High quality sound albums

3db

3db

Audioholic Slumlord
Maybe my love for this album is biasing my view but here it goes anyway :eek:

The Knack "Get The Knack" on vinyl. This album was very well produced with a clean sound that runs thru the entire bandwidth from bass to vocals, to highs.
 
STRONGBADF1

STRONGBADF1

Audioholic Spartan
Now we need to talk about how to shorten it to say 50. The goal would be that each of the 50 will be of truly high quality, high enough to take advantage of the best 2 channel home systems.
Hey PENG, Did you make any headway on really narrowing this list down? ...or did you run out of money buying all 115?

I didn't see Boston's self titled first realease on the list. Just got done Jammin' it on CD ( bar code #07464341882) and boy does it sound good for a rock record! (any of us who grew up in the 70's should remember Bostons reputation for sound quality)
 
P

PENG

Audioholic Slumlord
Hey PENG, Did you make any headway on really narrowing this list down? ...or did you run out of money buying all 115?

I didn't see Boston's self titled first realease on the list. Just got done Jammin' it on CD ( bar code #07464341882) and boy does it sound good for a rock record! (any of us who grew up in the 70's should remember Bostons reputation for sound quality)
I have not given it time to figure out how to do it but it will get done this year.:D I went to a small (the hall) live jazz concert a couple of days ago, bought their CD during break, played it the next day to compare. I was able to enjoy it equally when played in the HT system and slightly more in the 2 channel system mostly due to the slightly more transparent speakers. I will definitely add this CD to our list of 115. It is just another proof, (to me anyway) that the recording/mastering process is most important, not the format.

They did use amplification in that live event, I asked why and was told it's to balance things out so you could hear he piano and the guitars etc. May be that's the main reason why I actually could enjoy the CD a little more than I did in the "live" environment. Both went though some electronic processing, but one in a more controlled environment.
 
96cobra10101

96cobra10101

Senior Audioholic
I didn't see Fleetwood Mac's "Rumors" on your list. It one of my favorites. Also I have both CD and sacs of Dark Side of the Moon, the sacd has 5.1 which is a lot of fun to listen to.
 
M

MidnightSensi2

Audioholic Chief
One of my favorite sounding albums is Third Eye Blinds Self-Titled album on CD. It was a rare early 90's recording the defied the concept of the loudness wars.

You can read all about the making of the album from the recording engineer himself below.

Third Eye Blind's First Album Mr. Eric Valentine - Gearslutz.com

Q & A with Eric Valentine - Gearslutz.com
I go on Gearslutz sometimes. Not registered.. but, kept turning up in Google searches. The studio/recording folks and the hifi folks have a lot of the same questions. Lots of nice real world info on there.

Also be interesting to have a thread where we ask Gearslutz 'recorders/producers' questions about their process and they ask us about Audioholic 'consumption.' Kinda, like see where we meet, if that makes sense?
 
M

MidnightSensi2

Audioholic Chief
I switched amp, checked all connections still the same whether I use the Denon, Sony or Oppo 95. I really think she got too close to the mike. Given her powerful voice I wish she would not have done that, for me anyway.:D

I also replayed the CD in my 2 channel analog system. Even with the more revealing Focal, it seemed a little, just a little bit less grating. If you could not hear what I hear, then I guess I am just super sensitive to her top end frequencies (I am guessing 5 to 6K including the audible harmonics/source of distortions, but ignoring her fundamentals). The interesting is, I do not have similar issue with any of my other albums.

Thanks anyway for taking the time, I still thoroughly enjoy her singing and I will force myself to focus only on her musicality, instead of the ever so slightly scratchy top end.
I loaded it into Adobe Audition, and the signal isn't clipped. It has strong peaks in the upper frequencies. A lot of people find the 4k area kinda unsavory, which is right around where this lies. Actually, lots of nightclubs are setup/EQ'd to dip a bit around that region and it seems to really allow the volume to go up more without causing pain (most run right on that threshold). A lot of 'pop electronic dance music' has intentional clipping (blah) now that the larger labels are starting to get involved as it gains popularity...

So, your ears are fine hehe, it's common for that range to be a bit sensitive for people.
 
M

MidnightSensi2

Audioholic Chief
Sorry to be peace-meal replying to these...but lots of interesting stuff in this thread.

I don't understand vinyl at all. I have some friends that think they "get to the soul of the music". Not me, I hear distortion, noise, and lack of deep bass. I have heard vinyl playback systems that sound "warmer" than I hear from digital, but that has to be a frequency response anomaly from the vinyl playback system, not a failing of digital.
A lot of people are in this trend of 'vinyl is cool because everyone else is going digital so I'll have some vinyl to be hip'

I like vinyl, but not some voodoo reason... I like it because it's a big plastic thing and it's kinda epic to toss it on the table. I like the physicality of it.

