kramerHast du die DCC CD und LP mal verglichen?
Ja… tonal klingen beide ähnlich. Ich ziehe die CD leicht der LP vor, aber vielleicht es auch daran, dass mein CD Player* in einer anderen Liga als mein Plattenspieler spielt.
Der Mono-Mix von Audio Fidelity ist auch gut, obwohl ich die DCC klar bevorzuge….
* Digital-Playback: dCS Puccini… meiner Meinung nach, der beste Stand-Alone Player den man derzeit bekommen kann.
Hier noch ein Review eines Engineers:
First of all the packaging is labeled of „From The Original Master Tapes“. This is untrue. We’ve been told the original analog masters were in such poor condition as to be unusable (before they were lost sometime in the 90s) so a new „master“ was compiled back in 1993 for the DCC version. That same copy was used for this CD. Either way this disc isn’t from the original master tapes as indicated. No big deal as the DCC already sounds fantastic.
So I play this new version and within a few seconds of track one I could already tell a difference between it and the DCC. This new AF version didn’t have the low end I loved so much. Not only was the deep bass thinned out but the midrange was different. It lacked the depth and thickness of the DCC. Listening on I noticed this was true for every song. Seeing as this was people’s main complaint about the DCC I guess Steve took a more conservative approach with this new version. Is this a result of the mythical Kensei Audio Transformer or mastering choices?
There are a LOT more dropouts during the intro of I’m Waiting For The Day. Sounds like Steve’s tape has sustained damage over the years.
God Only Knows doesn’t sound quite as clear as on the DCC.
There’s a really loooong space of silence at the end of Sloop John B. I guess that extra ten seconds of blank space is supposed to signify the end of side one. I guess if I ever play this CD again I’ll just visualize myself flipping the record over during that time.
One more thing, the blurb about „The original dynamic range of this recording was not maximized, etc…“ to be worded poorly. It insinuates the dyanmic range wasn’t maximized. What? That’s not true. The dynamic range WAS maximized. That’s the whole point. It would’ve been much better to say something like „The dynamic range of this recording wasn’t compromised with limiting or compression“ or something like that.
This CD is going on the shelf. I’ll play the DCC disc when get a hankering to hear Pet Sounds again.
--