Dumb and Dumber CD Marketing Campaign

The latest issue of Listen magazine has two ads from Decca, a premier “classical” label since early LP days (and maybe even before).  Decca was also known in the states as London.
 
In the first ad, they’re promoting a 54-CD limited edition called “Decca Sound: the Analogue Years”.  Now, they’ve been reissuing their catalogue of stuff initially released on LP for years, especially to the delight of opera lovers.  So, what’s this then?  Have they taken all those reissues, some of which proudly claimed to be “digitally re-mastered” and reverted the digital re-mastering?
 
But even stranger is an ad for nine new issues on Blu-Ray Audio (a strategy embraced, I guess, because SACD and DVD-Audio was such a stunning success).  The ad boasts “No compression.  No compromise.”  So, you mean all those digitally recorded Decca CDs I bought during the last twenty years used compression?  You squashed Verdi and Wagner, Decca?  Is nothing sacred?  Still, no compression …  hey, I’ve gotta get me some of that!

I'm holding out in the hopes that drewfx1 will lead a campaign to group-gift-buy me the Mercury Living Presence LAN Drive Box Set in 64bit Floating Point.

Which means it's not a witch?

Moshkiae
 
Sidebar: Weird to see Decca doing this and the RCA Red Seal folks don't give a damn about their master recordings they put out, which were far superior than anything DECCA ever did! Decca just got famous because of a couple of bands. But there was nothing special about the music in them. Just some good old-fashioned luck and advertising and promotion!

Well, my point was that this is just marketing BS in the first place.  On the one hand, Decca is touting the analog experience by re-reissuing a bunch of LP-reissues that have been in their CD catalog for years, CD reissues that orignally proudly stated they were blessed with ADRM technology (which if memory serves stands for Analog Digital ReMastering).  So, did they undo the ADRM to come up with the "Analog Experience"?
 
On the other hand they're bragging about new digital recordings having no compression, as if their fully digital "classical" recordings released on CDs used compression in the first place.  Clearly anything up to the size of a chamber orchestra is going to be fine with a 90dB dynamic range and no compression would be beneficial or desirable.  Competing Mozart concerto titles are hardly going to throw down the gauntlet of loudness war superiority.  Maybe by the time you get to a Mahler-size orchestra you'd be asking too much of a 90dB dynamic range and some subtile compression would be warranted, but somehow I doubt that even in that case ... I've just have never done an analysis, so I can't say for certain one way or the other.
 
As to Decca vs RCA, I'll just point to the Solti Ring.  The engineers recorded that to far higher standards than the reproduction technology of the time could begin to accomodate.  I listened to the LPs in college (borrowed from the library because I couldn't afford to buy them back then).  I bought both the first CD reissue, which was much appreciated, and the second which is cherished, the remastering having eliminated much of the tape hiss.  For my money this remains the greatest Ring performance/recording of all times and I'd challenge anyone to come up with something recorded at that time that surpassed the engineering triumph they acheived.

Isn't the term "marketing BS" redundant?