Loveless is a bad album sorry.

>>60660962
96kbps wma files on my zune with the headphones that always don't work in one ear but I never buy new ones because I dont have a job

>>60661231
>>>/b/

The first LP issues are the best. Runner up are the more accessible Japanese bootlegs.

German boots and Plain reissues are shit.

>>60660962
fuck foff wiht your overrated band shoegaze is deadd kid

>>60660962
I have a double CD, one disc with the album remastered and the other disc is the mastered version from the original analog tapes, they both sound 10/10.

>>60662602
Yeah, what's up with that.
I get that the remaster put the recording into a stereo format, whereas loveless was originally pretty much mono (this version is nearly impossible to find, I can't locate it).

What's the main difference between the two CDs in the pack? Is there an audible difference?

>>60662602
I thought Loveless was recorded in a DAT tape, which is digital

>>60662626
I just checked the CD now, the first CD is the album remastered from the original tapes, and the second CD is the album mastered from the original 1/2 inch analogue tapes. There is definitely an audible difference from a quick listen, but I would have to listen to the discs back to back to pin point every difference. I'm assuming these versions of albums are the definitive editions and sound the best. I know people love vinyl, but I would just stick with the double CD for loveless. It sounds flawless on CD.

>>60662669
>and a previously unreleased ½-inch analogue tape.

Nevermind

>>60660962
I have the original UK pressing sounds good but i don't think my current Stereo system would really pick up on amazing quality, i need to upgrade since my turntable is good quality

My copy of it is a UK CD from 1991, I always thought it sounded great

>>60661231
How can anyone hate this album? Baka