New York Reunion- McCoy Tyner
Personnel: McCoy Tyner (piano); Joe Henderson (tenor saxophone); Ron Carter
(bass); Al Foster (drums). Recorded At RCA Studio A, New York, New York on
April 3-4, 1991. Includes liner notes by Bret Primack.

This is often mentioned as a great sounding recording. THe music ain`t half
bad, either! Also available as a hybrid SACD if you are so inclined. I
think my next CD player is going to be a multi (ie) able to play SACD,
DVDaudio etc. Anybody have one of those?

Robert J Dewar



"chris lee" wrote in message
om...
Can anyone recommend a cd that *sounds* great, regardless of the style
of music (but preferably jazz). I listen mostly to hip hop and
electronica, and while I enjoy the music, often the sound quality
isn't the best (partly, I think, because the music is produced by
sampling rather than by real instruments). I recently upgraded my
stereo, and the difference between good sounding CDs and average
sounding ones is very obvious. I bought the remastered 'Kind of Blue'
recently and it sounds fantastic. I'm not asking for CDs you like,
but ones which have a noticeable clarity of sound. Any other
recommendations would be welcome.

peace
chris

["Followup-To:" header set to rec.audio.misc.]
On 2004-06-09, chris lee wrote:
Can anyone recommend a cd that *sounds* great, regardless of the style
of music (but preferably jazz). I listen mostly to hip hop and
electronica, and while I enjoy the music, often the sound quality
isn't the best (partly, I think, because the music is produced by
sampling rather than by real instruments). I recently upgraded my
stereo, and the difference between good sounding CDs and average
sounding ones is very obvious. I bought the remastered 'Kind of Blue'
recently and it sounds fantastic. I'm not asking for CDs you like,
but ones which have a noticeable clarity of sound. Any other
recommendations would be welcome.

peace
chris

You might also check "www.referencerecordings.com" for their jazz
CDs, especially the demos.

Robert J Dewar wrote:

This is often mentioned as a great sounding recording. THe music ain`t half
bad, either! Also available as a hybrid SACD if you are so inclined. I
think my next CD player is going to be a multi (ie) able to play SACD,
DVDaudio etc. Anybody have one of those?

Yes. Players that will play CDs and SACDs are relatively common, but
true universal players (DVD-V, DVD-A, CD, SACD) are more rare - and
expensive.

Check out the Marantz line at:

http://www.amusicdirect.com/products...sp?mfr=MARANTZ

--
Better than hearing "Lady Day", or checking in at Monterey...

"ric" wrote in message ...
chris lee wrote:


If your system doesn't support SACD or DVD-A, you are missing out on
great sound.

I've heard those demonstrated up at Meyer-Emco. They are formats for
anal-retentive audiophiles who obsess over every note. And if it's an old
recording, you get a lot of tape-hiss to go along with it.

The new blue-ray technology that will be coming out in a couple of years
will put both of those formats to shame.

Besides, you have to buy two ****ing players in order to cover everything.
Do you have the time, money and space for that? And what happens when one
format wins out over the other? You'll be stuck with the equivalent of an
old laserdisc or DAT player.

I suggest holding off until you know for certain what format will win out in
the marketplace and will be around for awhile.

On Wed, 9 Jun 2004 17:55:41 -0400, "~GT~" none wrote:

Besides, you have to buy two ****ing players in order to cover everything.

Or an inexpensive universal player.

Kal

"Kalman Rubinson" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 9 Jun 2004 17:55:41 -0400, "~GT~" none wrote:

Besides, you have to buy two ****ing players in order to cover
everything.

Or an inexpensive universal player.

And how many models are out there that'll cover everything?

One? Two? Three?

On Wed, 9 Jun 2004 22:31:31 -0400, "~GT~" none wrote:

"Kalman Rubinson" wrote in message
.. .
On Wed, 9 Jun 2004 17:55:41 -0400, "~GT~" none wrote:

Besides, you have to buy two ****ing players in order to cover
everything.

Or an inexpensive universal player.

And how many models are out there that'll cover everything?