Warmer is more of the mastering if it was mastered POST digital. Like a digital recording pressed to vinyl. Those are sometimes 'warmer' because they can't push the lows and tops as much as the digital master or the needle won't stay in the grooves hehe.

As far as bass, that's one place I disagree. Technics 1200s, for example, are known for deep bass. One of the many reasons DJs loved them.

That said: Vinyl is not better than digital to me lol. I do like it, but as far as sound quality, heard the best in digital!

recordings do seem to vary more by the recording procedure than by the differences between CD and SACD process.
Can I get an AMEN?
There are some great options out there, but recordings using them to their fullest aren't all that common.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
96cobra10101

96cobra10101

Senior Audioholic
I like vinyl, but not some voodoo reason... I like it because it's a big plastic thing and it's kinda epic to toss it on the table. I like the physicality of it.
Same here. Plus I have been buying it since I was a kid when the only other option was cassette tapes, so now I have a buttload of records. It would cost way to much to replace them, and I'm not sure if I could. I have replace quite a few though that were favorites and get regular use.
 
P

PENG

Audioholic Slumlord
I loaded it into Adobe Audition, and the signal isn't clipped.
I am surprise, are you sure the resolution of the software is good enough to pick up marginally audible distortions?

It has strong peaks in the upper frequencies.
May be it does in proportional sense, but in absolute and overall sense that CD has disappointing dynamic range. If I remember right the dynamic range of that CD based on my SPL meter and/or VU meter on my Marantz power amp is around 6 dB on the best track.

So, your ears are fine hehe, it's common for that range to be a bit sensitive for people.
Thanks for letting me know my ears are fine, still, I guess.. Since you brought this up, I thought I should do a Google search to see if others had noticed something similar, and there were, such as:

Adele's vocal distortion?

Forum - Main Forums : Production - Mixing, Mastering, Gear & Techniques (Post#909666)

There are probably more if I search harder. It is odd that both her BR and CD have the same kind of vocal distortions on them. The vinyl, 19, is no better. I bought 21 recently, also in vinyl but have not listened to it yet as I am too lazy to flip those things every 15 to 20 minutes but will find time this weekend to confirm if 21, being newer, is better. I am beginning to think perhaps her voice is more prone to resulting in audible distortions if the recording process is not done perfectly.
 
Last edited:
3db

3db

Audioholic Slumlord
Sorry to be peace-meal replying to these...but lots of interesting stuff in this thread.



A lot of people are in this trend of 'vinyl is cool because everyone else is going digital so I'll have some vinyl to be hip'

I like vinyl, but not some voodoo reason... I like it because it's a big plastic thing and it's kinda epic to toss it on the table. I like the physicality of it.

Warmer is more of the mastering if it was mastered POST digital. Like a digital recording pressed to vinyl. Those are sometimes 'warmer' because they can't push the lows and tops as much as the digital master or the needle won't stay in the grooves hehe.

As far as bass, that's one place I disagree. Technics 1200s, for example, are known for deep bass. One of the many reasons DJs loved them.

That said: Vinyl is not better than digital to me lol. I do like it, but as far as sound quality, heard the best in digital!



Can I get an AMEN?
There are some great options out there, but recordings using them to their fullest aren't all that common.
I've always liked the physicallity of vinyl. There is so much more involvement in playing vinyl then CD or even worse, files on a hard drive. I to disagree whole heartedly with Irv about the new trend in vinyl, the distortion on vinyl and lack of bass in vinyl. That's all simply not true. If there is distortion on vinyl, its because the RE screwed up which is not the fault of the recording medium. I have many MANY examples where my vinyl copy matches the CD copy in depth of bass. Some people just likw to gripe about things I guess.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
P

PENG

Audioholic Slumlord
Reading some of the posts in this thread made me think of a recording so good that people complain about it:

Amazon.com: Orff: Carmina Burana: Carl Orff, Riccardo Muti, Jonathan Summers, Arleen Augér, John van Kesteren: Music

Read the reviews there and you should understand what I mean.
If I remember right, we have the one below on our list already.

Amazon.com: Orff: Carmina Burana: Håkan Hagegård, Judith Blegen, William Brown, Carl Orff, Robert Shaw, Atlanta Symphony Orchestra: Music

I am not sure which one sounds better but this (Telarc) one has the SACD version as well, for a lot more money.:D
 
Pyrrho

Pyrrho

Audioholic Ninja
Reading some of the posts in this thread made me think of a recording so good that people complain about it:

Amazon.com: Orff: Carmina Burana: Carl Orff, Riccardo Muti, Jonathan Summers, Arleen Augér, John van Kesteren: Music

Read the reviews there and you should understand what I mean.
If I remember right, we have the one below on our list already.

