Sound quality on original releases versus re-releases. There are many questions on this forum regarding sound quality. Someone asks which version of a specific album has the best sound. It seems as many answers prefer the original first pressning of a certain album. One example: If someone asks for the best sounding version of the early Rolling Stones LPs you may get the answer ”the original first Great Britain pressning on the Decca label”. But I sometimes wonder if you should trust this kind of answers! Especially when we are discussing older recordings (made in the 1960s). Here are some questions: After the artists originally made the recording, did they have control of the manufacturing process? Did they just deliever the master recordings to the record company and let them do the rest? In the early 60s the mastring engineers were probably very good at master classical music, but what about rock music? Many recordings have been re-released several times in different formats. Why should not these releases sound better than the original first pressnings if the original master recordings still are in good shape and the re-mastering engineers do have good equipement and good ears? Finally, isn’t what makes a good sounding recording/record sometimes something different persons can have different opinions about?