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