Mike Leghorn writes:

>I know that I have a lot of CD's that I think are inferior, at least in
>terms of sound.  I've actually found reviews of some of those CD's and
>they've always been positive.  This has made me very suspicious of critics'
>(in general) ability to distinguish between good recordings and bad
>recordings.  Of course, I realize it's all very subjective, and possibly
>I'm way out of whack with my standards.  If you'd be interested, I'd be
>could list some recordings that I think are inferior sounding.

Well, it could be that your criteria ("good sound") differs from their
criteria.  I know it differs from mine.  I'm not against good sound, but
I tend to give more weight to performance.  After all, it took me at least
ten years to switch over to stereo, and I never really minded the snap,
crackles, and pops of the LP.  Often, when I write a review, I don't write
about recorded sound at all (or no more than a sentence).

Steve Schwartz