Many of those recordings from the 70's, are actually pretty good. There is a lot more info on those masters that can be pulled out by a highly resolving system, to make hearing the 'flaws' not a big concern. I listen to a lot of prog and fusion from that time, and they tend to be pretty well recorded. Genesis - Selling England by the Pound, King Crimson, Return to Forever, Weather Report, PFM, Gong, Bruford all had some pretty impressive recordings.
It depends on how well the music was recorded in the first place. A high resolving system cannot ruin the sound of an old recording, if it sounds bad it was bad from the beginning. It's like having poor eyesight and then finally seeing the world through a pair of glasses. You may not like what you see but those details were always there, you just couldn't see them.
Totally agree. Good recording comes first. I can still remember the old Warner Bro & RCA vynil pressings in the 70s n 80s are just superb when l was in high school. You can hear the bass n clarity
I agree 100 percent. I’ve been building and upgrading my stereo system since 1972. I was 19 then. My father thought it was a waste of time and money. So once I got the system the way I liked it I played some of my father’s old records ( after a good cleaning ). He was so surprised by what he heard. More fuller and realistic sound. He told his cousin to bring over some of his old records so he could also enjoy how much better they would sound on a high end system. Unfortunately my dad’s cousin said that his old records sounded terrible and very scratchy. Lmao. I told him that you’re hearing the brushes on the symbols that you never heard before on your regular old system. He still thinks that all he heard was scratches. I said funny how he heard the sound only when the symbols were being played with brush’s. Could not convince him. Some people just don’t have a ear for good sounding music. Thanks for all you do so we can hear and feel music the way it should be.
Really liked your response to this question. Music through the ages has evolved in style but also in how its recorded. I have a very resolving system and I love that I can listen to the evolution of the recording technology through the years. I agree that listening to much of the “older” recordings of iconic music through a revealing modern system is emotional and illuminating. I can’t imagine what your FR 30’s do with it. Must be magical.
Listening to early Beatles on my friend's mono tubed record player, definitely a more immersive experience in the music itself, that same music over my reference system is more interesting than immersive - hearing the crudeness of those early stereo attempts, vocals out of one channel, even Ringos drums, before they started messing with laying cloth over his drum heads in the Apple days to dampen the sound were more realistic which is clearly reveled with reference playback - - so for me, two very different experiences. An interesting question posed in a way that I found myself relating to and considering - thanks Troy & Paul.
I agree with Paul, the better my system gets the more I enjoy old music. If a record is noisy the noise seems disconnected from the music which is behind the speakers. Thanks Paul for for your book and CD, it really helps in setting up speakers.
Improvement always means improvement no matter the type or date of rejestration. I am happy too how even pieces I know since 50 years are getting so much more with every step ahead when I discover hidden till then intentions of musicians.
Dark Side of The Moon is my go to test album for any system. Everything for the heartbeat to clair torrie's voice is just perfect for testing high end systems. And you can't forget all the stereo effects.
ill answer this way..... the 1st thing i sent thru my DirectStream dac was Fleetwood Mac TUSK. it *_blew my mind._* all the old cliches, the veil lifted, wider taller deeper soundstage, instruments id never heard. all of it..... i experienced all of it!
Wow, my favorite Uriah Heep album was Salisbury, but I liked about the first half dozen albums, Paul. I also liked the fact that they were one of the groups that I could play many of their guitar parts back in those days. I’m guessing we’re about the same age. 🤣
Was that the 2nd British Rock Meeting in 1972? I remember hearing that being broadcast on AFN radio at the time. I think I still have a cassette I recorded off the air of Curved Air’s performance
Life is so very short, finding Pleasure that sets us Free is Good for the Soul! But don't let it Enslave us! Old Recordings or New, Enjoy your Music while you can! We can't take it with us to the Otherside except in the SPIRIT! Love your Presentations Paul! Humble and Meek, they shall Inherit the World!
I just tried Uriah Heep "Gypsy", the 1973 live recording on UA-cam. It cranks! You have to listen to it driven to get the feel of it. The BASS! Maybe the recording is remastered, but imagine hearing that deep bass on your system (cranked). lol And another part with the tommies going off very quickly with that high pitched squeal (and basically nothing else) yet so much music coming @ you! It sounded so engaging and so 3D on my 5" FR and 6" woofer home hacked speakers. With my Audiolab amp and Samsung tablet.
Around the early 80's listened to Earth Wind and Fire Boogie wonderland through a Sansui G 33000 and AR 9 speakers. Kind of high end at that time. That was great!
I listened to Get Ready by Rare Earth the 1968 recording on my dad's Lexus LS460L Mark Levinson sounds system, and nothing else can do the same, so YES high end audio system will make older music sound better
A nuance, if I may: don't underestimate the recording quality of 'old' music. Many are actually actually quite good and definitely worth playing on a quality sound system. Even bands you wouldn't guess, such as Black Sabbath, paid attention to recording quality. More recent doesn't necessarily mean better recording quality.
“Hearing your music through a microscope” is a perfect analogy to listening to old music on a high quality system. For me the experience is mostly favorable, in that I hear details and effects that I never heard before. Very rarely do I hit a recording that is unlistenable but more often than not it’s a “I can’t believe I listened to this sh@t” moment.
🧐 ONE THING TO CONSIDER ALSO IS.. ..ON WHAT LEVEL OF AUDIO WERE YOU ORIGINALLY ACQUAINTED WITH THE ‘OLD MUSIC’ ?? - WHEN I WAS GROWING UP IN THE 80’s, I DIDN’T HAVE QUALITY ‘PHONICS’ SO NOW I PARTICULARLY ENJOY REVISITING OLD STUFF AND BEING ASTONISHED AT HOW MUCH I WAS MISSING… - ONE OF MY MOST BELOVED EXPERIENCES IS HEARING A TRACK THAT I’VE HEARD A MILLION TIMES IN THE PAST BUT NEVER THOUGHT MUCH ABOUT.. ..HMM, IS THIS MY FAVORITE SONG NOW?? 🤔
thats how i exactly feel about low older record quality when compared to wide frequencies new recordings where u feel the bass and sparking hights they just do not sound great on high end systems - thats why they try to remaster old music to newer standarts
Uriah Heep! Yes! I've seen them many times. They are still touring but with only one original member: Mick Box. I would like to hear your recording of Gypsy and any other of the songs you have from that concert. Is there a way for me to do this?