One? Two? Three?

Cheap ones, probably. Without regard to budget, a dozen or more. How
many do you need?

Kal

~GT~ wrote:
"ric" wrote in message ...

chris lee wrote:


If your system doesn't support SACD or DVD-A, you are missing out on
great sound.


I've heard those demonstrated up at Meyer-Emco. They are formats for
anal-retentive audiophiles who obsess over every note. And if it's an old
recording, you get a lot of tape-hiss to go along with it.

The new blue-ray technology that will be coming out in a couple of years
will put both of those formats to shame.

Besides, you have to buy two ****ing players in order to cover everything.
Do you have the time, money and space for that? And what happens when one
format wins out over the other? You'll be stuck with the equivalent of an
old laserdisc or DAT player.

I suggest holding off until you know for certain what format will win out in
the marketplace and will be around for awhile.

In the meantime get yourself an inexpensive universal player and check
out some of the 5.1 recordings. The Dark Side of the Moon is excellent
in surround sound. My player is a Pioneer DV-563A, about $120 on sale.
It plays almost everything.

~GT~ wrote:

If your system doesn't support SACD or DVD-A, you are missing out on
great sound.

I've heard those demonstrated up at Meyer-Emco. They are formats for
anal-retentive audiophiles who obsess over every note. And if it's an old
recording, you get a lot of tape-hiss to go along with it.

Ah...the ignorant vote has been cast.

Besides, you have to buy two ****ing players in order to cover everything.
Do you have the time, money and space for that? And what happens when one
format wins out over the other? You'll be stuck with the equivalent of an
old laserdisc or DAT player.

So the players that play CD, SACD, DVD-A, et. al. don't really exist?
Hmmm...either my player really isn't there *or* this is another ignorant
comment from someone who specializes in making same.

I suggest holding off until you know for certain what format will win out in
the marketplace and will be around for awhile.

I suggest you find a topic about which you know something, or stick to
your ****ing contests with sum1.

--
Better than hearing "Lady Day", or checking in at Monterey...

"ric" wrote in message ...
~GT~ wrote:

If your system doesn't support SACD or DVD-A, you are missing out on
great sound.

I've heard those demonstrated up at Meyer-Emco. They are formats for
anal-retentive audiophiles who obsess over every note. And if it's an
old
recording, you get a lot of tape-hiss to go along with it.

Ah...the ignorant vote has been cast.

Ah, another anal-retentive audiophile. No, my subjective opinion has been
cast.


Besides, you have to buy two ****ing players in order to cover
everything.
Do you have the time, money and space for that? And what happens when
one
format wins out over the other? You'll be stuck with the equivalent of
an
old laserdisc or DAT player.

So the players that play CD, SACD, DVD-A, et. al. don't really exist?

Did I say that they didn't exist at all? Sure there are plenty of players
that will play CD and SACD. Or CD and DVD-A, but are there many that'll
play all three?

And how about throwing video DVD in there as well. Oh and...let's
see...MP3, DVD+R, DVD-R, DVD+RW, DVD-RW, VCD, etc...

After all, they're all the same size with the same size spindle hole in the
middle.

Gotta save on all that shelf space, ya know....

Hmmm...either my player really isn't there *or* this is another ignorant
comment from someone who specializes in making same.

Or you have a player that will play both and you are one of the lucky (sic)
few and because you have one you think everybody else out there has one, or
is supposed to have one.


I suggest you find a topic about which you know something, or stick to
your ****ing contests with sum1.

Or better still, stay out of this discussion if you don't have anything
constructive to say.

~GT~ wrote:

I've heard those demonstrated up at Meyer-Emco. They are formats for
anal-retentive audiophiles who obsess over every note. And if it's an
old
recording, you get a lot of tape-hiss to go along with it.

Ah...the ignorant vote has been cast.

Ah, another anal-retentive audiophile. No, my subjective opinion has been
cast.

Only that in quite sujective A-B tests, only those with a tin ear could
not hear the vast difference between CD and SACD. This isn't "oxygen
free copper" Monstercable marketing stuff. This is easily heard. I feel
sorry for those whose hearing defeciency prevents them from hearing the
difference.

