In article ,
Chesney Christ wrote:

A certain RJH, of uk.rec.audio "fame", writes :

My 'reference' recordings are an old Louis Armstrong LP (50s I think) and an
original of Let it Bleed (66?). The quality (as well as the music let's not
forget!) is superb. Much of the late beatles stuff is pretty hq IMHO (cd and
LP). I bought a few remastered Hendrix cds a couple of years ago and the
quality compared to the record is diabolical - compressed and flat. They
must have got something right 40 years ago after all, at least to my mind.

No they didn't, because the cutting master tapes used to produce LPs
were all compressed and heavily EQ'd versions of the original recorded
masters...

Are you still going on about lp production masters? First of all, not
all lp masters are compressed and/or heavily eq'd. Second, some eq is
meant to be complementary to the natural frequency response of the
medium. In other words, an lp master that *isn't* eq'd might be
considered 'broken', as would be an lp master without the RIAA curve.

You are also comparing the apples of the original lp issue (the good
sounding one) with the oranges of the cd issue (flat, compressed).

Stephen