The New Yorker: 100 Essential Jazz Albums
Moderators: Mr Awesomer, JesseMiner, CafeSavoy
"Postjudices" would be a more appropriate term in this caseGemZombie wrote:You prejudices against Proper are obvious, and I believe somewhat unfounded. The liner notes of the sets I own (around 30) do not seem to be "just ripped".
N.B: I didn't say the liner notes were ripped - only the discographies.
Perhaps we should more the discussion on the badness/goodness of Proper Records and other cheapo reissue labels to a new thread...
- GemZombie
- Posts: 772
- Joined: Wed Nov 20, 2002 2:46 pm
- Location: Alpharetta, GA (Formerly SLO, CA)
- Contact:
I see, I misread. You must admit that exact make up of bands is hard to come by. Many of the liner notes I read actually admit that and indicate the instrumentation in some cases is guess work... at any rate, I'm not sure that saying they are ripped is fair either. I mean, with this stuff you really can only rely on what's been documented before.anton wrote:"Postjudices" would be a more appropriate term in this caseGemZombie wrote:You prejudices against Proper are obvious, and I believe somewhat unfounded. The liner notes of the sets I own (around 30) do not seem to be "just ripped".
N.B: I didn't say the liner notes were ripped - only the discographies.
Perhaps we should more the discussion on the badness/goodness of Proper Records and other cheapo reissue labels to a new thread...
They're definitely worth it for the liner notes.anton wrote:Granted, they are good value for your money (just like Pirate Bay), and they do give you a quick and good overview of an artist's work. But, the tracks are ripped from inferior sources and are then subjected to additional low-pass filtering.GemZombie wrote:Why is that bad? I love all of the Proper Box Sets I've bought.anton wrote: Bad: they include several Proper box sets
"Dance like it hurts. Love like you need money. Work when people are watching."