To further clarify my position, as far as tape recordings from the birth of stereo go, I say simply digitise them as accurately as possible, and otherwise leave them alone. Unfortunately, the labels who own the originals treat them like solid gold and as I've suggested in previous posts, milk the market endlessly with hints that you're actually hearing them, when in fact you're not. Witness the decades of deception surrounding reissues of the Solti Ring, and note my use of 'alleged' regarding the Reiner ASZ SACD. And as for the A&S 'remasters' of the EMI/Warner back-catalogue ...
What this does of course is open the door for the restorers who essentially obtain consumer copies of the copy-masters issued by the labels, process them, and try to fill the vacuum for collectors who (a) suspect something's still not right, or (b) believe there's always some undiscovered magic in their old favourites. There is a sort of synergy here between the restorers and the mainstream industry, but I find it all very cynical.
Agree 100%, especially when attempting to create artificial stereo from mono recordings.
IMHO, the Brahms first example above, like most of Paul Howard's (RA's) work, is more an example of removing patina than artificial enhancement.
Along those lines, I also personally favor the Pristine Mark Obert Thorne restorations, because similar to the RA restorations, they attempt to preserve the unique sonic characteristics of the original recording venues.
Just my two cents! :)
Thank you for taking part in the MusicWeb International Forum.
Len Mullenger - Founder of MusicWeb