There's a setlist from 50 years ago (part of "The Second British Rock Meeting 1972"): "MAY, 21 1972 Uriah Heep Setlist at Insel Grün, Germersheim, Germany: Bird of Prey, I Wanna Be Free, Easy Livin', July Morning, Rainbow Demon, The Wizard, Gypsy, Look at Yourself, Love Machine" No published recording available. There's a saying that the set was cut short because the drummer had been hit by some beverage cups. You can find another recording by Paul from that very festival as an official record from Curved Air - published 2018.
The only benefit to using your older classic rock or whatever music on a newer audiophile set up is that it’ll sound better ..not perfect ..but that’s life ..and that’s music 😋
I play my older LP's on my stereo all of the time. It is rather high end. Music is much more important to me than watching TV. I did a demo for my GenZ daughters. I played Future Games (Fleetwood Mac) on LP and Cd. I went between the two. Both of my daughters picked the LP for best sound. They were listening to the stereo on my Stanton Dynaphase 80 headphones that have Bass, Mid and Tweeter in each cup. On the speakers as well both picked the LP.
Paul, he asked about the Beatles and Fleetwood Mac, both are amazing. The Beatles benefit more from hifi than tool does. Fleetwood Mac sounds spectacular aswell. The answer should be yes, definitely worth it. These songs sound way better and are way more intricate than most people realise.
You should hear the high-resolution remixes of Sgt. Pepper, the white album, Abbey Road, Let it Be, Fleetwood Mac (self-titled), Rumours, and similar things on a high-end system! Just about everything that I've heard that has been remixed in high resolution from the original multi-track tapes (not the stereo mix down) sound fantastic on a good system.
l find well mixed/mastered recordings, whether on digital, vinyl, R2R, or even cassette sound great no matter what they're played on. However, aspects such as depth and soundstage might be better enhanced on some systems over others.
Perfect example. Yardbirds '68. A special 180g analog to disc pressing from found master tapes. By Jimmy Page himself on his label! Some recorded live. The pressing is incredible! Quiet, dynamic, .... But what you hear perfectly is what a 2 track live field recording sounded like back then. If that's the best they had back then I am still thrilled to listen to it! Or even more so Monk - Palo Alto. Another found master tape analog to lathe 180g pressing. But the events leading up to and the actual performance are incredibly strange. e.g. a janitor was pushed into proving a piano and tuning it just before Thelonious arrived. It was in Palo Alto High School and no one believed he was coming. So the recording was some school two track the same janitor used? But the pressing is flawless.
Agree 100%. Funny thing is, Fleetwood Mac (and Dire Straits, Pink Floyd) is very well recorded music, far better than today's commercial "loudness wars" afflicted stuff IMO. A little tape hiss (or amps audibly buzzing in the background of Stevie Ray Vaughan's music) makes it "authentic" too - LOL Fleetwood Mac's "Never Going Back Again" is outstanding as my particular system's greatest strength is playing stripped down music consisting of vocals and acoustic guitar. When I demo it for a visitor I always play that song at a healthy volume. It is like Stevie and Lindsey are in the room with us - floors 'em every time...
I wouldn't worry about the flaws in a vintage recording... especially if it's of a "live" performance. Case in point: "Smoke On The Water" by Deep Purple, from the "Made In Japan" tour album. The moments the microphones feed-back gives it a character that makes you realize "Damn!... They're REALLY cranking it out!" =;)
It’s a good question. Best to set up 2 systems. One vintage and one from PS Audio. As I wasn’t there in 60’s I will have no recollection of the sound. Multi system is the best. Vintage with Garrard 301 or 401 with SME TA won’t cost so much.
I recall of big bit concerts in 60ties and a dance discos from 70ties and what was common then that 95% speakers were many boxes each with big widerange drivers. In concerts with separate Marshall, in discos were used one common often tube powerful mono amplifiers . Expensive stereo was reserved for home use. . They were not resolving. , bass was usualy "bass reflex" type which provided high output at limited band - anyway they were very good in music expression and made people crazy joy. May be because of unity of listeners thanks to worlds top twenty lists.
@@Mikexception They still do it today. If you take a night club, for example, you don't always have a choice as to where the speakers are placed, and people's position in relation to where the speakers are, can't be controlled. Mono usually sounds better. Unless someone knows enough to stand between left and right speaker cabinets, you're not going to hear everything. Mono forces all the music to be coming out of all the speakers.
Stop by PS Audio for a listen. Would be wonderful. Could be costly. Something about not knowing you need to spend on the high end stuff. Then having to have it!
Uriah Heep fan? There's hope for you yet, Paul. 😉 All good natured kidding aside, even though live recordings,more often than not, are nowhere near the quality of studio production, it's that rawness that gives those recordings a life of their own. They may not give you the soundstage and clarity you expect, but there's usually a completely different energy that only going to a concert can give. I just went to one this week, and have another 4 lined up through September.
A great subject to bring up. No actually it does not. A high resolution system will make your old music sound a bit different, exposing board adjustments and mixing/ effect nuances we have become acclimated to, and bring them more forward. Nothing terribly bad, though it does require a little of a ‘Mental’ listening adjustment to the perception as to what we have been used to.
No it definitively isn't. When I was a kid with a walkman/mp3 player and cheapo headphones there were tracks I barely could listen to as they sounded like a one big mess, so I thought they were just bad, back then. When I revisit those now on a proper gear I often find them to sound great.
