Good Music for testing Audio Equipment
- Thread starter APP
- Start date
For the CD's Greatest Hits avoid the more recent releases, as an example and personally I feel the Greatest Hits II by Parlophone is superior to that released from 2002 onwards.
If you cannot get hold of the Parlophone from 1991 (possibly the I & II double release in 1994 or Platinum in 2000 is identical) for Greatest Hits II then possibly best most recent CD is the 2002 US Platinum release by Hollywood Records.
I have had quite a few of the Greatest Hits 2 and I have kept the Parlophone 1991 and the Hollywood Records 2002 Platinum (has all three Greatest Hits) - having difficulty getting Parlophone Greatest Hits Platinum 2000 release so not compared it.
But ideally hunt the Palophone UK/Hollywood Records US releases.
The link shows all the Greatest Hits, released for UK and then US for Hollywood Records.
http://www.discogs.com/search/?sort...title=greatest+hits&artist=queen&type=release
http://www.discogs.com/search/?sort...title=greatest+hits&artist=queen&type=release
Here is the one showing releases for Platinum (I, II, and III): http://www.discogs.com/Queen-Greatest-Hits-I-II-III-The-Platinum-Collection/release/375902 and more overall: http://www.discogs.com/search/?sort...=Queen&label=&credit=&submitter=&type=release
Discogs is very useful as it provides critical information such as catalogue number, year, label, all this information helps to find the one you want; also take note of RM for remastered when looking at list if it is next to a release.
You can click on the tab on both views to also to switch to Master Release.
I must admit I do find it a bit fascinating hunting down the various release and comparing to find the best release, this I have found applies to nearly all music/artists that spans a couple of decades or more and can definitely be worth researching and tracking down, especially as it is not just modern releases that can have sound quality issues but also the initial digital CD releases when the format first came out and also in the 80s and some very early 90s can be a bit poor.
Cheers
Orb
Last edited:
Hey Ron, that album's opening track (Track 1 on CD) with the crowd has become such a test for me...some seriously SOTA system setup delivered it expansively but bright, or 'rushed' where somehow without the details, you 'tune out' until the music starts. In my own system, (right or wrong), i have set up to get that audience sounding as natural, expansive as possible, with lots of individual clapping, hooting, whistling so that it becomes really a part of the album rather than just a lead-in.
Thank you, Lloyd! I would like to hear that on your system.
Two of my favorite pieces of music for both listening and testing are:
"The Rose" on Amanda McBroom, Growing Up in Hollywood Town (Sheffield Lab 13)
"Send in the Clowns" on Bill Henderson, Live at the Times (Jazz Planet Records/Classic Records)
Two of my favorite pieces of music for both listening and testing are:
"The Rose" on Amanda McBroom, Growing Up in Hollywood Town (Sheffield Lab 13)
"Send in the Clowns" on Bill Henderson, Live at the Times (Jazz Planet Records/Classic Records)
Yeah can be a bit hit and miss depending upon the studio and associated engineers involved, but usually the Remastered releases in the 90s tend to be the optimum (of course this assumes the original master tape is what is used and in very good condition) from my experience when considering more mainstream genres including jazz.
A generalisation I know
So it will not be applicable in all instances.
Cheers
Orb
A bit of controversial 'heresy', but I would say the Nirvana Unplugged is actually better recorded-mixed-mastered than the Eric Clapton one.
It has surprised some people I know who would never had thought that.
Cheers
Orb
Yeah can be a bit hit and miss depending upon the studio and associated engineers involved, but usually the Remastered releases in the 90s tend to be the optimum (of course this assumes the original master tape is what is used and in very good condition) from my experience when considering more mainstream genres including jazz.
A generalisation I know
So it will not be applicable in all instances.
Cheers
Orb
Could you mention a few of your favorites of those remasters?
TBH it is easier to mention albums as has been done by yourself and other posters because it will come down to the music-artist selection first and then checking the history of the album's release and remastering.
Where this gets messy is the classical genre as this seems to have much less remastering and more re-issues (derived from an earlier master), and the history of a particular performance can be pretty vague - only the biggest names (whether a person or piece-symphony) are probably tracked with any success on Discogs, and this is further compounded by the fact there can be many different performances recorded for a work and people will have different preferences (even when it is just a 'simple' solo instrument related performance such as those written by Chopin - from experience I have my favourites due to the nuance of the performance); just did a search on discogs as an example for The Four Seasons and found 1,123 releases, 625 of which are CD, and there are 134 known Masters on their system covering both LP and CD.
View is that of known Masters, can change tab for view: http://www.discogs.com/search/?sort=year,desc&q=the+four+seasons&genre_exact=Classical&type=master
Another problem is that some of the great classical performances recommended by good experts may not even be reissued and one has to go through specialist sites and shops.
But Discogs is great for all other genres, such as say Frank Sinatra 'Frank Sinatra Sings For Only The Lonely'.
On Amazon they are selling this: http://www.amazon.com/Frank-Sinatra...id=1438365362&sr=8-2&keywords=Only+the+Lonely
This is described as having the 1958 Master and also 1998 digital remaster.
We know the detailed history of this album by looking at the Master Release (very 1st recording and shows Master Release near top right) : http://www.discogs.com/Frank-Sinatr...Lonely/master/144038?sort=year&sort_order=asc
I have sorted this ascending by year.
Scrolling down and searching on RM, I can see re-masters were done 1984 (re-mastered for LP), 1987 (CD remaster done by Larry Walsh), 1998 (CD), 2008 (CD by Mobile Fidelity mono-digipak), 2009 (LP by Mobile Fidelity mono), and 2012 (CD by Arnoldo Mondadori Editore).
So might be worth comparing the 1987 release to the Amazon that has the 1998 one, or if interested in mono the Mobile Fidelity - not a big follower of this but I guess it is possible as it is Capitol Records the mono recording may be deemed 'better' quality than the stereo, this could be comparable in some ways to The Beatles and the debate around their mono vs stereo releases.
Ah the joys of being an audiophile
Cheers
Orb
Thanks Orb, very informative.
I remember the 20bit remaster of Ella and Louis from the '90, which was terrible.
Was that due to the 20bit but also it seemed as if they had just added a ''smile'' curve, boosting the highs and Louis 's' into the stratosphere.
I remember the 20bit remaster of Ella and Louis from the '90, which was terrible.
Was that due to the 20bit but also it seemed as if they had just added a ''smile'' curve, boosting the highs and Louis 's' into the stratosphere.
Your welcome
And for me this is an aspect of the audio hobby that can be quite interesting and importantly satisfying, especially when you find that one remaster that is great, to me this is part of what it means being an audiophile in a fun way.
Cheers
Orb
And for me this is an aspect of the audio hobby that can be quite interesting and importantly satisfying, especially when you find that one remaster that is great, to me this is part of what it means being an audiophile in a fun way.
Cheers
Orb
Similar threads
 | Steve Williams Site Founder | Site Owner | Administrator |  | Ron Resnick Site Owner | Administrator |  | Julian (The Fixer) Website Build | Marketing Managersing |