[Head_case]

What remastered and original albums have you got that are worth recommending?

I had U2s original Joshua Tree album on CD. It sounded thin and compressed with a lot of fuzz in the guitar parts of tracks like 'Where the Streets have no name'. So I bought the vinyl LP. It wasn't any better really.

Is the remastered version worthwhile?


On the other hand, I bought Grant Lee Phillips 'Mobilize' album on CD. Then the Japanese version came out with a spare track so I got that one too (dead end track too

). Then I found a SACD but I don't have a SACD player, but both it since I liked the album so much. No difference there either.

Hmm. Not doing well am I?

bought the fabled Italian Quartet's rendition of Debussy/Ravel String Quartets on Phillips records. It was a brilliant album for its age - and it really doesn't show its age against modern CDs, 30 years older, unless you're really picky. A few years ago, I bought the digitally remastered version too.

I can't tell any difference between the two!

Are remastered albums worthwhile or just a marketing ploy? Who's got some that they can recommend for the sonic improvement over the original compression etc?

 

[LFF]

Most remastered albums actually sound much worse than the originals released in the 1980's and 1990's. In general I stay far away from any album released post 1995 that says "Remastered".

Most good to great remasters come from respectable companies like MoFi, Audio Fidelity, Classic Records, DCC, Sheffield, Stockfisch, Groove Note, OJC and Analogue Productions.

Buying from these labels usually guarantees a better sounding product than your average compressed remaster at Best Buy. However, even then, they get it wrong sometimes. It's been known that they sometimes release CD's and LP's mastered from the wrong tapes or use bad EQ. Confused? You should be.

Usually the best way to get the best version is to do your research and find out who mastered the album and from what source. There are many forums and many people out there who can help. Also - feel free to PM me with any questions.

In the end - I simply got tired on buying bad sounding CD's and I learned how remaster stuff myself. I am now working as an audio engineer and I specialize in remastering and sound restoration.

Here is a short video to show why I hate remasters:

YouTube - The Loudness War

YouTube - Why I Don't Buy "Remastered" CDs.

I'll post some samples from my collection later.

 

[juniperlater]

I know some did not, but I love the Beatles remasters from 2009.

 

[LFF]

Here is one very clear example:

"A Cottage For Sale" by Nat King Cole from Just One of Those Things:

1. The Original Capitol CD

At first - this sounds good. However, notice the unnatural tone and fake echo.

2. Remastered European CD

Note, the huge increase in loudness, loss in dynamic range and wrong channel placement! Horrible tone and fake echo too!

3. Audiophile version

This is from an audiophile LP from S&P records remastered by Steve Hoffman. Notice no fake echo, awesome dynamics and a very natural tone. Should sound like Nat is in the room!

more to come.....

 

[Head_case]

Thanks guys.

I know some of the ancient 78 Shellacs do sound much better when remastered properly by a decent studio!

I'm thinking more about some of the modern stuff, particularly 80's and 90's as you say LFF.

Wow. Is it even possible for us mere earthlings to consider getting an album 'remastered'?! I guess there must be advantages to being a sound engineer

Take U2's Joshua Tree for instance: it must have sold millions, and the sound quality is okay coming out of the Irish studio, but let's face it. It's not audiophile, nor is it cutting edge for a band with such a whopping great big budget. I've heard low budget albums sound better in terms of recording...!

The labels might be a great idea, but generally I listen to music by artists I like, so I put up with bad recordings; hiss and other audio engineering deficiencies for their music, rather than go for a collection of perfectly recorded albums.

 

[LFF]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Head_case /img/forum/go_quote.gif Thanks guys. I know some of the ancient 78 Shellacs do sound much better when remastered properly by a decent studio! I'm thinking more about some of the modern stuff, particularly 80's and 90's as you say LFF. Wow. Is it even possible for us mere earthlings to consider getting an album 'remastered'?! I guess there must be advantages to being a sound engineer Take U2's Joshua Tree for instance: it must have sold millions, and the sound quality is okay coming out of the Irish studio, but let's face it. It's not audiophile, nor is it cutting edge for a band with such a whopping great big budget. I've heard low budget albums sound better in terms of recording...! The labels might be a great idea, but generally I listen to music by artists I like, so I put up with bad recordings; hiss and other audio engineering deficiencies for their music, rather than go for a collection of perfectly recorded albums.

What modern stuff, aside from U2, are you considering? I think I went through 4 versions of Joshua Tree before I did my own. (I'll post samples of that as well.)

 

[Head_case]

Wow - thanks for that lucid demonstrating of the difference remastering makes!

You clearly know your stuff! :cheers:

I love a lot of stuff - like Heidi Talbot's 'in love and in light' vinyl LP. It comes with the CD, and the quality is DIRE in both. It's listenable and her music and voice are gorgeous, but it's completely let down by that bl****d Irish recording studio again.

In comparison, albums by Moya Brennan (Irish again) are recorded pristine and clear with a full dynamic range.

Here's a list of albums I would to see remastered with a fuller range. Bear in mind, my system runs bright - I'm on a Musical Fidelity X-Ray and Nu-Visa pre-amp with 2x XAS200 power amps and Celestion A1 speakers with van den Hul ultimates and cables with a Michell Gyrodec and Live Origin tonearm.

1. Sam Phillips: "The Indescribable Wow" (produced by T Bone Burnett on Virgin Records - there's really no excuse for this one sounding thin and lacking in punch!) I have the CD and the vinyl LP - LP is better. Dynamic range is good, but the bass either thuds or is attenuated by the drums. This is one of the rare 'pop' albums from the modern era that uses harpsichord. When she releases 'Martinis & Bikinis' - the problem with the recording is solved.

