[superpiper]

Good question!

How are we defining best?

I'd have thought that simply keeping it technically good is not enough and that pushing the capabillities of the format and the artist should be considered.

Like, to ensure there is enough dynamics on a recording, to fully capture the recording may require a little clipping? In otherwords , mastering on a holistic scale, rather than just a technical.

Oh, and have no ****ing clue what I'm talking about...

 

[roebeet]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bmac /img/forum/go_quote.gif Sorry to go a little off-topic, but what program are you guys using to look at these waveforms?

Audacity. It's free, distributed under the GPL.

 

[Bmac]

Great, thanks.

 

[LFF]

Quote:

Originally Posted by sonci /img/forum/go_quote.gif Am I to understand that the best mastered albums are those with as few instruments as possible?.. or just because they are easier to master?

No. They just happen to be well mastered. The number of instruments has nothing to do with it. In fact, I feel that these albums are harder to master than other albums with more instruments. Mastering is a real science and art form that takes a long time to learn and understand. It takes even longer to get good at it.

Quote:

Originally Posted by sonci /img/forum/go_quote.gif I dont own the first 2, but knowing Krall, I suscept there are no electric guitars, some kind of unplugged boring music...

Music taste has nothing to do with mastering.

What you might find boring, other people might find pleasing and vice versa.

 

[Ham Sandwich]

Quote:

Originally Posted by superpiper /img/forum/go_quote.gif Good question! How are we defining best? I'd have thought that simply keeping it technically good is not enough and that pushing the capabillities of the format and the artist should be considered. Like, to ensure there is enough dynamics on a recording, to fully capture the recording may require a little clipping? In otherwords , mastering on a holistic scale, rather than just a technical. Oh, and have no ****ing clue what I'm talking about...

Good (as in best) mastering to me is more than just being technically good. You need to get the non-technical aspects right as well (the feelings and art).

An example of a well reviewed and well received that is noted for good sound quality is the Brandenburg Concertos directed by Martin Pearlman and released on Telarc (1993). Well noted for excellent sound quality. But the mastering engineer got way too excited about getting maximum stereo width. There is no middle. There is nothing between the speakers. It's no fun on headphones. On my nearfield monitors it actually sounds like I'm listening to headphones rather than speakers because the width is that wide and there is no middle. It might work if you have an ideal listening room and speakers like Magneplanars. But for us normal folks the mastering on that set of CDs is just wonked. Sounds excellent (very excellent) other than the stereo width separation issues. I consider that a failure in mastering. They got many technical issues right except the stereo width (and getting the stereo right is kinda important in mastering). I mention this one because I'm listening to the Brandenburg Concertos right now.

Capturing the recording without clipping is done during mixing and recording. That isn't a mastering issue. If the recording is clipped during the recording phase the mastering phase can't undo that.

 

[Duggeh]

If re-issues are allowed, then I'd nod to the 2000 HDCD remaster of Amarok. Not all of the Oldfield HDCD remasters were better, and a couple were worse than the previous releases.

Whole Album:

First 7 minutes:

The 2009 Oldfield personal remaster of the original Tubular Bells is also the best that album has ever sounded.

 

[islewind]

I can't comment on which aspect of the recording/eq/mixing/mastering makes the difference, but here are some choices:

Donald Fagen - Morph the Cat
Fabio Biondi - Vivaldi Concertos
Mark Knopfler - Sailing to Philadelphia
Adam Cohen - Adam Cohen
Susannah McCorkle - Hearts and Minds

 

[sgrossklass]

@Duggeh:

Is that after HDCD decoding?

BTW, your screenshots make the page stretch over approximately two screen widths here, making posts very hard to read. It might be useful to use a smaller thumbnail with a link to the full-size image, like this (the first time in years that the "nearest neighbour" resampling algorithm was of any use, anything more advanced would blow up the file size):

That's the 1990 CD release of Amarok for comparison, which isn't bad-sounding to begin with.

 

[sonci]

Try a pure uncompressed 2009 album
Jim O'Rourke- The Visitor

 

[happyxix]

Grrr. All these good mastering is pissing me off on how albums sound nowadays. I bought Michael Jackson's This it It album and my god how bad it looks. Time to go looking around for old copies of thriller...

 

[SoupRKnowva]

Hey LFF, you never did finished your list

 

[LFF]

Quote:

Originally Posted by SoupRKnowva /img/forum/go_quote.gif Hey LFF, you never did finished your list

Sorry guys. I think the list is going to stay like this.

I have been focusing on getting more work and haven't had much time to listen to new CD's friends have lent me.

Also, it's hard to find decent modern masters. If I could pick re-issues, then I can go wild but actual first time releases that are well mastered in this past decade is hard.

 

[A Love Supreme]

Not sure about best, but the worst definitely belongs to The Stooges - Raw Power. They ruined a legendary album with the worst remaster job ever.

 

[Ham Sandwich]

Quote:

Originally Posted by A Love Supreme /img/forum/go_quote.gif Not sure about best, but the worst definitely belongs to The Stooges - Raw Power. They ruined a legendary album with the worst remaster job ever.

There is a story and a reason behind that. You can read about it on the wikipedia page for Raw Power. The short reason, it was butchered because Iggy wanted it that way.

The potentially good news is that Raw Power is being re-re-released as a deluxe edition RSN (real soon now) getting a remaster of the original David Bowie mix and a live soundboard recording for the bonus tracks. Here's what the wikipedia page says:
Quote:

Sony Legacy Recordings will release a deluxe version of Raw Power on April 27, 2010. Raw Power: The Masters Edition will contain David Bowie's original Raw Power mix, a live soundboard recording from Atlanta in October 1973, and liner notes written by authorized Stooges biographer Jeffrey Morgan.

Will they butcher the remaster? Probably. It is after all a remaster being done in 2010 in the era of the loudness wars.

 

[Pachikara]

Quote:

I will second two against nature by SD. It's a bit bassy, but I can handle it.

Bassy? I always felt the drum sound is too thin...may be thats the way Fagen and Becker wanted it to sound.