Amazon.com: Orff: Carmina Burana: Håkan Hagegård, Judith Blegen, William Brown, Carl Orff, Robert Shaw, Atlanta Symphony Orchestra: Music

I am not sure which one sounds better but this (Telarc) one has the SACD version as well, for a lot more money.:D

Because I have not heard that one, perhaps I should say nothing. But I did read the reviews at your link, and given the fact that no one has complained about the dynamic range, my guess is that it is not a very lively performance of the work, and consequently not as good. Also, given how incredibly good the Muti version is, and how absolutely perfect Arleen Augér is on it, I think it highly likely that the one I recommend is the one to get. Given its price, I suggest you buy it and compare for yourself. It may not be current "state of the art" in fidelity (it is an analog recording), but they did not compress all the life out of the dynamic range, and the performance gives a proper appreciation for the fact that different parts of it should be very soft while other parts should be very loud.
 
P

PENG

Audioholic Slumlord
Because I have not heard that one, perhaps I should say nothing. But I did read the reviews at your link, and given the fact that no one has complained about the dynamic range, my guess is that it is not a very lively performance of the work, and consequently not as good. Also, given how incredibly good the Muti version is, and how absolutely perfect Arleen Augér is on it, I think it highly likely that the one I recommend is the one to get. Given its price, I suggest you buy it and compare for yourself. It may not be current "state of the art" in fidelity (it is an analog recording), but they did not compress all the life out of the dynamic range, and the performance gives a proper appreciation for the fact that different parts of it should be very soft while other parts should be very loud.
I read some of those reviews about the complaints of DR, but I hope they are really about DR that I don't mind and actually prefer, as long that is the real reason. I was waiting for price drop of the Telarc one in SACD just for curiosity, knowing full well I wouldn't hear the difference. I will likely buy the Multi version (already in cart) despite the high shipping costs as it is not available from Amazon.ca. As some reviewers said, if you like this piece, you can't just ownn one version.
 
j_garcia

j_garcia

Audioholic Jedi
Please add Steven Wilson: The Raven That Refused to Sing (And Other Stories). Exceptional mastering. The Blu-ray version is likely the preference here as it includes the dtsHD MA tracks as well as 24/96 stereo and instrumental versions of all of the tracks as well.
 
Last edited:
Pyrrho

Pyrrho

Audioholic Ninja
I read some of those reviews about the complaints of DR, but I hope they are really about DR that I don't mind and actually prefer, as long that is the real reason. I was waiting for price drop of the Telarc one in SACD just for curiosity, knowing full well I wouldn't hear the difference. I will likely buy the Multi version (already in cart) despite the high shipping costs as it is not available from Amazon.ca. As some reviewers said, if you like this piece, you can't just ownn one version.

You can buy it at Amazon.ca from third party sellers:

Carmina Burana: Amazon.ca: Music

As I type this, you can pay CDN$4.42 + CDN$3.49 shipping for a new copy of it.

And if there is a problem with the seller, you can get a refund from Amazon (at least, that is how it works in the U.S.; see their policies for the Canadian website).

As for owning more than one recording, I have no need of anything more than the Muti version. I happen to also own the highly regarded Jochum version, but, in my opinion, the Muti version is better in just about every way. Overall, Jochum isn't bad, and might have been the best on record before Muti, but we are not now in the pre-Muti era, so that need not concern us. (The fact that Orff himself endorsed that version is only important for the recordings available at the time he endorsed it, not for anything that was recorded after he made the endorsement. That Orff liked it best at the time of his endorsement tells us nothing about how Orff would feel about future recordings.) The little bits that I have heard of the piece from other people have not impressed me either, so I am inclined to think that the Muti version is all one needs. And compared with Arleen Augér singing the Dulcissime (on the Muti version), pretty much everyone else who sings it sounds like a cat being tortured. Arleen Augér is the standout among a group of great musicians, all performing as well as you are likely to find anywhere. For example, in the Circa mea pectora, Jonathan Summers sings with the power and passion that is exactly right for what he is singing. According to Wikipedia:

Carl Orff, who later became a close friend, would write to people anywhere in the world planning to perform Carmina Burana saying that John van Kesteren was his favourite "Roasted Swan".


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_van_Kesteren

John van Kesteren is the tenor on the Muti recording. Really, the Muti recording is almost perfect in every possible way. I just wish they had current state of the art recording capability then, but the fidelity is still quite good, being (I think) a 1979 analog recording (released in 1980; hence, the 1980 copyright date).

