zipper said:
What I'm refering to is soundstage,instrument definition,clarity,etc. Volume doesn't change what ain't there. Perhaps the original mixing is the culprit.
When I close my eyes & listen I can almost sense where the musicians are on some tracks (Laura Branigan,Alice in Chains "Jar of flies" are some examples). I don't get that from REO. I'm not saying the recording is a disaster,I'm just saying it's consistently undefining. Maybe thats REO's style,I don't know & it's really not the point. The point is now that I've got some decent blowers I can hear stuff I've never heard before.
Trust me,REO is one of my favorite bands,so it's not like I wanted to just make this up.
I didn't intend to imply that you were making things up. The difference you heard could very well be attributed to the mix and your ears are different than others. The remaster of Hi Infelidty sounds good to me and does exhibit the soundstage, clarity, etc you mention and is definitely better than the same songs on The Hits.
From this statement: "but to learn that REO Speedwagons' "The Hits" is a poor recording was indeed a shock" I inferred that you *used* to think it was ok, but upon playing it on your Axioms, you now think it is a poor recording. Usually when people say the better speakers reveal things 'they never heard before' they mean for the better, whereas in your case you believe they revealed a poor quality recording.
It sounds like you actually prefer the super compressed, overly loud mastering that is prevalent today and there is nothing wrong with that. I prefer the opposite - and "loudness" (of the mix) definitely does affect what you perceive. IMO, Alice in Chains is a perfect example of a miserable recording: super compressed, sibilant, and with no dynamic range at all - to me it sounds poor on good speakers, average speakers, and my computer speakers. For me, better speakers would likely reveal it is even worse than I currently think it is.