Quote Originally Posted by DMK
Pavarotti sings loud, no question. If I ever want to peel the paint from my walls, I'll play some of his music. Godawful! Perhaps he's more listenable on vinyl?

I have to share your high opinion of DG, however. When I scavenge the used LP bins, the DG label is high on my list to look out for. I buy whatever I find and I know two people to sell the duplicates to. I prefer the vinyl to the CD - no surprise there. I've bought some of their CD's if the music warrants it and I don't already own it on vinyl. When and if I find the vinyl, the CD goes into storage.

As for the pop/rock stuff not getting the same care and attention, I'd have to speculate as to why. A lot of very important music is being overlooked, IMHO. I mentioned Bob Dylan -an EXTREMELY important artist- and Columbia botched most of his vinyl. The remastered CD's are very close in sound quality, which is to say not good. I'd guess that rock fans as a rule put sound quality a distant second behind the performance. I'd call that having one's priorities in place! Except for the record reviews I've read in audio mags, I've yet to hear the average rock fan wax on about soundstaging or macro-detail. Mostly, I'd take my cue from your post and say that not enough of the record companies care about their product and not enough listeners care about sound quality. No shame there, unless sound quality is one's primary concern.
DMK: How did Columbia botch Bob Dylan's material on CD? Have you heard any of the bootleg series? I own the 1966 and 1964 concerts and the sound, in my view, is fabulous. Admittedly, I've never heard the vinyl versions (which omit some of the cuts included in the CDs), but I can't imagine them sounding better than what Columbia transferred to CD. They sound so good coming through my ADS 1230 speakers that I almost feel like I'm in a time warp, a visitor to a live performance of 40 years ago. Good god, man, what more could one ask for from a machine playing recorded music?