Classic records reissue - very disappointing

I bought the Classic Records from Day 1, I have most of their Living Stereos and Mercuries, and I also have some originals and compared them (with adjustments in VTA). From the Mastering they are excellent, a very good job was done in the 90's. When some say they sound horrible or digital, I think, it is based on their System. The very best is the 1. Series in 180gr. Top vinyl, no noise. I also have bought later some of their 200gr and stopped that fast. The first of them are silent but in the last years (or their last years) they got serious problems with their pressing factory. They made a bad job. Maybe 2 reasons, melted 2. hand vinyl or/and too fast output (cooling process or something in that area) which damaged the grooves (cracks and so on, no RCM can get it out, there are distortions, not in everyone but from time to time).
Their latest Clarity Vinyl are superior from sonics (and mastering). Unfortunately it is possible to get some with distortions, too.

I think, this was the wake up call for some competitors to go to Europe with their Pressings. They take more care or have some more educated people there, who knows. Speakers corner for example have an absolutely inferior mastering but their vinyl is super.

Classic Records grew up in critics since they started. Hobson destroyed the market for the professional record dealers with the super high pricing for LSC.
It is always the same story, you have friends a short time but your enemies will bite you even 20 years later.

Classic Records with their enthusiasm (Remastering with Wilkinson, Rebuild of the original machines) created the real analog revival in the Digital Darkness.

Kudos to Hobson/Grundman

The Scheherazade from Chesky:
They used the pure 2-Track Tape without the - normally - added 3. channel. This means, the mid Part (left-mid-right) is not supported or 'pushed'. The result is, the listener gets a more realistic Soundstage. The recordings simply sounds more real. I also have the Chesky records. Outstanding good remasterings. A pity, they didn't made more.

The CR:
In a way they have to sound a bit different, mainly based on
- other pressing machines
- different cutting heads
- different power amps for those
- different cutting angles
- different Quality of Vinyl
and very important
- 30 years difference in the Age of the Tapes

Tapes are magnetic and this stored information is not stable. The loss of information is natural, specially in the extremes of both areas, maximum highs, lowest Bass.

(the faster they made the cutting process, the more dynamic are the records. The fastest from all was Bob Fine)

When the tapes were running on the Westrex / Scully now, you can choose different equalizations. but there never was a Standard for that. It was changed from time to time because something new came in, something different was tried, 1954-1959 it was the N.A.R.T Standard for magnetic Tapes, later NAB Standard...

When the tape is old, the noise (rush) will get louder...a remaster needs a lot of work to be done right, and in this chain a lot can be done wrong.
CR tried to do it as best as possible and based on the age of tapes, equipment, they made the best possible results (Chesky did go a different way). Wilkinson still had the datas of everything, they went back to these datas and some was made identical, and when not possible based on technical issues, they went as close as possible to the written datas.

What we got is still the impression what happened 30 years ago without wrong information, and let us not forget, for 29.99 $ we got a LSC-1817.
did you know what you had to pay for a mint copy 1993? 700+ USD and you had to say 5x"Thank you" to the Seller..

CR was so proud to go to RTI (I think, that was the one) for pressing, not knowing, that this company would ruin their name...

I listened to some Scheherazade Reissues

Classic Records, first Series 180gr
Chesky
EMI ASD 251, Sir Thomas Beecham, RPO

Classic Records

RCA was one of those rare Companies (with Decca and Mercury) which made recordings to the absolute limit what was possible from dynamics, see their Stampers 1s, 2s and so on. Some of them were so „hot“, they were nearly untrackable at their time.
The Scheherazade is a very critical record (even the Reissue), the violins have extremely high frequencies and are amplified in 2 stages. I am sure, most tweeters will go into clipping when you will hear this record loud. Then the high frquencies sound „compressed“. But this has nothing to do with the mastering itself. It is the way it is. A hot record.

Chesky

The made 3 channels into 2, this gives a deeper soundstage and a more defined „focus“ left and right side from the middle. But this records sounds dry, you can‘t hear (of feel) the moved air which was caught from the microphones. This is more an audiophile Pressing than an illusion of being a part of thePresentation.

EMI
EMI was not among those companies who pushed the curtain in recording sessions. EMI made excellent recordings BUT they had no „Espit“. They had no ambition to try where the limit is. They had order to stay 18 dB below the maximum. No EMI records has a higher Dynamic than 40dB!
Back to their Scheherazade, this is a nice sounding one. Good dynamics, a powerful Bass, when you listen to it, you will be impressed, a good demo disc for most stereo Systems. Most of their records were made in the Abbey Road Studios, only very few were made in Kingsway Hall. One reason for a good, but in a way degraded Presentation.
But why do they sound good even with all these limits? Their secrets were the used microphones and how they made the fixings. The made the Sound more concentrated, with a bigger distance between the Listener and the Orchestra, and they reduced the distance of the Instrument groups. The result is a powerful presentation for the Listener.

But RCA had a total different Philosophy, they wanted to go into the Session, very difficult to do, but with a Stereo System which can handle those dynamics, the Listener is in the Position above the concert and can „see“ into it.