Frankly, a lot of music pre-2000 was recorded a lot better, and tape has such a resolution that improvements in conversion are clearly heard. For example, the Fleetwood Mac 24/96 version sounds incredible. Not everything that is old sounds great, but odds are that it was engineered better than a modern recording and nuance is well preserved because of the analog medium.
I am younger than you but my musical tastes go back even further. I enjoy jazz from the 50s, 40s and sometimes the 1930s. The 1930s recordings are derived from restored 78 records (before magnetic master tapes) and you can hear the floors on any modern equipment. I will definitely say that they do sound better on good quality equipment. In fact I would say it is how I judge the quality of my equipment - if it can play those recordings that are less than perfect and present them in a musical and enjoyable way. So I would say when buying high end equipment that people need to make sure they hear it playing the music that they like on the media that they have. Too many people get trapped into buying expensive music formats, special reamasters or simply listening to music that has been recorded using audiophile techniques or equipment.
Yes, better hardware makes all the music more enjoyable but at the same time that what you mentioned is kind of music that benefits the least from it, compared to other genres.
I got into "high end audio" because I wanted crap to sound great and loud (in that order). That's why anyone who was serious about it back then (70's / 80's) also had lots of tone controls including EQ's. There was so much left on the table by a lot of band's recordings. I went to concerts at a very young age and saw that a sound board could turn a hockey rink into a concert hall. A few days later that same board turned a 4 foot tall platform in a grass field into another concert hall. That's what I've been chasing since I was a kid. Really dont care if it was recorded like crap (as long as I still can fix it). Move a slid or two and almost anything sounds as good as a Rush album.
🤔 could we say “ amplified “😁… leaving room for nostalgia and also many more older recordings have been redone and remastered so you can have the best of both worlds anytime you want😎🤗😍😍😍
Sort of…. Some-of the worst sounding recorded music, to me at least, is re mastered versions of older recordings. There are no absolutes (well,…very few maybe) in audio.
Probably a bit shallow of me but thing that really bugs me with some older recordings is the lack of bass extension. The rest of it can sound amazing but it's often missing that last extra dimension for some reason.
It's because most Listeners didn't have the system to reproduce such stuff, So many tunes dont go where they could have. Remember that radio airplay was on HORRID sound systems mostly.
Uriah heep magician birthday UFO lights out,I listen to Fleetwood Mac pete green and rumers ect also heck of a lot of 70s rock 80s heavy metal. My God high end hi-fi really brings out the awesomeness of it. You not doing justice to those artist's oh Nazareth expect no mercy brilliant album. My set up £80,000,00 also from England.
The answer to this is to use a speaker that makes it "real and exciting". I would say with confidence the answer is to use horn speakers, such as Lansing's "Voice of the Theater", or similar cinema speaker designs of that era. The downside is these speakers are large -some for the large "picture palaces" theatres are very much larger, but if you have the space, go for those. Stereo is not that important with large horns. Who cares where the musicians are placed when using a cinema horn. Nearly all recordings take on new excitement when using a large cinema horn. Old 78's are best on horns too!!
I wouldn't throw away a high-end audio system just because I want to hear old (or older) music recordings "authentically" with it. I don't necessarily have to sleep on a bare floor just because I have a nice bed.
IMHO, it would really seem to come down to the time-honored idiom *Take The Good With The Bad* . I'm sorry if this may seem to be over-simplifying things, but doesn't it really boil down to being accepting of the bad aspects of old recordings (since there's really nothing you can do about it, anyway), while still appreciating being able to *faithfully* extract whatever good there may still be there?
If one got new equipment and his listening experience got worse with his music. In this case the new equipment isn’t really high end at all. The Beatles and Fleetwood Mac are excellent examples of well produced pop music.
Maybe we should use the word "charm" instead of "flawed", but I'm one of those who wouldn't listen to what I consider bad music just because the recording is good. 😄
Can a system be too revealing? Yes... and no. Just think of special effects in old movies and how they look today in 4K. Too much information can take away some the magic... but then again, add a whole new one. Speaking of Uriah Heep - On "Come Away Melinda", for example, there was a lot of experimentation with the stereo sound. The lines sung on the left channel are much closer to the listener's ear, than those on the right channel. The opening of each channel can also be clearly heard, because it is accompanied by a noise trail, which then immediately falls silent again. Was that intentional? I do not think so. You probably just couldn't hear it back then... it's was 'blurred out'. You may find this annoying at first... but over time it unfolds its very own magic. It brings you closer to the music... the musicians themselves... the moment of the recording. The creaking of the piano chair, the guitar string that was not plucked cleanly at this one specific point in the song.. and ONLY at this point, because loops were not repeated here, but the song was actually played through in one piece... etc. I don't want to miss that anymore.
I play all my music through my Technics receiver - aux cord to PC sound card I use EQ's to fine tune, as long as the source is a quality recording everything sounds good. I have two JBL Northridge 3 way speakers. Fact: MP3 is Trash, stop buying that crap people, buy an LP!
Cannot see why not. Play an old 78 vinyl record from the 1930’s on a high end system you are going to hear everything that album can produce in mono audio. What if such an album is extremely rare and worth a thousand or more dollars. Does that mean you have to play it on a 1930’s record player..🤔🙄😳😀
There was really good recordings as well back in the day as well. i notice there at times just need a little more volume and may not have the dynamics of a better master. There's also crappy recent recordings as well. Nothing wrong with a little distortion.
More than 50% of music coming from my JBL's was recorded in the 1960's and 1970's. Damn right it's worth it! If you're going to play Fleetwood Mac it better involve Peter Green, Danny Kirwan and Jeremy Spencer! You can keep the "sheep bleep" that comes from Stevie's mouth... 😁
@@Mark-lq3sb Not sure about that, but Ms Nicks was crowned in 1977, shortly after producing the greatest rock live performance of all time, Rhiannon on Midnight Special, the most stunning debut of a new artist in history
@@aakar88 Crowned? Greatest rock live performance of all time? By whom and who says so? New artist? I guess they never heard of Buckingham Nicks years before.
