Originally Posted by
voice of theatr
This is a really interesting topic to me. I've bought many CD's ("reissues") through the years that didn't sound as good as my original vinyl copies of the same album. Like many of you, I've later bought remastered or "audiophile" versions of the same album on CD that sometimes sounds as good or better than the vinyl. I think one reason for this would be that when many albums were first recorded and released on vinyl, the album's producer and sometimes even the musician(s) were often involved to some extent in the mastering process. Even if they weren't there for the mastering process itself and just had to give the OK to the mastering job after hearing it, there was at least some (varying) degree of producer and/or artist participation in mastering (or OK'ing/vetoing) the proposed final mastered "product". Not to mention that vinyl has been around for a long time and by especially by the 60's, 70's, and 80's, record companies/mastering facilities had a good knowledge base and lots of experience regarding how to properly master vinyl.
Fast forward to many years later when the record company re-releases the album on CD. When CD technology was in it's first several years, many labels just "dumped" the analog signal to digital without much concern of locating the original master tapes, or even paying much attention to basics like overall signal level, EQ, etc. Remember that for example vinyl was usually mastered a little light on the low end due to physical limitations of the medium. CD's/digital can benefit from a different approach to mastering in many ways compared to vinyl, and a lot of record labels were pretty oblivious to many of these basics for years when CD's were still a (relatively) newer technology. Not to mention that by the time the original vinyl release got reissued on CD, the original producer and artist often times were not consulted/had no say as far as how does the mastering job sound to them. So, blame lack of original artist/producer involvement in the mastering process, ignorance, low budgets, and/or rush jobs--any or all of the above for many of the awful sounding CD's that are out there.
These days, many record companies have a pretty good handle on how to master a CD IMHO, so many new releases that I buy sound great on CD. Of course, being a new release, the producer and sometimes the artist are involved in the CD mastering process even if it's just listening to the final mastered CD and saying OK or "redo it". That involvement helps quite a bit as does the fact that there are a lot more people these days that are "good" at mastering CD's/have up to date knowledge and mastering techniques and equipment.
As far as re-mastered CD's of stuff originally released on vinyl, those are still hit and miss IMHO. This may be partly because the original producer and artist often times are not involved with the remastering job to any extent, and partly because whoever did the mastering of the "remastered CD" may just plain not be very talented at his job. You can also blame the fact that in some cases the original master tapes have deteriorated over the years and no amount of technology may be able to "restore" what signal quality has been lost on those original tapes.
Of course the debate rages on as far as are CD's or LP's being the "better" sounding medium. I would agree that if you've got the right turntable, cartridge, preamp, and piece of mint vinyl that LP's can sound amazing. I have a nice vinyl collection that I'll never sell in addition to my CD collection. I would say that there is some degree of trade off / apples and oranges involved when comparing vinyl sound quality to CD sound quality. Yes, when you convert the original analog music to digital, you do lose some definition/resolution. Analog is more direct than analog converted to digital. However, IMHO, CD technology has a lot going for it and if recorded, converted, and mastered "properly", CD's can sound "better" than much of the vinyl that's out there IMHO. Remember that there is the potential for greater dynamic range on a CD then vinyl, lower distortion, better signal to noise ratio, better/extended bandwidth, etc. As far as I'm concerned, when CD's are done "right", they can surpass the sound of many pieces of vinyl. However, it is apples and oranges. I have vinyl LP's that have such a warm/clear intimate sound that if kept mint and relatively noise free, they are hard to beat. Even if they're not as dynamic or have a little more distortion etc. than CD's, the overall sound is so great that some would argue that digital couldn't touch it. I think both mediums have their strengths and weaknesses, and I have some CD's that are so dynamic and clean sounding and have such an amazing extended bandwidth etc. that they would be hard to "best" with vinyl, and some vinyl that sounds so warm and crystal clear and "in your face" that it would be hard to "best" with CD's..... There are many uniquely amazing sounding CD's and vinyl recordings out there and anyone who turns their nose up at either medium (vinyl or CD's) is missing out on some amazing recordings IMHO. Both mediums have different strengths and weaknesses and some releases that really shine in that particular medium. It really is an apples and oranges thing with me--I like both for different reasons!