When listening to the Muti version, sit in your music listening room, which must be quiet other than the sound from your audio system. The very soft portions should be very soft indeed, and the loud portions will be quite loud. Don't even think about using the disc as background music or in your car, unless you have the world's quietest car.

Having attended many classical concerts, I can tell you that at a live performance, it is not uncommon for them to play so softly that one can barely hear them, and so loud that one can barely stand it. I have no other disc that really gives that sort of impression as well the Muti Carmina Burana.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
M

MidnightSensi2

Audioholic Chief
I am surprise, are you sure the resolution of the software is good enough to pick up marginally audible distortions?
Yep. :) Cubase shows same.

May be it does in proportional sense, but in absolute and overall sense that CD has disappointing dynamic range. If I remember right the dynamic range of that CD based on my SPL meter and/or VU meter on my Marantz power amp is around 6 dB on the best track.
Even though her instruments are sometimes sparse, they are close in frequency and so processing is used to layer so it doesn't become muddy when pushing how 'forward' the mix sounds. This is what I've heard referred to as the 'energy wars' (as opposed to 'loudness wars'). Fighting for the most energized mix, if you..say..cut some of the lower harmonics of her voice, you can up the piano that would otherwise conflict/muddy the mix. This often will coincide with lower the dynamic range, but not always....

To me this sounds like it was run through processing and what your hearing is artifacting.

With the human voice, artifacting is easy to detect. With synths, its a lot harder because they are foreign sounding, so easier to hide in the mix. So, they made some judgement call that the other elements deserved more energy in the mix and, to make that work without the mix sounding muddy, vocal processing was used.

To me both her albums don't have mastering that works well for her. In one of those links, one person noted 'not hearing her breathe' ... which is a really good point, because if you've seen her live it's how she prepares to wale and it's almost like a build up. Very powerful, sadly not realized in the albums well.

But, hey, they sold pretty well. lol. ;)
 
M

MidnightSensi2

Audioholic Chief
Ah, haha, it's all explained here:
Tom Elmhirst: Recording Adele 'Rolling In The Deep'

Yeah, lotsa 'stuff' used. ;)

Rolling in the deep, the chorus I only see 2dB dynamic range (more in the rest of the track)... which is why the kicks sound so lifeless.

Just might not be our taste.

Reading some of the posts in this thread made me think of a recording so good that people complain about it:

Amazon.com: Orff: Carmina Burana: Carl Orff, Riccardo Muti, Jonathan Summers, Arleen Augér, John van Kesteren: Music

Read the reviews there and you should understand what I mean.
That album has huge dynamic range. Huge dynamics can be cumbersome for people (Audyssey addresses low volume listening to highly dynamic content). Usually people who like symphonic music are used to that... but, guess not here.
 
P

PENG

Audioholic Slumlord
Hey PENG, Did you make any headway on really narrowing this list down? ...or did you run out of money buying all 115?

I didn't see Boston's self titled first realease on the list. Just got done Jammin' it on CD ( bar code #07464341882) and boy does it sound good for a rock record! (any of us who grew up in the 70's should remember Bostons reputation for sound quality)
Did you mean this one?

Amazon.com: Boston: Boston: Music

Update: Can't wait for your response, after reading some reviews I ordered it.
 
Last edited:
P

PENG

Audioholic Slumlord
You can buy it at Amazon.ca from third party sellers:

Carmina Burana: Amazon.ca: Music

As I type this, you can pay CDN$4.42 + CDN$3.49 shipping for a new copy of it.
I could not find it this morning for some reason. I follow the link, found and ordered it, estimated delivery April4-11. If it does sound better than the Telarc, that sounds great to me, also has huge DR, I will remove it from the list. For now, I added the Muti so both are on the list, bumping it up to 121 in total, but I have not posted it yet.

When listening to the Muti version, sit in your music listening room, which must be quiet other than the sound from your audio system. The very soft portions should be very soft indeed, and the loud portions will be quite loud. Don't even think about using the disc as background music or in your car, unless you have the world's quietest car.

Having attended many classical concerts, I can tell you that at a live performance, it is not uncommon for them to play so softly that one can barely hear them, and so loud that one can barely stand it. I have no other disc that really gives that sort of impression as well the Muti Carmina Burana.
I will try it in both rooms, one is quieter and the amp has more power but the less powerful one has VU meter so I can see the DR without using the SPL meter. I am a regular classical concert goer so I understand what you are saying.
 
newsletter

  • RBHsound.com
  • BlueJeansCable.com
  • SVS Sound Subwoofers
  • Experience the Martin Logan Montis
Top