32 of 37 people found the following review helpful
This review is from: Abbey Road (Audio CD)
This is a simple review from someone with a fairly good CD system that didn't cost the earth (£1500 bought over a number of years) Arcam, B&W, Yamaha, QED cable.
I don't know the fancy words and high brow tech talk for describing the way things sound but thought I'd give my honest opinion of what I heard.
I waited a few days for this arrive after much anticipation, hearing all sorts of hype, opinions and so called reviews. I've owned the 1987 CD for approx 10 years, like how it sounded, and know it as well as the next man..... most of the words, air guitar solo's etc etc (lol, yes I'm 28 years old :-)
The long and the short of it is there is a definite difference in the quality of sound on the 2009 CD. Don't expect a completely different sound because you're essentially listening to the same source material on the same format (CD) but there is a difference I guarantee you. What you get is a cleaner sound, very much like thin layer of dirt has been removed from the source. They have boosted the overall recording level slightly (I always found the 1987 disc a bit quiet anyway) but not massively so. I don't believe they've altered the mix very much (if at all), you're likely to find that due to the cleaner sound, you can just hear instruments that are less prominant with better definition.
Whether you notice the definite difference with this version will all depend on two things.
1) The quality of your equipment = the better it is, the greater the difference (don't bother if you listen using an Ghetto blaster from Tandy for example), I'd say a £300 system upwards (you'd need better ears for £300 though).
2) How you listen to your music = whether music is just for background ambience........ or for eyes closed, comfy sofa, sunday afternoon music appreciation
If you still can't hear the difference after meeting both the above criteria then I can't help you ha ha
Finally, I don't know a lot about audio compression and frequency limiting and frankly it bores me when I read reviews with that kind of info in, all I know is what I hear.
Hope this helps you make a decision guys
PS. I like how it sounds, I think they did a good job
Sort: Oldest first | Newest first
Showing 1-1 of 1 posts in this discussion
Initial post: 15 Oct 2009 13:17:27 BDT
D. J. Roberts says:
I have a pretty good set-up, and I was disappointed with what I heard. We hear things differently, but overall what I heard was a louder - too loud - version of the album (I like loud but have got by over the years with a volume control). I played my 1987 original at a similar volume and there were several minor pros and cons to each version but overall I found no significant difference - certainly not £10's worth. I found no difference at all at lower volumes. I'd stick to the solidly packaged original.
‹ Previous 1 Next ›