Quality Re-Masters

[Phelonious Ponk]

By digging up old ones I mean the quotes from me that you started with today are from August of last year.

Tim

 

[Johnny Vinyl]

AJA comparision - Part 2

Well, I did full comparison of both the orginal and the Cisco release, and there is no comparison. While I've enjoyed the orginal for the last 30 years, this remaster is so far ahead of it, it is almost like listening to an entirely new record. This is especially true of the "B Side", which impressed me with its dynamics, separation, depth and spaciousness...the degree of which I've never heard before. "Brilliant" is certainly a term I would use to describe the overall quality of this pressing.

I cued up another Cisco pressing after AJA (Dexter Gordon's - One Flight Up), and again I was immersed in the quality of the recording. I think I need to look into a few more Cisco pressings.

 

[mep]

By digging up old ones I mean the quotes from me that you started with today are from August of last year.

Tim

I didn't look at the dates and didn't realize they were that old. The quotes were on consectutive pages.

 

[LL21]

 

[FrantzM]

Hi

People... I am trying to revive this dying thread. I am rebuilding (building too) my music collection. It is all digital and likely will remain so... While rebuilding , I would take the opportunity to acquire the best mastering jobs (IMO 98.99% of what you hear, forget about the format ... CD, SACD, Hi-Rez, Tape). I am after the better mastering possible of given albums.
Now it is too many times an hit or miss thing. Just getting the MSFL for example is no guarantee. I have found the jobs from XRCD however consistently good to outstanding but I hesitate to acquire all XRCDs or MSFLs or whatever when the "regular" CD could be better.
Many here have compared both "regular" and re-mastered and we (I) need their opinions and recommendations.. Of course once I have the CD it is promptly ripped so I have relatively low interest in packaging unless it is really unusual ... On this I am trying to remember the name of a French Progressive Rock Group which came with a CD Jacket in Aluminum it was a Live concert.
So People , Your (more regular) inputs, Please ... A sticky maybe What do you think Mods?

 

[Phelonious Ponk]

Hi

People... I am trying to revive this dying thread. I am rebuilding (building too) my music collection. It is all digital and likely will remain so... While rebuilding , I would take the opportunity to acquire the best mastering jobs (IMO 98.99% of what you hear, forget about the format ... CD, SACD, Hi-Rez, Tape). I am after the better mastering possible of given albums.
Now it is too many times an hit or miss thing. Just getting the MSFL for example is no guarantee. I have found the jobs from XRCD however consistently good to outstanding but I hesitate to acquire all XRCDs or MSFLs or whatever when the "regular" CD could be better.
Many here have compared both "regular" and re-mastered and we (I) need their opinions and recommendations.. Of course once I have the CD it is promptly ripped so I have relatively low interest in packaging unless it is really unusual ... On this I am trying to remember the name of a French Progressive Rock Group which came with a CD Jacket in Aluminum it was a Live concert.
So People , Your (more regular) inputs, Please ... A sticky maybe What do you think Mods?

I think it needs a sticky, Frantz. And I'm a mod. Unfortunately, I can't seem to find the tool for a sticky. I'll ask one of the other guys and get it done,

Here's why it needs one: I'm with you. It's all about the mastering and recording. I don't really care about the format. I'll take a really good master at 256kbps over a dead one or brick-walled one at the highest resolution. But it's all soooooooo subjective. There are modern remasters that are "loud" that I like - a lot - better than the originals. There are others in which I really just prefer to turn up the original transfer to cd from the 80s/90s and let 'er rip. There are "audiophile" re-masters, from the most famous mastering engineer that I just plain don't like and there are "loud" remasters that, while they lose some dynamics, pick up so much clarity that they are much better to listen to than the quieter originals. And then if you want to really get anal, you'll be looking for 90s cds from Germany and Japan and hanging out over on Steve Hoffman's forum getting input on which ones are best...and getting lots of differing opinions.

