In addition, I believe you have made the mistake of not using the original 1987 CD releases for reference in certain cases. These predated the "Definitive Edition" versions issued in 1989. Specifically, both Lizard and Red (as well as Wake) in their original versions still hold up as the best available on CD, IMO. Some of the complaints you had about the DEs, 30th and 40th versions are those I am not sure you would have with these earliest versions. Unfortunately, both Larks and S&BB from the original 1987 releases were awful and had massive top end boosting, so in these cases I do think the 30ths are a good comparison baseline. I am generally not fond of the 1989 "Definitive Edition" series, but I suppose for the sake of completion those discs serve a purpose in a thorough comparison.
I would also point out that you have used Japanese CDs as a reference point in cases where there is nothing sonically unique about the Japanese mastering compared to the rest of the world. The only Japanese CDs which were not cloned from the same digital masters used everywhere else were their early releases, which came out from 1987-1988. I find these mostly inferior to the US/UK pressings from the same time period, but they are unique masterings. Since 1989, Robert Fripp has not allowed any of the core albums to be mastered by anyone outside of his oversight and involvement. The Japanese have only used snazzier packaging and in recent years snake oil marketing to put the same discs available in the US and UK/Europe onto so-called "SHM" and "SHM-Platinum." These SHM discs are simply unique data surfaces using a different reflective material which theoretically produces less "errors" upon playback. Many argue that there is no difference in sonic output, whatsoever. But even proponents of these SHM discs will generally argue that the differences are very slight, and certainly not able to produce the sort of dramatic differences from the same digital information which your group has sometimes described. Some have even felt that given two identical discs, the "SHM" disc will sound inferior to a traditionally produced disc.
About nine years ago I did some fairly exhaustive research on King Crimson on CD. It became a long discussion with many contributors. We made some discoveries along the way, and sometimes even changed our minds about favorites. Different opinions were offered. Should you have an interest in our findings, they can be referenced here: http://forums.stevehoffman.tv/threads/getting-to-the-bottom-of-king-crimson-on-cd.127721/
Two final notes:
1. I do not care for Steven Wilson's digital remixes, so my comments will generally refer to versions featuring the original mixes.
2. I have since returned to vinyl for most of my listening. For my money, King Crimson is best heard on vintage vinyl pressings. By "vintage" I am not talking about recent reissues cut from digital files, but pressings from the 70s or even some of the 80s reissues.
Cheers,
Jeff
]]>