Beating the RVG Horse

I have an all tube SET based system and all the RVG's recordings(LPs of course) that I have sound very nice.

Grimace, I'm with you. I research and try to do my due diligence not to purchase any more RVG remasters. It is amazing to me how much more presence, fullness and bass some cd's can add or take away from system performance. When I land a sonically-well extended Jazz cd , I say "yeah" and then I research the person doing the remastering and the label. I start looking for more of the classics remasterd by that individual. Recently a good sounding Jazz cd I purchased is "Tetragon" by Joe Henderson remastered by Phil de Lancie on the Fantasy label. Compared to my Blue note RVG remsaster of Joe Henderson "Page One," "Tetragon" has much more presence, fulness bass extension etc. I really dislike thin sound. The paricular software I use truly makes a big difference in my system performance. At the reverse, a Kenny Dorham Cd "Quiet Kenny" that I purchased in error(missed the RVG remaster label), lacks mid and low end weight-sounds rather thin on my system. I said before, for a fan of true classic jazz, hard bop etc. some of the greatest recordings of all time are part of the Blue note RVG series. It's unavoidable. I have quite a few of these recordings. I try to listen and just enjoy the artistry and forget about bass and mids weight. And for vinyl guys who would suggest I go vinyl- going vinyl is impossible for me right now. I don't have room for a turntable in my setup. In the future maybe.

Foster,

The other thing about the vinyl guys is that if they own the originals - and a lot of them claim to - they may be forgeting how rare and expensive all that stuff is. It would be nice, but it's not always as easily done as said.

I have 'Quiet Kenny' too, but mine is the 24-bit re-master, not the RVG re-master. The mid/bass isn't awful, but it isn't a very good recording in general.

Edle- the original post is about the RGV remasters done in the last few years specifically, not the original recordings or LPs or previous CD issues. Many of the original and reissue LPs are sonically fantastic.

Zaik- Like the original poster, I have found the RGV reissues to sound "thin and tinny" and much less smooth than the 1980s CD issues. I wonder if we are talking about different things? Maybe you are comparing to some different CD versions?

On recordings I really like musically but dislike sonically because they sound anemic and thin, I use a digital EQ on my computer to re-master the recording myself and bring up the bass range a little bit. It works pretty well.

DM: When I say smooth, I'm talking specifically about texture. Most of the 80's BN CDs I've got sound more rough and brash compared with various later reissues, RVGs included. To me the older disks sound more 'digital' for lack of a better term. This is independent of overall tonal balance. Occasionally this quality can actually lend the material an excitingly up-front presence in a way, but I don't think it's as accurate and usually it sounds worse. But for me this is the only *consistent* difference I notice among BN CD reissues. Questions of tonal balance seem too variable to me for broad generalization.