The King Crimson 40th anniversary series, apart from the tracks for which the multi-track master tapes are no longer available, have been completely remixed by Robert Fripp and Steven Wilson in addition to being remastered by Robert Fripp and Simon Heyworth, so naming them as an example in a discussion focused on just remastering is perhaps a bit unfounded given how radically different an entirely new mix can sound simply by its nature. Of course if the intent is to recreate the original mix as closely as possible, that's a bit of a gray area, but unless there was something technically seriously wrong with the original 2-track master apart from the mix itself, it's hard to see why one would do that. Typically the goal when doing a new mix is to improve on the original, not just mimic it as best as you can. I feel the fans of the 40th anniversary series could call those good
reissues but not necessarily good remasters. Not saying they aren't well mastered, but given that those exact mixes have never been to my knowledge heard with different mastering, there hardly is a good point of reference.
Well, since I mentioned it, since some of the tracks originate from the 2-track master tapes, and have therefore not been remixed but only remastered, comparing those to previous CD issues would be a fair comparison. If someone has done such a comparison, it might be interesting to hear your findings, even if only out of curiosity more than anything else. This reminds me I actually have to get the debut album on vinyl at some point…
Ok so someone new to all of this how do the 30th anniversary series compare to the 40th?. I was looking to pick up Red and In the Wake of Poseidon. I've seen both listed.