@@Mark-lq3sb In '77 Rhiannon was constantly played on the radio, everybody loved the beautiful silky vocal and were starting to become aware of Fleetwood Mac adding new talent. Rhiannon live on the Midnight Special was the first glimpse of what the new lineup looked like and what they were capable of. Seeing this debut in "77 is still one of the greatest most powerful rock experiences of all time, Ms Nicks literally took the title in about a 6 minute live performance, thru the years we watched her glory as well as her struggles, watched her become a solo star as well as a loyal member of FM. Rock and Roll survivor, one of the greatest in our lifetime, kindly show a bit of respect
Kind of off topic but I feel like it's not been told enough. I totally respect people who say they prefer to listen to old music although I personally definitively don't. I have literally zero respect for people who are like "oNlY oLd mUsiC iS gOoD, nEw mUsiC sUcK". Hipsters and ignorants that were never interested in music at all. All they wanted is just to fit in into their closed-minded social circles. Please don't be those guys.
" it’s like watching old films in 4K" - un, no. First of all if one has a film original on 35mm and especially 70mm film there is more than enough information on that material to fill up 4K video. Secondly, significant advances in audio recording were done in the 1950's that even by the early 1960s stereo recordings done to the highest standard (on tape) really contain more information than copies which were done on vinyl or cassette tape.
What if you have a high end home theater setup with top of the line Audio system. You watch a classic 1940’s movie in black & white. Does that mean you have to watch that 1940 movie on a back and white tv from the 1940’s. 🙄
You don't have to buy a black and white TV. Black and white played on a color TV is still black and white. Also, if its a movie, and not an old TV show, the aspect ratio will be 16:9. Since 16:9 is the current, and correct aspect ratio, playing a movie on an old 4:3 crt would be less accurate then using a modern system.
"Does old music benefit from high end audio?" The age of the music is mostly meaningless. Yes, today's equipment has the potential to produce better sounding songs. However, the equipment is only one part of the equation. The other part of the equation is the "human" factor... meaning, the personnel in the studio need to know what they are doing. By that, I do not mean whether or not they know how to operator their equipment. What I do mean is that they need to know how to reap the most out of their equipment. Sadly, it seems like most studio personnel are obsessed with compression, echo, reverb, double-voicing, equalization, etc. All of that kills the sound quality. @0:57 "...The Beatles, Fleetwood Mac..." If you are fortunate enough to land the right pressings (hard to do), those bands will sound fantastic. Perhaps not what some at audio shows would deem worthy. But probably because they never heard the right pressings, even though they are in the high-end audio business. I have heard an Abbey Road pressing and a Led Zep II pressing and a Black Sabbath pressing (first album) that were out of this world realistic. They would stand up to and beat out nearly everything that they play at the high-end audio shows. And it is music that we all know and all (with few exceptions) love, being played on high-end gear. It is audio nirvana. The Abbey Road pressing was played in the presence of Garth Leerer, President of Musical Surroundings, and he exclaimed "Outstanding!". The Black Sabbath pressing was played in the presence of Jim White, creator of Aesthetix high-end gear. A year after he heard it, I asked him if he remembered, and he said "Yes". I have heard a fantastic Madonna Immaculate Collection pressing (double album), and a Lipps, Inc Funkytown pressing, and several other pressings that are outstanding. It is unfortunate that such gems are so hard to find. They should be the rule; not the exception. Sadly, sub-par sound quality is the rule, when it should be the exception. So you can find great sounding songs of your favorite music, but be prepared to search and search and search and search. Also be prepared to spend $$, due to a conga line of purchases that are bad or nothing special. You can go on, and on and for some songs, and a great sounding pressing might not exist, or you might have to purchase 20+ copies to have any shot at success. With digital, qobuz removes most of the risk. But you are limited to their catalog. I mentioned qobuz, because they offer the most exceptionally great sounding offerings. In summery, the age of the music is not the #1 factor. It is the studio personnel and the specific copy that you obtain. And if it is a re-master, it will likely be worse than the original release.
Many of those recordings from the 70's, are actually pretty good. There is a lot more info on those masters that can be pulled out by a highly resolving system, to make hearing the 'flaws' not a big concern.
I listen to a lot of prog and fusion from that time, and they tend to be pretty well recorded.
Genesis - Selling England by the Pound, King Crimson, Return to Forever, Weather Report, PFM, Gong, Bruford all had some pretty impressive recordings.
It depends on how well the music was recorded in the first place. A high resolving system cannot ruin the sound of an old recording, if it sounds bad it was bad from the beginning. It's like having poor eyesight and then finally seeing the world through a pair of glasses. You may not like what you see but those details were always there, you just couldn't see them.
Totally agree. Good recording comes first. I can still remember the old Warner Bro & RCA vynil pressings in the 70s n 80s are just superb when l was in high school. You can hear the bass n clarity
I agree 100 percent. I’ve been building and upgrading my stereo system since 1972. I was 19 then. My father thought it was a waste of time and money. So once I got the system the way I liked it I played some of my father’s old records ( after a good cleaning ). He was so surprised by what he heard. More fuller and realistic sound. He told his cousin to bring over some of his old records so he could also enjoy how much better they would sound on a high end system. Unfortunately my dad’s cousin said that his old records sounded terrible and very scratchy. Lmao. I told him that you’re hearing the brushes on the symbols that you never heard before on your regular old system. He still thinks that all he heard was scratches. I said funny how he heard the sound only when the symbols were being played with brush’s. Could not convince him. Some people just don’t have a ear for good sounding music. Thanks for all you do so we can hear and feel music the way it should be.
Really liked your response to this question. Music through the ages has evolved in style but also in how its recorded. I have a very resolving system and I love that I can listen to the evolution of the recording technology through the years. I agree that listening to much of the “older” recordings of iconic music through a revealing modern system is emotional and illuminating. I can’t imagine what your FR 30’s do with it. Must be magical.