2. Myaskovsky String Quartets (Taneyev Quartet) - Complete Cycle No. I - XIII
This was re-released last year or so by Northern Flowers records. The complete cycle of 5 discs are from 1981-83 and are recorded with a compressed sound stage. At times, the violins hit sibilance. I have the original Russian Disc collection which is better in some respects than the re-release, but is dated 80's and no way can it compete with a modern recording. Unfortunately, no other string quartet group has ever ventured to complete this cycle...

3. Siobhan Maher Kennedy - Immigrant Flower. Beautiful debut pop-country album with harsh sibilance and highly strung treble. 'I wanna see the bright lights' is fierce at the top end and the recording is harsh all over. Good dynamic range but the drum mix is thick. Her voice is generally ethereal and angelically crystalline. But the recording here makes it sound shrapnel like.

Guess these aren't popular enough to merit remastering

Well, I can live with the poor sound quality of some of my Crystal Gayle CDs because I have the originals on LPs!

Now to invest in a vinyl LP cleaner that doesn't need a spare room...

 

[Head_case]

Hey LFF - are your remastered versions of the Joshua Tree up for trades?

Funny enough, I even bought the CD singles hoping that the quality would be better than the CD album or vinyl LP album! Grrrr...!

I'll swap you my dud originals for some limited edition Pink Floyd postcards

 

[LFF]

I haven't heard any of the albums you posted above. That's sad on my part. I hate not knowing a particular recording. That seems to be my problem - too much music...so little time.

As for trades...well...that's a no-no on this forum. However, I do remaster for a living so feel free to check out my website for rates.

Head-fi discounts apply.

 

[Head_case]

Lol ~! All the engineering guys I know have more time for fiddling with bits than listening to music...!

Oops - sorry . I forgot about trades.....!

Will check out your website!

Now if only you'd get those albums and remaster them .... ahhhhh....music heaven

 

[LFF]

Here is some quick comparisons once again.

First song from U2's Joshua Tree:

1) MFSL Version

Not bad and considered by many to be the best retail version out there. I liked it except that it always sounded a bit too bright and unnatural for me.

2) Modern Remaster

Need I explain?!

3) My remaster

Remastered with tubes and a high end EQ. Just a bit more natural on the vocals, drums and the rest of the sound. I can turn it up as loud I want with no distortion and it sounds just amazing to me.

I guess, in the end, it doesn't matter as long as you enjoy the music. To me, music comes first followed by the sound.

 

[Head_case]

Well the REMcrap remastered version sounds worse than my original version by far! It sounds like the band is breaking up on that part of the remastered track lol.

I like your version a lot by a mile: it has a smoother feel and is way more gentle to listen to loud. I daresay - even Bono's gruff vocals start to improve, which is something I would never ever say about his crooked voice! I guess the problem with the recessed guitar is down to the band. It just seems to be recessed against the muscular drumming and Bono's vocals. Even with the mid-range brought forward in your remastering, the guitar still sounds etching rather than thrashing in the way that furious strumming should. Guess they played it best live (in my mind), and never really captured the live tension so vividly ever again

Still, thumbs up for your remastering skill! That's really quite a revelation to discover!

 

[LFF]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Head_case /img/forum/go_quote.gif Well the REMcrap remastered version sounds worse than my original version by far! It sounds like the band is breaking up on that part of the remastered track lol. I like your version a lot by a mile: it has a smoother feel and is way more gentle to listen to loud. I daresay - even Bono's gruff vocals start to improve, which is something I would never ever say about his crooked voice! I guess the problem with the recessed guitar is down to the band. It just seems to be recessed against the muscular drumming and Bono's vocals. Even with the mid-range brought forward in your remastering, the guitar still sounds etching rather than thrashing in the way that furious strumming should. Guess they played it best live (in my mind), and never really captured the live tension so vividly ever again Still, thumbs up for your remastering skill! That's really quite a revelation to discover!

Thanks.

The recessed guitar is something that bugs me too and I can bring out a lot more but I hate remixing and re-doing a recording like this as it changes the feel way too much. It's like playing god when what you really should be doing is playing museum curator and showing off originals in their best possible light.

Your right about live music - it's always the very best.

 

[Head_case]

Quote:

The recessed guitar is something that bugs me too and I can bring out a lot more but I hate remixing and re-doing a recording like this as it changes the feel way too much. It's like playing god when what you really should be doing is playing museum curator and showing off originals in their best possible light.

Lol - I wouldn't mind hearing your remixed version too. I think you'd treat it far more sympathetically than the various 'dance remixes' I have by DJ Paddy-Pants-Down-the-Streets-ain't-gotta-name Remix versions I have somewhere and listened to only once and wilted immediately thereafter!

Well it's a luxury to have a recorded medium to spin in the lounge! My Musical Fidelity set up doesn't have a graphic equaliser anywhere in its circuit, so the resolution problems it brings to poorly recorded music really shows.

I thought that Clearmountain or Lilywhite guy whoever who did the 'Joshua Tree' album was supposed to be good at his stuff!

Arrgh. Who's got the new 'Horizon...' LP by U2 then? It's already heading towards collectors prices for the vinyl LP. Quality any good? If it's bad, I might get it anyway, just in case their remastered versions sound like the REMcrap versions 10 years later..>!