Brubeck: Take Five - Analogue Productions Remaster CD vs K2 HD 2011 Sony Remaster?

[rbbert]

It's only the mono LP which has the pitch problem (AFAIK).

I have a Gold CD, an HDCD and what is probably an original CD of Take 5, but I'm not sure I can easily find the latter two, they're on a spindle somewhere. I'm not really into vintage digital anyway

 

[ddk]

 

[dmnc02]

Hah! Get a non-remastered first generation digital transfer of Take 5 and then compare to all these audiophile re-mastersings, the new ones are a joke! You won't believe how much body and naturalness is lost to remastering, even the scale of the instruments are completely different. Do it with anything including all Miles remasters from Sony & you'll see that it gets worse with every remastered CD.

Whenever you get your hands on an early CD and compare it to these two pressings through a non-molesting DAC, ie not up sampling or reclocking alla DCS, you'll know what I'm talking about.

david

PS. Sorry to say that Oppo's not up to scratch to judge anything like this on.

Out of curiosity: which non-molesting DAC do you use and does it process DSD natively? Or are you comparing the older CD's to the RBCD layer on the SACDs?

 

[ddk]

Out of curiosity: which non-molesting DAC do you use and does it process DSD natively? Or are you comparing the older CD's to the RBCD layer on the SACDs?

I use the analog output of Sony SCD-1 for SACDs and CD direct comparison. Then I also check the rbcd layer to other pressings with a TL0x+Medea combo. I'm not comparing DSD vs PCM, its the continuos remastering that seem to destroy the life and soul of the original. I see it with some vinyl reissues too. Recently I bought the remastered reissue LP of Sinatra's Duets and its dead sounding compared to my cheap original copy which wasn't all that great to begin with.

david

PS. I get a much better sound from the CEC+Weiss compared to anything from the Sony.

 

[LL21]

OK...so I have compared the Sony K2HD CD version to the recent Analogue Productions Remaster. In a word, APO wins for me.

Honestly, the K2 is excellent, and if this were not probably in my top 5 jazz albums, I would be extremely happy with the K2. It is clear, dynamic and exceptionally detailed. I hear a lot more than I did on my old CD I got years ago where the signal came thru 'weakly'.

At the same volume, in comparison with the APO, I also initially was inclined to favour this clarity. Until I turned the knob up on the APO to the level where it 'felt' at about the same level as the K2 (volume 42 vs 32 on K2)...and then I realized I prefer the APO.

The difference? Both great, but the K2 feels like an exceptionally clear remaster of an old recording, with that slight edge of brittleness that comes (in a more extreme fashion) from Furtwangler recordings from the late 1930s. Again, the K2 fees like an exceptional remaster of an old recording.

By contrast the APO feels like an excellent remaster of a natural recording. Maybe note quite as natural as the Herbie Hancock Joni Letters CD, or a Norah Jones album...but close enough, I don't care to scrutinize.

I never scrutinized with the K2 either...but I was always conscious it felt a bit like an old recording. I will continue to listen to APO some more, but at the moment, I don't feel it sounds like an old recording anymore.