3 ms·
Most of the arguments in vinyl sounding better center on original masters being pressed directly to vinyl “biscuits” without an intermediate step while CDs go t
by tmountain 4y ago
Most of the arguments in vinyl sounding better center on original masters being pressed directly to vinyl “biscuits” without an intermediate step while CDs go through a compression step before they are digitized. These days, that’s rarely true. If original masters are used for too many high volume pressings, they wear out (physically), so the masters are often digitized before they go to vinyl. This sparked some controversy recently regarding a Michael Jackson repress with an ironic twist that nobody could tell the difference or noticed until the mastering engineer slipped up and let the cat out of the bag.
- tmountain 4y agohttps://www.audioholics.com/audio-technologies/mobile-fidelity-scandal https://www.audioholics.com/audio-technologies/mobile-fideli...
- iggldiggl 4y ago> If original masters are used for too many high volume pressings, they wear out (physically) E.g. when Dylan's famous 60's electric trilogy first came out on CD, at least two of those albums had to be remixed not for whatever possible artistical and/or money-making reasons [1] that commonly cause remixes to be done these days, but simply because the original master tapes (including the safety copies) had worn out through continuous re-pressings of the original vinyl albums. [1] Though of course the switch to CD in itself was, while also undeniably a definitive technological upgrade, in some ways also a nice way of making people buy the albums again even if they already owned them in some other storage format.