1. The stereo transfer was made using the full capabilities of 16/44 technology, and
2. The same, and hopefully original, sources have been used for both.
Regarding the latter, unfortunately the major labels in particular have been milking the reissue market for decades with, as they admit now, copies of recordings that were not the originals on the feeble excuse that these were not restorable. As a recording engineer with experience back to analogue tape days, I know this is utter nonsense (see my May 2023 thread on "Baking the Ring"). Apart from repairing edits and possibly 'doctoring' some dropouts, there is no reason why a simple and competently done analogue-to-digital stereo transfer at 16/44 will not give you exactly what the production team heard in the control room at the time of the recording. Personally, I'd prefer no noise reduction.
I'm happy to expound further, particularly on so-called "hi-res", but as you say, Pandora's box is creaking ... A final comment, however, is that on this subject I'm often disappointed by how much MWI reviewers seem to be in thrall of the industry's hyperbole, instead of calling them out for their sheer cynicism.
Hello. I have so many incarnations of the Britten Requiem. I received the latest as a download at Christmas. I don't want to open a Pandora's box but I appreciate that these recordings get improved with remastering: altering balances, cleaning up distortion, fixing edits, etc., and I am happy to have them. But I will get these in a 16/44 download, no? What do I get by opting for a 24/96 etc. transfer? Thank you.
Message Thread
« Back to index | View thread »
Thank you for taking part in the MusicWeb International Forum.
Len Mullenger - Founder of MusicWeb