

(08) "Equipment:" What you listen through determines what any given edition sounds like. If your stereo is "sounded" to jack up certain frequencies, or if it delivers a, what some people call, "smiley-faced" sound with increased highs and bass, you'll never know what an album was/is originally supposed to sound like. Again, that's not a problem at all. I know people who absolutely love their Bose systems (are those still a thing today?) or similarly fuzzed with music reproduction systems (tube equipment, massive EQ units, etc.), and they simply love and enjoy the music that way. But, I don't, although I also (!) chose a system for my hearing capabilities that influences the reproduced sound.I have a Marantz amp (PM-14S1), a Marantz SACD player (SA-14S1), a Technics turntable (SL1500C with a comparatively cheap pickup), old Dynaudio 1.8 MKII floor-standing speakers, which I still love today, and HIFIMAN ARYA Organic headphones. I have more equipment, but that's my main listening setup that is good enough for me, adds a bit of "warmth" (for lack of a better term) and sounds exactly like I want it to sound. It's perfect for my hearing capabilities today and also for mediocre or "bad" CD editions that I love and still want to listen to on a system that makes those "bearable". I consciously decided not to buy a totally revealing system because a large part (especially classic jazz recordings) of my collection would have become unlistenable.So, every equipment choice you make impacts the sound of your albums and you should really, if at all possible, audition your system of choice before you buy it, perhaps in a room which isn't perfectly treated and with albums that you know really well. Let your own ears decide.

***

(09) "Audiophile Editions:" "Audiophile" remasters are often not my cup of tea, although there are many out there that best heretofore available editions. They command premium prices and are often nothing but re-equalized versions of - in many cases - second or further removed generations of the master tapes, digitally supplied copies of said tapes or just verbally "jacked-up" reissues.Be careful before you shell out lots of money. Check and read up on those editions first! Also beware of people who tout "wider soundstages", "separation of instruments" and "more air" surrounding musicians and their instruments. "Psychoacoustics" are certainly a thing in many circles.

***

(10) "Audiophiles:" I know I'll get lots of "flak" for this statement, but in 40 years of collecting music, most "audiophiles" I met on- and offline talked out of their collective arse.They paid lots of money for some reissue that they then (have to) love and defend. They paid thousands of dollars for cables and shady equipment and then, as I experienced myself in a workshop or two, couldn't even tell the difference between gear hooked up with a metal coat hanger (!) or expensive cables. Those many people also couldn't discern the difference between a 256kbs .mp3 file and the corresponding *.wav one.And, to top it all off, if you have ever frequented "audiophile" forums, you'll see hundreds - if not thousands - of photos of Hi-Fi setups that are mind-boggingly absurd. Speakers for tens of thousands of dollars squeezed into corners with 2 inches from the wall, speakers that are toed-in although they really shouldn't be, rooms with tiled floors, 6 glass doors and absolutely no furniture or room treatment, underpowered amps that drive power-hungry speakers ... the list is endless.Most of those people have money, but absolutely lack common sense. When people started using green markers to "paint" the edges of their CDs to "alter" laser refraction and bought massive $2000 tone bases for their CD and SACD players, I stopped listening to them. I left them alone with the elephants they apparently live with.Yes, I do know a handful of people who have what is often called "golden ears", but they are very few and very far between. The rest are posers who buy music that sounds good as opposed to music that is good.Simply don't listen to your average "audiophiles" if you don't know them well.

Preferred CD-Editions:

| deus62.com | contact | impressum | datenschutz

© deus62, 2025