The Pros & Cons, and relevant depth, of "remastering" - No, NOT LOUDNESS wars again!

  • Thread starter Thread starter rayc
  • Start date Start date
rayc

rayc

retroreprobate
The Pros & Cons, and relevant depth, of "remastering" - No, NOT LOUDNESS wars again!

I've bought a few CD "remasters" in the last several years and sometimes they're less than good, (particularly if they were in the early crop of CDs that weren't mastered specifically for CD), some have been awful (where loudness was the raison d'etre) and some have been an even bigger problem for me: TOO CLEAN.
Some, however, have been marvellous.

A couple of the Black Sabbath remasters are fine - though one of them seems to have imported more distortion than the original CD or vinyl.
A couple of the Queen remasters were good and one was simply trerrible.
Most of the remasters done by AZTEC Music in Australia are great - really done from original tapes, a known and sensitive ME, time & effort taken to bring a musical legacy back into use etc even with the knowledge that the market is limited and the price (AUS$25 delivered) is low.

I have a couple of the unofficial "Mickboy" Stones CDs that are pretty good as the chap seems to have had "musicality" in mind rather than applying aural detergent to everything. The Goats Head Soup one is particularly pleasing to my ears.

Some remasters seem to have been ernestly & forensically cleaned up.

I recently scored the remaster & expansion of one of my all time favourite bits of vinyl - Argus by Wishbone Ash. I've had a CD for a very long time & thoroughly enjoyed that version of the album but the "remaster" seems to have been an autopsy rather than a resurrection:
I can hear everything, including things I've not heard before and taht, to my ear so long used to the album, don't belong. I can clearly hear things that were only hinted at in the previous versions - again thaings that shouldn't, to me, be so prominent in the mix.
Add that to the enormous amount of "bonus" material that is rarely of value & even more rarely of benefit to the original album, (though the 2 extra tracks on 801's LIVE really fir in seemlessly & please the concert completeist type as well), and it seems more a marketting tool than anything else: buy this even though you have the cassette, vinyl, original CD, bonus CD and now have a chance at the delux edition.
Any thoughts?
 
i've heard the same thing from various 're-masters'


some are done simply to get the levels up to more 'modern' levels, typically at the expense of the big dynamic sound it originally had, to sounding flat and 'ONE VOLUME ALL THE WAY THROUGH'.
\


it just makes you appreciate good mixes and light mastering all the more.
 
I've also heard 'remasters' where, like you say, you can hear things you never heard before. The MEs responsible will often say they just cleared up the mud to uncover these parts, but it makes the songs just sound wrong to my ears.
 
The 1st few albums the "Glimmer Twins" produced for the Stones were pretty muddy by modern standards as they were learning their craft but they stand up as classic LPs because the songs are great and the sound is "The Sound" of the Stones.
I know I'm old enough to have had my ears tuned to the sound of analogue, tape, some valves and such and that this education has created a bias in my perception but Gonzo & mjbphotos are right: remasters are often loud but flat and "just sound wrong".
Not always but often.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top