On 28 Oct 2004 14:32:08 GMT, ohawker (Andy
Evans) wrote:

Of course you hear nuances on vinyl that you won't hear on CD - or
rather you would hear on CD if you ran it through a compressor the way
it has been for the vinyl version.

that's a good point

But what do you say to the artist and producer who have striven to make their
sound as perfect as they can on CD? We are still here in the land of the
subjective "prefer" masquerading as the objective "better", you see.

I'm not following you here. I think we can assume that artists and producers
strive for perfection in broad terms. But valve equipment is used in the shape
of mics, 19" rackmount gear and even mastering and playback amps (rarely, but
Tim de P is one). Wouldn't it be more correct to say "producers use whatever
gear they find gives them the "best" sound they can get". Can't we leave this
choice to the producers in question without second guessing what they 'ought'
to use?

=== Andy Evans ===

Of course we can - I am all for letting the artists and producer be
the final arbiter of what is the "correct" sound, or the most
aesthetically pleasing, if you like. Whatever they choose to do with
reverb, valves, passes through a tape machine etc are fine with me.
Although generally they will be the first to admit that the version
that they produce for vinyl (sorry to harp on about it) is necessarily
a compromise between the desirable and the possible.

But is that not the point at which we can say that this is what it is
meant to sound like and strive to achieve that in playback?

Again, I'm not saying there is anything actually wrong with adding
what amounts to effects with a valve amp. I'm sure it can sound nice,
although I would get very bored with exactly the same effect being
applied to everything I listened to.

d
Pearce Consulting
http://www.pearce.uk.com