Re: [ARSCLIST] Record tracking,and ageing, was De-static question

[Jeffrey Kane <jeffkane@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Capitol's earlier stuff could be VERY good, I have a few classical
recordings by them and while the performances aren't that fabulous the sound
is very very good. I prefer them to EMI. Their two tracks sound very good as
well. RCA was WONDERFUL until the Dynagroove era. I have found though that
the unlistenable Dynagroove stuff, if available on 4 track, sounds MUCH
better through that medium. I've bought precisely two dynagroove records.
One was to see if it really sounded all that bad. The second was because I
wasn't looking. :(

-----Original Message-----
From: Association for Recorded Sound Discussion List
[mailto:ARSCLIST@xxxxxxx] On Behalf Of phillip holmes
Sent: Sunday, February 12, 2006 5:41 PM
To: ARSCLIST@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [ARSCLIST] Record tracking,and ageing, was De-static question

Don't forget the RCA soundtrack series with Charles Gerhardt and the 
National Phil Orchestra.  They're great.  They could do great stuff when 
they tried.  There were some Vics on thin vinyl that were mastered well. 
And plenty of pop recordings in the '70s have great pressings, but mostly 
the first set of laquers.
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "David Lennick" <dlennick@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: <ARSCLIST@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Sunday, February 12, 2006 5:10 PM
Subject: Re: [ARSCLIST] Record tracking,and ageing, was De-static question


> Tom Fine wrote:
>
>> Didn't RCA go to hell when they adopted that "dynagroove" system? It's 
>> not just them with 70's
>> reissues. Everyone got lazy. Listen to MCA reissues of Command and Kapp 
>> records. They're horrible.
>> Capitol umpteenth pressing of Beatles records, which is what I grew up 
>> with in the 70's and 80's,
>> weren't so hot either.
>
> On the other hand, there were RCA masterings and pressings of some Vox and

> Murray Hill sets, and they're
> wonderful. MCA...feh.