Sound quality - best and worse

Please post only reggae discussions here
Punxsta
Posts: 70
Joined: Wed Sep 05, 2007 6:14 pm

Sound quality - best and worse

Post by Punxsta »

a follow up to Greg's post (and a red rag to a bull for the vinyl elite out there) but would be a useful thread for me and others?
Your BEST cd and WORST cd resissue sound experience?

BEST - I was blown away by the Willi Williams resissue on blood and fire - the cd version does seem to add some new depth to one of my favourite records. Plus the dubs are wicked.

WORST - Scientist meets the Roots Radics reissue on 'Sound System'. Very shoddy and the bass is barely there - why bother?.
(But did make me track down the vinyl which was worth it because it is heavy. Just wish i could find radicfaction on vinyl too!)

would value any tips from the well listened RA guys out there.....
Rootsman
Posts: 1543
Joined: Fri Feb 03, 2006 7:36 pm

Re: Sound quality - best and worse

Post by Rootsman »

Avoid all Jet Star Killer Price albums, all taken direct from vinyl with no attempt to remaster. They are full of pops crackles and sound shit

For Instance "King Tubby meets Upsetters Grass Roots Of Dub" and "Surrounded by Dreads at The National Arena" are really poor quality CD`s copied from bad vinyl.

Definately ones to avoid.

Dave
User avatar
6anbatte
Posts: 1857
Joined: Wed Aug 02, 2006 2:06 pm

Re: Sound quality - best and worse

Post by 6anbatte »

The following CDs both sound incredible on my hi-fi;

[cover=7647,5075]

[cover=48,47]
"Now I know the truth and must reveal it unto the youth."
Jah Titus
Posts: 493
Joined: Wed May 17, 2006 8:36 am

Re: Sound quality - best and worse

Post by Jah Titus »

BEST - Obviously a lot of gud ina B&F catalogue. Example: 129 BEAT STREET: JAH-MAN SPECIAL.

WORST - Too much. Always rememba PHIL PRATT THING among others from PS dem boast high quality . Really bad. LIFE GOES IN CIRCLES: SOUNDS FROM TALENT CORPORATION was disapointing too.


BLESS
ton1
Posts: 447
Joined: Thu Jun 14, 2007 5:07 pm

Re: Sound quality - best and worse

Post by ton1 »

Jah Titus wrote: WORST - Too much. Always rememba PHIL PRATT THING among others from PS dem boast high quality . Really bad. LIFE GOES IN CIRCLES: SOUNDS FROM TALENT CORPORATION was disapointing too.

BLESS
Some crackles (like on the Phil Pratt Thing comp') are often better than a poor remastering which makes the dynamic of the recordings disappear and sounds like a chewing-gum, looks like it was recorded in toilets while the singer is speaking in a big PVC tube floating on water (see what I mean ? ;)). This sound is typical of a denoise operation with a basic sound software and is really worse than doing nothing.
Antonin
User avatar
6anbatte
Posts: 1857
Joined: Wed Aug 02, 2006 2:06 pm

Re: Sound quality - best and worse

Post by 6anbatte »

Interesting that "Phil Pratt Thing" is mentioned because I have "Who Gets Your Love" which I recorded from 12" onto compact cassette at least 20 years ago.

I recently transfered it onto CD from the compact cassette (I'd found it lying around the house) and my version of it still sounds much, much better than the Pressure Sounds version.

Hopefully, someone with technical knowledge can tell me why that would be.
"Now I know the truth and must reveal it unto the youth."
Guillaume

Re: Sound quality - best and worse

Post by Guillaume »

Jah Jah give us Love - Wailing Souls repress 10'' was very bad... And now the Greensleeves repress is avaible with a good sound quality...

Some Thompson Sound repress are very bad too... brand new repress but lot of crackles...
ton1
Posts: 447
Joined: Thu Jun 14, 2007 5:07 pm

Re: Sound quality - best and worse

Post by ton1 »

6anbatte wrote:Interesting that "Phil Pratt Thing" is mentioned because I have "Who Gets Your Love" which I recorded from 12" onto compact cassette at least 20 years ago.

I recently transfered it onto CD from the compact cassette (I'd found it lying around the house) and my version of it still sounds much, much better than the Pressure Sounds version.

Hopefully, someone with technical knowledge can tell me why that would be.
I think I miss your point and you miss mine :) or maybe my english reading is weak.

What I meant earlier is that I think the PS release has no mastering (or just a bit) and I think it's better because a poor mastering make the music sounds really bad.

If your cut on cassette was coming from a 12", it surely has more dynamic than a 7". Good dynamic can be understood by when the rythm hits you, you feel a short and loud "BOOM" while when there is a low dynamic, you feel a
feeble and distorted "boooom".

I'll shake the Phil Pratt Thing when I'm at home but as far as I remember, first time I heard it, I have thought it was a good idea not to remaster it.
Antonin
Jah Titus
Posts: 493
Joined: Wed May 17, 2006 8:36 am

Re: Sound quality - best and worse

Post by Jah Titus »

Of course Ton1 but Phil Pratt Thing is nuff worst dan "some crackles" how yu seh.

6anbatte mi know people dat mek great vinyl transfer, restoration an mastering works ina dem room. Nuff betta dan some "professionals".


BLESS
ton1
Posts: 447
Joined: Thu Jun 14, 2007 5:07 pm

Re: Sound quality - best and worse

Post by ton1 »

Jah Titus wrote:Of course Ton1 but Phil Pratt Thing is nuff worst dan "some crackles" how yu seh.

6anbatte mi know people dat mek great vinyl transfer, restoration an mastering works ina dem room. Nuff betta dan some "professionals".

BLESS
I'll check and will tell you my opinion on this, i was saying that from memory.

I know great vinyl transfer doesn't need professionals, only needs good equipment and good knowledges and feeling for sound engineering (even self-educated). Fact is some people think they have these knowledges and feeling though they obviously don't ("professionals" or not).
Antonin
Post Reply