Take 5 has been hailed as one of the top recordings out there and it was recorded in 1961 (and still hailed right now).
In my opinion, nothing takes the place of a very nice high-end system. Great video as always.
Thanks for sharing Paul 👍
Listening to early Beatles on my friend's mono tubed record player, definitely a more immersive experience in the music itself, that same music over my reference system is more interesting than immersive - hearing the crudeness of those early stereo attempts, vocals out of one channel, even Ringos drums, before they started messing with laying cloth over his drum heads in the Apple days to dampen the sound were more realistic which is clearly reveled with reference playback - - so for me, two very different experiences. An interesting question posed in a way that I found myself relating to and considering - thanks Troy & Paul.
I agree with Paul, the better my system gets the more I enjoy old music. If a record is noisy the noise seems disconnected from the music which is behind the speakers. Thanks Paul for for your book and CD, it really helps in setting up speakers.
I think that just about sums it up, if good gear shows up older or poor recording, doesn't matter, progress is a good thing
cleaning up the old master pressings and remastering these old recordings can many times make surprising improvements.
Good to hear you're point of view and I'm inclined to agree with you my friend. Greetings from Sheffield South Yorkshire England 🤗😸
Improvement always means improvement no matter the type or date of rejestration. I am happy too how even pieces I know since 50 years are getting so much more with every step ahead when I discover hidden till then intentions of musicians.
Good man. Bless you 🙏 ♥
Dark Side of The Moon is my go to test album for any system. Everything for the heartbeat to clair torrie's voice is just perfect for testing high end systems. And you can't forget all the stereo effects.
Right on 👍👍
ill answer this way..... the 1st thing i sent thru my DirectStream dac was Fleetwood Mac TUSK.
it *_blew my mind._* all the old cliches, the veil lifted, wider taller deeper soundstage, instruments id never heard.
all of it..... i experienced all of it!
just saw Waters play on Colbert this week, man is still in top form @ 80!
Wow, my favorite
Uriah Heep album was Salisbury, but I liked
about the first half dozen albums, Paul. I also liked the fact that they were one of the groups that I could play many of their guitar parts back in those days. I’m guessing we’re about the same age. 🤣
Was that the 2nd British Rock Meeting in 1972? I remember hearing that being broadcast on AFN radio at the time. I think I still have a cassette I recorded off the air of Curved Air’s performance
Life is so very short, finding Pleasure that sets us Free is Good for the Soul! But don't let it Enslave us! Old Recordings or New, Enjoy your Music while you can! We can't take it with us to the Otherside except in the SPIRIT!
Love your Presentations Paul! Humble and Meek, they shall Inherit the World!
I just tried Uriah Heep "Gypsy", the 1973 live recording on UA-cam. It cranks! You have to listen to it driven to get the feel of it. The BASS! Maybe the recording is remastered, but imagine hearing that deep bass on your system (cranked). lol And another part with the tommies going off very quickly with that high pitched squeal (and basically nothing else) yet so much music coming @ you! It sounded so engaging and so 3D on my 5" FR and 6" woofer home hacked speakers. With my Audiolab amp and Samsung tablet.
Around the early 80's listened to Earth Wind and Fire Boogie wonderland through a Sansui G 33000 and AR 9 speakers. Kind of high end at that time. That was great!
I listened to Get Ready by Rare Earth the 1968 recording on my dad's Lexus LS460L Mark Levinson sounds system, and nothing else can do the same, so YES high end audio system will make older music sound better
A nuance, if I may: don't underestimate the recording quality of 'old' music. Many are actually actually quite good and definitely worth playing on a quality sound system. Even bands you wouldn't guess, such as Black Sabbath, paid attention to recording quality. More recent doesn't necessarily mean better recording quality.
Awesome Sabbath bloody Sabbath one of my favourites!👍🤟
“Hearing your music through a microscope” is a perfect analogy to listening to old music on a high quality system. For me the experience is mostly favorable, in that I hear details and effects that I never heard before. Very rarely do I hit a recording that is unlistenable but more often than not it’s a “I can’t believe I listened to this sh@t” moment.
For '70's music on high end try Manfred Mann's Earth Band - Solar Fire, sounds amazing.
Nice one 👍
Very simple: if the source is good, and your system suits your taste, it will sound good, and the other way around. ✌️❤️🇩🇰
🧐 ONE THING TO CONSIDER ALSO IS.. ..ON WHAT LEVEL OF AUDIO WERE YOU ORIGINALLY ACQUAINTED WITH THE ‘OLD MUSIC’ ??
- WHEN I WAS GROWING UP IN THE 80’s, I DIDN’T HAVE QUALITY ‘PHONICS’ SO NOW I PARTICULARLY ENJOY REVISITING OLD STUFF AND BEING ASTONISHED AT HOW MUCH I WAS MISSING…
- ONE OF MY MOST BELOVED EXPERIENCES IS HEARING A TRACK THAT I’VE HEARD A MILLION TIMES IN THE PAST BUT NEVER THOUGHT MUCH ABOUT.. ..HMM, IS THIS MY FAVORITE SONG NOW?? 🤔
Thanks, now off to my Fleetwood Mac 'CD's
thats how i exactly feel about low older record quality when compared to wide frequencies new recordings where u feel the bass and sparking hights they just do not sound great on high end systems - thats why they try to remaster old music to newer standarts
You should get a tablet Paul. Printing out the questions on a daily basis wastes trees ;). Enjoy the videos none the less!
Yes!!
Uriah Heep! Yes! I've seen them many times. They are still touring but with only one original member: Mick Box. I would like to hear your recording of Gypsy and any other of the songs you have from that concert. Is there a way for me to do this?
There's a setlist from 50 years ago (part of "The Second British Rock Meeting 1972"):
"MAY, 21 1972
Uriah Heep Setlist
at Insel Grün, Germersheim, Germany:
Bird of Prey, I Wanna Be Free, Easy Livin', July Morning, Rainbow Demon, The Wizard, Gypsy, Look at Yourself, Love Machine"
No published recording available. There's a saying that the set was cut short because the drummer had been hit by some beverage cups. You can find another recording by Paul from that very festival as an official record from Curved Air - published 2018.