So yeah, it needs a sticky here because it is not just a bunch of recommendations, it is an on-going dialogue. And it's worth every digit, because it probably has more impact on the quality of your listening experience than anything short of your speakers and room. So where do we start? Anything in particular that you're looking for?

Tim

 

[RBFC]

I've stuck the thread because Frantz brings up a subject that deserves the attention.

Lee

 

[Phelonious Ponk]

OK - here's a start -- Miles Davis, Bitches Brew Legacy Edition. It's not a huge jump forward from the original, because the original was damn good, but it's a slight improvement on excellent. Great music well recorded and mastered.

Tim

 

[LL21]

Alright, i'll have a go.

i owned the original Police and U2 albums...bob ludwig...sensational!! i must have 5 or 6 now. Snoop/Dr. Dre - did not buy remasters...rip off.

Thelonius Monk Genius of Modern Music Albums 1 & 2 and all the different Red Garland Trio and Quintet albums. Coltrane, Wayne Shorter, as well. All were bettered (by far by far by far) by the remastered versions that have since come out by RVG and others. I also own may of the Ella Fitzgerald remasters. Hoodoo Man Blues - wow...great SACD. OTOH, Elmore James remasters/Ray Charles remasters...not worth it...felt kinda ripped off...just recorded louder...fortunately bought s/hand of Amazon.

I like the latest Grateful Dead remasteres...but only the ones from the last few years. In fact, they are vastly superior to the original CDs. The Pink Floyd Wall 1994 remaster is great and i've been told subequent remasteres were not necessarily that much better. Final Cut remastered is fantastic. Pink Floyd Dark Side of the Moon gold mfsl cd is def fuller, warmer than the regular disc...not tried sacd.

that's me for now. someone else pls carry on...

 

[Phelonious Ponk]

Pink Floyd Dark Side of the Moon gold mfsl cd is def fuller, warmer than the regular disc...not tried sacd.

Better? Sometimes "fuller, warmer" just feels like somebody turned up the lower mids, dulled the edges. filled the silence just before the attacks with an unidentifiable sonic goo. Audiophiles talk of warmth as if it is always a good thing. It is good, but only if you started off cold.

Tim

 

[Phelonious Ponk]

I have mixed feelings about the Yes remasters. They're too loud. But they definitely bring out some clarity and punch missing from the original CD transfers.

Tim

 

[FrantzM]

I have mixed feelings about the Yes remasters. They're too loud. But they definitely bring out some clarity and punch missing from the original CD transfers.

Tim

Guess what, I bought these mostly and they are too loud... There is indeed some extra clarity but it is at the expense of subtlety. At time sounds as if Yes was trying to be more metal, not much though decent re-masters not the last word IMO.

 

[microstrip]

(...) The Pink Floyd Wall 1994 remaster is great and i've been told subequent remasteres were not necessarily that much better. Final Cut remastered is fantastic. Pink Floyd Dark Side of the Moon gold mfsl cd is def fuller, warmer than the regular disc...not tried sacd.

that's me for now. someone else pls carry on...

Better? Sometimes "fuller, warmer" just feels like somebody turned up the lower mids, dulled the edges. filled the silence just before the attacks with an unidentifiable sonic goo. Audiophiles talk of warmth as if it is always a good thing. It is good, but only if you started off cold.

Tim

The Dark Side of the Moon is an interesting example. I have listened to many versions of it since it was lunched, the first one was in a small discotheque that was equipped with a Thorens turntable, Quad 44-405 and pair of JBL 4311 monitors at late hours in the Summer of 1974 - I doubt that it will ever sound as good at this time.

This is the type of recording where our opinions about remastering will be based mainly on our preferences - it is heavily processed , using advanced mixing techniques. I doubt that any one can how exactly how it should sound, and opinions will depend also on the reproduction system. Personally, I prefer my EMI Toshiba japanese professional pressing LP to the last CD remaster.