Besides, you have to buy two ****ing players in order to cover
? everything.
Do you have the time, money and space for that? And what happens when
one
format wins out over the other? You'll be stuck with the equivalent of
an
old laserdisc or DAT player.

So the players that play CD, SACD, DVD-A, et. al. don't really exist?

Did I say that they didn't exist at all?

Well, you said "Besides, you have to buy two ****ing players in order to
cover everything." Yes, that's what you said in your own eloquent way.

Sure there are plenty of players
that will play CD and SACD. Or CD and DVD-A, but are there many that'll
play all three?

Dozens. With more being released every day.

And how about throwing video DVD in there as well.

Careful. Your ignorance is showing, again. Most SACD players *are* DVD-V
players. And *all* combo CD/SACD/DVD-A players that I'm aware of will do
DVD-V, too.

Oh and...let's
see...MP3, DVD+R, DVD-R, DVD+RW, DVD-RW, VCD, etc...

All of the above (except maybe DVD*R/RW, I'm not sure) being included
is the norm. Kinda kills your above statement that "...And what happens
when one format wins out over the other? You'll be stuck with the
equivalent of an old laserdisc or DAT player." Are you suffering from
"foot in mouth" disease?

Gotta save on all that shelf space, ya know....

I did.

Or you have a player that will play both and you are one of the lucky (sic)
few and because you have one you think everybody else out there has one, or
is supposed to have one.

No. I was just making a suggestion to the OP, who was on a quest for
great sound. You changing your stance from your original "



I suggest you find a topic about which you know something, or stick to
your ****ing contests with sum1.

Or better still, stay out of this discussion if you don't have anything
constructive to say.

--
Better than hearing "Lady Day", or checking in at Monterey...

~GT~ wrote:

I've heard those demonstrated up at Meyer-Emco. They are formats for
anal-retentive audiophiles who obsess over every note. And if it's an
old
recording, you get a lot of tape-hiss to go along with it.

Ah...the ignorant vote has been cast.

Ah, another anal-retentive audiophile. No, my subjective opinion has been
cast.

Only that in quite sujective A-B tests, only those with a tin ear could
not hear the vast difference between CD and SACD. This isn't "oxygen
free copper" Monstercable marketing stuff. This is easily heard. I feel
sorry for those whose hearing defeciency prevents them from hearing the
difference.

Besides, you have to buy two ****ing players in order to cover
? everything.
Do you have the time, money and space for that? And what happens when
one
format wins out over the other? You'll be stuck with the equivalent of
an
old laserdisc or DAT player.

So the players that play CD, SACD, DVD-A, et. al. don't really exist?

Did I say that they didn't exist at all?

Well, you said "Besides, you have to buy two ****ing players in order to
cover everything." Yes, that's what you said in your own eloquent way.

Sure there are plenty of players
that will play CD and SACD. Or CD and DVD-A, but are there many that'll
play all three?

Dozens. With more being released every day.

And how about throwing video DVD in there as well.

Careful. Your ignorance is showing, again. Most SACD players *are* DVD-V
players. And *all* combo CD/SACD/DVD-A players that I'm aware of will do
DVD-V, too.

Oh and...let's
see...MP3, DVD+R, DVD-R, DVD+RW, DVD-RW, VCD, etc...

All of the above (except maybe DVD*R/RW, I'm not sure) being included
is the norm. Kinda kills your above statement that "...And what happens
when one format wins out over the other? You'll be stuck with the
equivalent of an old laserdisc or DAT player." Are you suffering from
"foot in mouth" disease?

Gotta save on all that shelf space, ya know....

I did.

Or you have a player that will play both and you are one of the lucky (sic)
few and because you have one you think everybody else out there has one, or
is supposed to have one.

No. I was just making a suggestion to the OP, who was on a quest for
great sound. You changing your stance from your original "They are formats
for anal-retentive audiophiles who obsess over every note" ???

--
Better than hearing "Lady Day", or checking in at Monterey...