I’d love to hear Paul’s recordings of gypsy, uriah Heap was the first band saw, absolutely amazing.
The only benefit to using your older classic rock or whatever music on a newer audiophile set up is that it’ll sound better ..not perfect ..but that’s life ..and that’s music 😋
I play my older LP's on my stereo all of the time. It is rather high end. Music is much more important to me than watching TV. I did a demo for my GenZ daughters. I played Future Games (Fleetwood Mac) on LP and Cd. I went between the two. Both of my daughters picked the LP for best sound. They were listening to the stereo on my Stanton Dynaphase 80 headphones that have Bass, Mid and Tweeter in each cup. On the speakers as well both picked the LP.
Paul, he asked about the Beatles and Fleetwood Mac, both are amazing. The Beatles benefit more from hifi than tool does. Fleetwood Mac sounds spectacular aswell. The answer should be yes, definitely worth it. These songs sound way better and are way more intricate than most people realise.
LUL
Actually, Tool does benefit quite a bit from a good system. With the Beatles, the big jump comes from the Giles Martin remixes in 24/96.
You should hear the high-resolution remixes of Sgt. Pepper, the white album, Abbey Road, Let it Be, Fleetwood Mac (self-titled), Rumours, and similar things on a high-end system! Just about everything that I've heard that has been remixed in high resolution from the original multi-track tapes (not the stereo mix down) sound fantastic on a good system.
l find well mixed/mastered recordings, whether on digital, vinyl, R2R, or even cassette sound great no matter what they're played on. However, aspects such as depth and soundstage might be better enhanced on some systems over others.
100% agree with all that you say it’s definitely better on a high end system The Beatles Rolling Stones Fleetwood Mac even Dire Straits
One of my absolute best sounding CDs are made 1984 so I guess that's not old if old is supposed to sound less good than todays recordings.
Perfect example. Yardbirds '68. A special 180g analog to disc pressing from found master tapes. By Jimmy Page himself on his label! Some recorded live. The pressing is incredible! Quiet, dynamic, .... But what you hear perfectly is what a 2 track live field recording sounded like back then. If that's the best they had back then I am still thrilled to listen to it!
Or even more so Monk - Palo Alto. Another found master tape analog to lathe 180g pressing. But the events leading up to and the actual performance are incredibly strange. e.g. a janitor was pushed into proving a piano and tuning it just before Thelonious arrived. It was in Palo Alto High School and no one believed he was coming. So the recording was some school two track the same janitor used? But the pressing is flawless.
i really really waiting for some studio gear from PS Audio
Agree 100%. Funny thing is, Fleetwood Mac (and Dire Straits, Pink Floyd) is very well recorded music, far better than today's commercial "loudness wars" afflicted stuff IMO. A little tape hiss (or amps audibly buzzing in the background of Stevie Ray Vaughan's music) makes it "authentic" too - LOL
Fleetwood Mac's "Never Going Back Again" is outstanding as my particular system's greatest strength is playing stripped down music consisting of vocals and acoustic guitar. When I demo it for a visitor I always play that song at a healthy volume. It is like Stevie and Lindsey are in the room with us - floors 'em every time...
I wouldn't worry about the flaws in a vintage recording... especially if it's of a "live" performance. Case in point: "Smoke On The Water" by Deep Purple, from the "Made In Japan" tour album. The moments the microphones feed-back gives it a character that makes you realize "Damn!... They're REALLY cranking it out!" =;)
It’s a good question. Best to set up 2 systems. One vintage and one from PS Audio. As I wasn’t there in 60’s I will have no recollection of the sound. Multi system is the best. Vintage with Garrard 301 or 401 with SME TA won’t cost so much.
I recall of big bit concerts in 60ties and a dance discos from 70ties and what was common then that 95% speakers were many boxes each with big widerange drivers. In concerts with separate Marshall, in discos were used one common often tube powerful mono amplifiers . Expensive stereo was reserved for home use. . They were not resolving. , bass was usualy "bass reflex" type which provided high output at limited band - anyway they were very good in music expression and made people crazy joy. May be because of unity of listeners thanks to worlds top twenty lists.
@@Mikexception They still do it today. If you take a night club, for example, you don't always have a choice as to where the speakers are placed, and people's position in relation to where the speakers are, can't be controlled. Mono usually sounds better. Unless someone knows enough to stand between left and right speaker cabinets, you're not going to hear everything. Mono forces all the music to be coming out of all the speakers.
Stop by PS Audio for a listen. Would be wonderful. Could be costly. Something about not knowing you need to spend on the high end stuff. Then having to have it!
Uriah Heep fan? There's hope for you yet, Paul. 😉
All good natured kidding aside, even though live recordings,more often than not, are nowhere near the quality of studio production, it's that rawness that gives those recordings a life of their own. They may not give you the soundstage and clarity you expect, but there's usually a completely different energy that only going to a concert can give. I just went to one this week, and have another 4 lined up through September.
A great subject to bring up. No actually it does not. A high resolution system will make your old music sound a bit different, exposing board adjustments and mixing/ effect nuances we have become acclimated to, and bring them more forward. Nothing terribly bad, though it does require a little of a ‘Mental’ listening adjustment to the perception as to what we have been used to.
High end audio speaks to the excesses in our society. A dead end road for sure. Be content with what you have as the pleasure is the same.
No it definitively isn't.
When I was a kid with a walkman/mp3 player and cheapo headphones there were tracks I barely could listen to as they sounded like a one big mess, so I thought they were just bad, back then. When I revisit those now on a proper gear I often find them to sound great.
Frankly, a lot of music pre-2000 was recorded a lot better, and tape has such a resolution that improvements in conversion are clearly heard. For example, the Fleetwood Mac 24/96 version sounds incredible. Not everything that is old sounds great, but odds are that it was engineered better than a modern recording and nuance is well preserved because of the analog medium.
