[Scott[_6_]]

On Jul 5, 9:39*am, ScottW2 wrote:
On Jul 5, 8:56*am, Steven Sullivan wrote:







Still, I've been mostly enthralled by the story (I'm currently reading the
section on the history of the Loudness Wars), occasionally amused
(Telarc's Bob Woods' response to Doug Sax's many strident anti-digital tirades:
"My reaction was: go **** yourself.") or appalled (too much
print given to Steve Albini's and Neil Young's emotionally overwrought *
Luddite claims; and worse, one Roger Lagadec, a Swiss engineer who helped
develop CD and should thus know better, quoted Young "I could
probably have run a test that made him look silly. *But what would I have
accomplished? *I would have made a technical test that said that according to
a very simple criterion, Neil Young could not hear beyond 14 or 15 kHz or so.
But he is a genius. *He knows everything there is to know about sound,
and if I were to compare what he says with the result of a test taht I
engineered, I would say screw the test, he knows what he's talking abou."
This suggests to me that Mr. Lagadoc shouldn't be engineering tests
of audibility.)

I don't understand why Neil Young's views on recording technology are
given such credence. *I love his work as a musician/songwriter,
especially the 70's era stuff, but not a single one of his works gets
an honorable mention for the quality of the recording IMO. Classic
Records did a relative nice job on greatest hits but the remastered
DVD-A releases are are slight improvements at best over the CDs on
selected tracks, but that's faint praise relative to the original
releases.
Nothing in his prolific catalogue is a benchmark demonstrating
recording prowess IMO.

ScottW-

You might want to check out the recent release of Live at Massey Hall.
I think Rust Never Sleeps was also a pretty outstanding recording.
Live at Massey Hall is pretty amazing. Not to mention the music is
fantastic.