Phil Leigh;188422 Wrote: > As an aside, I'd rather use a Black Sabbath album from 1970 than a > modern over-compressed piece of nonsense t assess audio quality. They > were recorded using good quality gear and good engineering/mastering > processes. As a general principle, I agree. But Black Sabbath's first album was recorded for just 600 quid, so the chances they were using a first class studio seems unlikely. (Mind you, it does sound good - probably because they did it so quick and avoided faffing about with loads of overdubs).
And of course, if HiFi News were using the CD remaster of this album as their source, then that has been quite heavily compressed. (Album Replaygain for the remaster is -7.52dB). -- cliveb Performers -> dozens of mixers and effects -> clipped/hypercompressed mastering -> you think a few extra ps of jitter matters? ------------------------------------------------------------------------ cliveb's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=348 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=33276 _______________________________________________ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