I am younger than you but my musical tastes go back even further. I enjoy jazz from the 50s, 40s and sometimes the 1930s. The 1930s recordings are derived from restored 78 records (before magnetic master tapes) and you can hear the floors on any modern equipment. I will definitely say that they do sound better on good quality equipment. In fact I would say it is how I judge the quality of my equipment - if it can play those recordings that are less than perfect and present them in a musical and enjoyable way.
So I would say when buying high end equipment that people need to make sure they hear it playing the music that they like on the media that they have. Too many people get trapped into buying expensive music formats, special reamasters or simply listening to music that has been recorded using audiophile techniques or equipment.
I can say that I listen to a lot of 50s and 60s rock and yes, a great system will make these recordings more enjoyable.
Yes, better hardware makes all the music more enjoyable but at the same time that what you mentioned is kind of music that benefits the least from it, compared to other genres.
There are DEFINITELY good recordings of Fleetwood Mac. "Rumors" is a demo album for me.
Agree Gold Dust Woman is amazing on my system
Brilliant album also Boston blues 👍
I got into "high end audio" because I wanted crap to sound great and loud (in that order). That's why anyone who was serious about it back then (70's / 80's) also had lots of tone controls including EQ's. There was so much left on the table by a lot of band's recordings. I went to concerts at a very young age and saw that a sound board could turn a hockey rink into a concert hall. A few days later that same board turned a 4 foot tall platform in a grass field into another concert hall. That's what I've been chasing since I was a kid. Really dont care if it was recorded like crap (as long as I still can fix it). Move a slid or two and almost anything sounds as good as a Rush album.
Rush awesome 👍
🤔 could we say “ amplified “😁… leaving room for nostalgia and also many more older recordings have been redone and remastered so you can have the best of both worlds anytime you want😎🤗😍😍😍
Sort of…. Some-of the worst sounding recorded music, to me at least, is re mastered versions of older recordings. There are no absolutes (well,…very few maybe) in audio.
@@JohnLnyc 🤔🤷♂️No doubt …I personally have not …but when I do I just avoid them 😁😍😍😍
Probably a bit shallow of me but thing that really bugs me with some older recordings is the lack of bass extension. The rest of it can sound amazing but it's often missing that last extra dimension for some reason.
It's because most Listeners didn't have the system to reproduce such stuff, So many tunes dont go where they could have.
Remember that radio airplay was on HORRID sound systems mostly.
@@bidenisasnake9932 Yes, that most certainly crossed my mind and is probably the main reason.
Uriah heep magician birthday UFO lights out,I listen to Fleetwood Mac pete green and rumers ect also heck of a lot of 70s rock 80s heavy metal. My God high end hi-fi really brings out the awesomeness of it. You not doing justice to those artist's oh Nazareth expect no mercy brilliant album. My set up £80,000,00 also from England.
The answer to this is to use a speaker that makes it "real and exciting". I would say with confidence the answer is to use horn speakers, such as Lansing's "Voice of the Theater", or similar cinema speaker designs of that era. The downside is these speakers are large -some for the large "picture palaces" theatres are very much larger, but if you have the space, go for those. Stereo is not that important with large horns. Who cares where the musicians are placed when using a cinema horn. Nearly all recordings take on new excitement when using a large cinema horn. Old 78's are best on horns too!!
Who cares for a system where I cannot hear where the musicians are placed?
hi end makes old music sound much better . simple! even better when my new 300's turn up soon. ha
I wouldn't throw away a high-end audio system just because I want to hear old (or older) music recordings "authentically" with it. I don't necessarily have to sleep on a bare floor just because I have a nice bed.
4:59 Huriah Heep - Gypsy
IMHO, it would really seem to come down to the time-honored idiom *Take The Good With The Bad* .
I'm sorry if this may seem to be over-simplifying things, but doesn't it really boil down to being accepting of the bad aspects of old recordings (since there's really nothing you can do about it, anyway), while still appreciating being able to *faithfully* extract whatever good there may still be there?
There is a point where there are diminishing returns and investing more and more really isn't worth it no matter what kind of lesson you listen to.
If one got new equipment and his listening experience got worse with his music. In this case the new equipment isn’t really high end at all. The Beatles and Fleetwood Mac are excellent examples of well produced pop music.
Maybe we should use the word "charm" instead of "flawed", but I'm one of those who wouldn't listen to what I consider bad music just because the recording is good. 😄
I have heard high end cd players bring out sound never heard in the tracks
I play 78 RPM‘s records on a TNT turntable
Does old music benefit from high end audio?
Jimmy Cliff : I Can See Clearly Now ........ LOL
Original Van Halen discs sound awful on a high end system. However, I replaced with the Remasters and they sound much better...
Uriah Heep, Deep Purple, Jethro Thull ... all great iconic bands ... without Uriah Heep there would probably not be Queen lol
Can a system be too revealing? Yes... and no.
Just think of special effects in old movies and how they look today in 4K. Too much information can take away some the magic... but then again, add a whole new one.
Speaking of Uriah Heep - On "Come Away Melinda", for example, there was a lot of experimentation with the stereo sound. The lines sung on the left channel are much closer to the listener's ear, than those on the right channel. The opening of each channel can also be clearly heard, because it is accompanied by a noise trail, which then immediately falls silent again. Was that intentional? I do not think so. You probably just couldn't hear it back then... it's was 'blurred out'.
You may find this annoying at first... but over time it unfolds its very own magic. It brings you closer to the music... the musicians themselves... the moment of the recording. The creaking of the piano chair, the guitar string that was not plucked cleanly at this one specific point in the song.. and ONLY at this point, because loops were not repeated here, but the song was actually played through in one piece... etc.
I don't want to miss that anymore.
I play all my music through my Technics receiver - aux cord to PC sound card I use EQ's to fine tune, as long as the source is a quality recording everything sounds good. I have two JBL Northridge 3 way speakers. Fact: MP3 is Trash, stop buying that crap people, buy an LP!
