Head-Fi.org › Forums › Misc.-Category Forums › Music › Do remastered albums tend to be significantly better?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Do remastered albums tend to be significantly better? - Page 2

post #16 of 142
10/14/05 at 10:22pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by EdipisReks
never say never
Never.

Most "remastered" CDs suck. They use "space-age" technology like noise reduction and the like to actually take more AWAY from the sound than give back.

I guarantee that most albums you come across will ALWAYS sound better on their ORIGINAL mix on vinyl. There are very few instances where this is not the case. I suppose EXTREMELY long albums like "A Wizard/A True Star" by Todd Rundgren, or the like, but otherwise, the best-sounding material will be the original mix.
Reply

Head-Fi's Best Sellers

post #17 of 142
10/14/05 at 10:45pm
Not everyone still listens to vinyl. Maybe they do sound best that way, but for people who have embraced the digital revoloution, a remastered CD always sounds better than the original version of the CD.
Reply
post #18 of 142
10/14/05 at 10:58pm
Most remasters I've heard sound pretty bad. Over-usage of compression (ruining dynamic range) and too much noise reduction seem to be the main culprits. For some reason, they seem to think a perfectly black background is necessary on CD's... why, I don't have a clue. Since "hiss" is broadband noise, removing it will also remove some of the music -- there's no way around this, period. When over-applied, this results in a "thin" sound lacking in body.
Reply
post #19 of 142
10/14/05 at 11:01pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by bigshot
The worst remasters I've heard are the Zappa albums where he put digital drum tracks in replacing the original drummer

See ya
Steve


Which Zappa albums are like this??

Reply
post #20 of 142
10/14/05 at 11:30pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pete7
...a remastered CD always sounds better than the original version of the CD.
Obviously not true, except in your humble opinion

Many of us can name tons of remasters that sound much worse to our ears than the original CD issues. They used to use a lot more of those 16-bits of resolution that all CDs are limited to than they generally do today.
Reply
post #21 of 142
10/14/05 at 11:46pm
i'd also say remasters aren't necessarily better than previously issued pressings. there are many instances (although i can't think of any examples at the moment) where dynamic range is sacrificed for volume level, compression, etc. also, some of my earlier pressings CDs sound much wider and more more realistic than their respective narrow, closed in sounding remastered versions.
Reply
post #22 of 142
10/15/05 at 12:07am
Hey, thanks for pointing out that it was my opinion I was giving. If you and whoever else feel differently, you are certainly entitled to your humble opinion, also. That still doesn't necessarily mean I have to agree. As a former musician with near perfect pitch, for me, remastered editions have always sounded better. Boy, it's so good to know I have an opinion.
Reply
post #23 of 142
10/15/05 at 12:10am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pete7
Hey, thanks for pointing out that it was my opinion I was giving.
Geez, lighten up, there was a winky. We come here to have fun
Reply
post #24 of 142
10/15/05 at 12:26am
Yeah me, too, but I didn't catch that winky...So what do you really think, like remastered editions are just a marketing ploy? I always thought a remaster sounded a lot "tighter" with a more expanded dynamic range.
Reply
post #25 of 142
10/15/05 at 12:37am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aman


Which Zappa albums are like this??


Which are those? >.<
Reply
post #26 of 142
10/15/05 at 12:46am
Quote:
Originally Posted by bigshot
The worst remasters I've heard are the Zappa albums where he put digital drum tracks in replacing the original drummer.
are you talking about the old 1986 cd issues of a couple of his early mothers albums? these aren't exactly "remasters," as they're entirely alternate mixes that frank made with some new digital tracks, reinserted lyrics that had been censored originally, and some other various fiddling.

these versions haven't been available for about 10 years... as the latest ryko releases revert back to the original versions... remastered, of course.
Reply
post #27 of 142
10/15/05 at 12:52am
there are remasters out there that are eons better, but it's not always the case. the average consumer will think the remastered version sounds "better" just because the fact that it's louder than the older version.

and yeah...
Reply
post #28 of 142
10/15/05 at 12:58am
I picked up a 2001 remaster of Madonna's True Blue for a trip down memory lane. It is the most hideously clipped album I own. It got exactly 2 plays (headphone and speaker). It now collects dust. Very disappointing.

Remasters can be very hit and miss.
Reply
post #29 of 142
10/15/05 at 12:58am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pete7
Yeah me, too, but I didn't catch that winky...So what do you really think, like remastered editions are just a marketing ploy? I always thought a remaster sounded a lot "tighter".
Well, it depends a lot on what you grew up with, I think. I assume that you're young, but that's not intended to be in any way derogatory I don't like remasters of old classics that try to sound like the highly compressed and punched up sound that is the norm nowadays. I like a more relaxed presentation that is faithful to the original. Lots of artists want to reinvent themselves and still sound pertinent, so they naturally want their catalog punched up to sound more modern. David Bowie is a prime example of this. He's had his albums remastered a number of times and they just get worse and worse. The original CD releases on RCA, even though it is widely known they aren't from the masters, are highly prized because they are the only ones that aren't screwed up with high amounts of compression and equalization. And his latest remasters really aren't all that bad in comparison to the norm, but they are certainly not better in any way that I can hear. Just one example of many, but it is mostly a marketing ploy to have people rebuy their collection to get a more modern sound.
Reply
post #30 of 142
10/15/05 at 3:00am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pete7
So what do you really think, like remastered editions are just a marketing ploy?
In all actuality, what else are they? (how many times have i bought the same Zep Album )
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Music

Head-Fi's Best Sellers

Head-Fi.org › Forums › Misc.-Category Forums › Music › Do remastered albums tend to be significantly better?