BTW, warmth does not mean dull. It is mostly used in opposition to an aggressive sound or sometimes to misrepresent the audiophile sound preferences You can have warmth with plenty of attack, air and detail. Also full is many times used in opposition to a "thin" sound. I agree with you some systems can be over tuned to enhance warmth and fullness but this is not an audiophile feature.

 

[LL21]

Better? Sometimes "fuller, warmer" just feels like somebody turned up the lower mids, dulled the edges. filled the silence just before the attacks with an unidentifiable sonic goo. Audiophiles talk of warmth as if it is always a good thing. It is good, but only if you started off cold.

Tim

Agree Tim...i found the original dsom CD i owned to be a bit thin for my tastes and prefer the DSOM MFSL.

 

[rblnr]

I'll add some stuff I've posted on other threads. I am constantly seeking out remasters of stuff I like because the payoff can be huge, even more than spending an extra grand on cables Seriously though, a good remaster is the is far and away at the peak of the value curve in terms of improving SQ.

This came out some years ago but just came across it, a 30th anniversary reissue of Steve Miller Band's 'Fly Like An Eagle'

It's far better than the original CD version -- very dimensional with nice highs. A shockingly good remaster.

http://www.amazon.com/Fly-Like-Eagle...8250924&sr=8-5

Good Rhino:

The 'handmade' version of Richard and Linda Thompson's 'Shoot Out the Lights'

I have several issues of this album including a fancy 'gold' European version, and this new Rhino is a legitimate improvement over any of them. It's an amazing album that they recorded and toured for while their marriage was falling apart. They alternate songs until they sing together on the great 'Wall of Death' which likens a relationship to a carnival ride. I'm sure Springsteen was partly inspired by this in writing 'Tunnel of Love'.

Bad Rhino:

New Order's 'Low Life'

This 'remaster' sounds no better than the original done in digital's dark days. A big disappointment on a seminal album of the 80s.

As a whole, I find Rhino hit 'n miss where Mofi is consistently good. A lot of stuff I grew up with and love illustrate digital at it's worst -- I'm always on the lookout for remasters from that era.


Being B- or C-movie Stones doesn't mean there aren't some pleasures and peaks, in fact, probably means just that minus true soul.

Anyway, the remaster of INXS's 'Kick' just out is light years better than the original, much clearer and less compressed. A great summer album.

MoFi remaster of Elvis Costello's 'Armed Forces'. Best recording of a great album.

The latest mofi of Little Feat's 'Waiting for Columbus' is the best yet of that album. The side w/Mercenary Territory and Spanish Moon is my all time fave live sequence.

 

[rblnr]

Briefly compared a track or two of the PF 'The Wall' remaster to the original -- maybe a little cleaner, some hash removed. A little more punch in spots First impression, not a night 'n day, home run improvement.

OTOH, Hdtracks recent 24/96 remaster of Nirvana's Nevermind is immediately better -- more present and powerful-sounding.

 

[LL21]

Bob - do you mean the new The Wall Remaster CD which just came out this month as part of the new wave of Pink Floyd remasters? Or the 1994 remastered version of The Wall vs the pre-1994 CD? Have you listened to the MoFo Gold CD Nirvana Nevermind?...just curious as to how it compared to the original CD...or to the 24/96 remaster. thanks.

 

[rblnr]

Bob - do you mean the new The Wall Remaster CD which just came out this month as part of the new wave of Pink Floyd remasters? Or the 1994 remastered version of The Wall vs the pre-1994 CD? Have you listened to the MoFo Gold CD Nirvana Nevermind?...just curious as to how it compared to the original CD...or to the 24/96 remaster. thanks.

Talking about the brand new Wall. The new Nirvana 24/96 is better than the Mofi which I also own. The relative lack of hash and murkiness (compressed mix) takes some getting used to, but I don't believe it's contrary to the artist's intent.

 

[jazdoc]

I remember when "Nevermind" was released and Nirvana fans were pissed because the production values where too good; meaning that the band had 'sold out'

 

[LL21]

thanks...will check out these new remasters!