For sure all audio benefits from old music.
hipster spotted.
Can't upscale what's not there. Yeah, "But it was a state of the art recording, they used 2" reel to reel!?!" Yeah 60 years ago.
Cannot see why not. Play an old 78 vinyl record from the 1930’s on a high end system you are going to hear everything that album can produce in mono audio.
What if such an album is extremely rare and worth a thousand or more dollars.
Does that mean you have to play it on a 1930’s record player..🤔🙄😳😀
The real question is does HiFi benefit from old tunes? Damn right!!!
Poorly made music on my audio system is like watching movies from the 70s on my 140” home theater screen.
There was really good recordings as well back in the day as well. i notice there at times just need a little more volume and may not have the dynamics of a better master. There's also crappy recent recordings as well. Nothing wrong with a little distortion.
More than 50% of music coming from my JBL's was recorded in the 1960's and 1970's. Damn right it's worth it!
If you're going to play Fleetwood Mac it better involve Peter Green, Danny Kirwan and Jeremy Spencer! You can keep the "sheep bleep" that comes from Stevie's mouth... 😁
Stevie is awesome still The Queen Of Rock And Roll, the look, the voice, the songs.
@@aakar88
The Queen? No, that would be Janis.
@@Mark-lq3sb Not sure about that, but Ms Nicks was crowned in 1977, shortly after producing the greatest rock live performance of all time, Rhiannon on Midnight Special, the most stunning debut of a new artist in history
@@aakar88
Crowned? Greatest rock live performance of all time? By whom and who says so?
New artist? I guess they never heard of Buckingham Nicks years before.
@@Mark-lq3sb In '77 Rhiannon was constantly played on the radio, everybody loved the beautiful silky vocal and were starting to become aware of Fleetwood Mac adding new talent. Rhiannon live on the Midnight Special was the first glimpse of what the new lineup looked like and what they were capable of.
Seeing this debut in "77 is still one of the greatest most powerful rock experiences of all time, Ms Nicks literally took the title in about a 6 minute live performance, thru the years we watched her glory as well as her struggles, watched her become a solo star as well as a loyal member of FM.
Rock and Roll survivor, one of the greatest in our lifetime, kindly show a bit of respect
Kind of off topic but I feel like it's not been told enough.
I totally respect people who say they prefer to listen to old music although I personally definitively don't.
I have literally zero respect for people who are like "oNlY oLd mUsiC iS gOoD, nEw mUsiC sUcK". Hipsters and ignorants that were never interested in music at all. All they wanted is just to fit in into their closed-minded social circles. Please don't be those guys.
How about ,The 40s the 50s the 60s the 70s the 80d the 90s and the 2000s were great for music.
Now it's kind of lost ???
if I come over to your place to hear your system
are you goanna make me wear a mask ?
No , it’s like watching old films in 4K
" it’s like watching old films in 4K" - un, no. First of all if one has a film original on 35mm and especially 70mm film there is more than enough information on that material to fill up 4K video.
Secondly, significant advances in audio recording were done in the 1950's that even by the early 1960s stereo recordings done to the highest standard (on tape) really contain more information than copies which were done on vinyl or cassette tape.
What if you have a high end home theater setup with top of the line Audio system. You watch a classic 1940’s movie in black & white. Does that mean you have to watch that 1940 movie on a back and white tv from the 1940’s. 🙄
You don't have to buy a black and white TV. Black and white played on a color TV is still black and white. Also, if its a movie, and not an old TV show, the aspect ratio will be 16:9. Since 16:9 is the current, and correct aspect ratio, playing a movie on an old 4:3 crt would be less accurate then using a modern system.
"Does old music benefit from high end audio?"
The age of the music is mostly meaningless.
Yes, today's equipment has the potential to produce better sounding songs. However, the equipment is only one part of the equation.
The other part of the equation is the "human" factor... meaning, the personnel in the studio need to know what they are doing.
By that, I do not mean whether or not they know how to operator their equipment. What I do mean is that they need to know how to reap the most out of their equipment.
Sadly, it seems like most studio personnel are obsessed with compression, echo, reverb, double-voicing, equalization, etc. All of that kills the sound quality.
@0:57 "...The Beatles, Fleetwood Mac..."
If you are fortunate enough to land the right pressings (hard to do), those bands will sound fantastic. Perhaps not what some at audio shows would deem worthy. But probably because they never heard the right pressings, even though they are in the high-end audio business.
I have heard an Abbey Road pressing and a Led Zep II pressing and a Black Sabbath pressing (first album) that were out of this world realistic. They would stand up to and beat out nearly everything that they play at the high-end audio shows. And it is music that we all know and all (with few exceptions) love, being played on high-end gear. It is audio nirvana.
The Abbey Road pressing was played in the presence of Garth Leerer, President of Musical Surroundings, and he exclaimed "Outstanding!".
The Black Sabbath pressing was played in the presence of Jim White, creator of Aesthetix high-end gear. A year after he heard it, I asked him if he remembered, and he said "Yes".
I have heard a fantastic Madonna Immaculate Collection pressing (double album), and a Lipps, Inc Funkytown pressing, and several other pressings that are outstanding.
It is unfortunate that such gems are so hard to find. They should be the rule; not the exception. Sadly, sub-par sound quality is the rule, when it should be the exception.
So you can find great sounding songs of your favorite music, but be prepared to search and search and search and search. Also be prepared to spend $$, due to a conga line of purchases that are bad or nothing special. You can go on, and on and for some songs, and a great sounding pressing might not exist, or you might have to purchase 20+ copies to have any shot at success.
With digital, qobuz removes most of the risk. But you are limited to their catalog. I mentioned qobuz, because they offer the most exceptionally great sounding offerings.
In summery, the age of the music is not the #1 factor. It is the studio personnel and the specific copy that you obtain. And if it is a re-master, it will likely be worse than the original release.
Dumb question