Skip to main content ↑ ↓

Notice

Please note that most of the software linked on this forum is likely to be safe to use. If you are unsure, feel free to ask in the relevant topics, or send a private message to an administrator or moderator. To help curb the problems of false positives, or in the event that you do find actual malware, you can contribute through the article linked here.
Topic: More and more remasters (Read 4824 times) previous topic - next topic
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

More and more remasters

Seems like original pressings of 80's albums are dissappearing fast. Classic sounding stuff that should never be touched like maiden, priest, queensryche, whitesnake .. all REMASTERED - whoopy ! Well this new generation of people can cream themselves silly while I'll take that second hand cheap original that people are selling fast.

Now is the chance, grab them quick, grab them cheap before they all go.

More and more remasters

Reply #1 –
...and by 'remaster' they mean taking the master and putting it through a +10dB hardlimiter. Brilliant.

More and more remasters

Reply #2 –
I'm disturbed by the sam thing too.
While some remasters are tasty.. The others are unbearable.

I noticed that a lot of remasters are made to sound better on cheaper systems, and in effect, they don't sound as good on a quality system as the original. Too much compression I think.

More and more remasters

Reply #3 –
There must be an explanation for such stupidity? I still don't understand the same excuse "the band and mixing engineer really liked the sound".

More and more remasters

Reply #4 –
Sometimes, when CD supply is running low, some bands decide to make some more copies, and some bands to make a re-mastered version. Sadly, the band doesn't have much word about it.. It's the industry that is in need of more money, so they make a remaster, that sounds better on cheaper systems. They usually add some bass, treble, and sometimes.. They over-compress. That's sad.

But still, there are some good remasters out there.

More and more remasters

Reply #5 –
One example of that is JARRE's Oxygene 2007 Remaster. The original album from 1976 is like +1.00dB. The new remaster is about -8.50dB. But listening to the album, you do notice that the man touched the sound. The mixing is different, more ambient and spatial effects, the stereo is really more pleasant. I think this is one instance I would prefer the remaster over the original. I am coping all right with CD's at -8.00dB but -10.00/-12.00 are really really blown up.

More and more remasters

Reply #6 –
That all amazingly reminds me the South Park episode where Spielberg wanted to re-release every classic movie

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_Hat

More and more remasters

Reply #7 –
Quote from: Pestilence. on
[...] they don't sound as good on a quality system as the original. Too much compression I think.

...and the understatement of the decade goes to....

They sound horrible compared to the original.

More and more remasters

Reply #8 –
This thread is useless without samples.

More and more remasters

Reply #9 –
Quote from: Neasden on
One example of that is JARRE's Oxygene 2007 Remaster. The original album from 1976 is like +1.00dB. The new remaster is about -8.50dB. But listening to the album, you do notice that the man touched the sound. The mixing is different, more ambient and spatial effects, the stereo is really more pleasant.


I understand it is not remaster but a completely new recording.
Teemu
 

More and more remasters

Reply #10 –
Quote
I understand it is not remaster but a completely new recording.


The stereo version I doubt it's a new recording, maybe the "live" performance on DVD and the 5.1 mixes. The stereo version is exactly the same thing but more enhanced.