Punnisher
Headphoneus Supremus
- Joined
- Dec 4, 2007
- Posts
- 2,655
- Likes
- 41
After becoming more and more concerned with audio quality and the preservation of it, my CD buying strategies have changed dramatically. I am also a fan of music from the 1950's to the present, so that brings some important elements to the table in terms of formats, sound quality and mastering/remastering.
A disturbing trend has emerged that is nothing new, however I am only now beginning to understand the gravity of it.
Everywhere you look there are great sounding albums, supposedly remastered. Why? An example is Steely Dan. A look through amazon shows many "original recording remastered" labels. I find this disturbing, for these guys have been on the leading edge of sound quality for a long, long time. It all sounds fantastic. Why the need for every single album to undergo multiple remasters?
I'm not saying that every album doesn't need it, as there are exceptions. Some albums were initially very poor but have been remastered and improved. That's absolutely fine.
What really grinds my gears though, are unnecessary remasters coupled with "bonus material". A couple examples are Frank Sinatra and the Doors. It's some of my favorite music but has undergone so much remastering and re-re-releasing. So many people are fooled into handing over their money mindlessly, all the while sound quality is probably suffering. I'm sick of it.
Nowadays, if an album is old enough to have multiple versions, I am hesitant to buy from amazon. You never really know what version you're getting. Many times I have tried to order an original-master Rush album, only to be given a Rush Remasters version. Not that there's anything wrong with these remasters, but you just can never be sure what you're getting.
I have decided to get my used CDs from local music stores, where I can inspect and verify that they are the original versions. So far I have had great success, finding Dire Straits, the Doors, and other CDs from the early 90's or late 80's. All sound great.
What are your thoughts on all this? Maybe I'm beating a dead horse here but It's just something I've been passionate about lately.
A disturbing trend has emerged that is nothing new, however I am only now beginning to understand the gravity of it.
Everywhere you look there are great sounding albums, supposedly remastered. Why? An example is Steely Dan. A look through amazon shows many "original recording remastered" labels. I find this disturbing, for these guys have been on the leading edge of sound quality for a long, long time. It all sounds fantastic. Why the need for every single album to undergo multiple remasters?
I'm not saying that every album doesn't need it, as there are exceptions. Some albums were initially very poor but have been remastered and improved. That's absolutely fine.
What really grinds my gears though, are unnecessary remasters coupled with "bonus material". A couple examples are Frank Sinatra and the Doors. It's some of my favorite music but has undergone so much remastering and re-re-releasing. So many people are fooled into handing over their money mindlessly, all the while sound quality is probably suffering. I'm sick of it.
Nowadays, if an album is old enough to have multiple versions, I am hesitant to buy from amazon. You never really know what version you're getting. Many times I have tried to order an original-master Rush album, only to be given a Rush Remasters version. Not that there's anything wrong with these remasters, but you just can never be sure what you're getting.
I have decided to get my used CDs from local music stores, where I can inspect and verify that they are the original versions. So far I have had great success, finding Dire Straits, the Doors, and other CDs from the early 90's or late 80's. All sound great.
What are your thoughts on all this? Maybe I'm beating a dead horse here but It's just something I've been passionate about lately.