Have you ever liked music LESS after hearing well-done remasters?

i'm not talking about shitty remasters that make it too quiet or too loud or you can hear the needle drop... i'm talking about proper remasters here, but the "i could never hear that instrument before!" effect backfiring. have you ever NOT liked the new detail, or found it detracted, or found that you didn't actually like the stuff once you heard it the way it was meant to be?

This hasn't happened to me, but I've related on a Skip Spence thread somewhere that Brother JT reacted very badly to hearing the Sundazed reissue of Oar at my house right after it came out, and other people who were familiar with the first version of that album on CD have had similar reactions.

nas - illmatic remaster -- i dont think those instruments are improved by being given more depth/definition. its like they were made to sound flat on cassette ribbon

the remaster of megadeth's 'rust in peace' detracted from the original i found. there are significant changes to the content of the music, in particular the vocals, which is a massive no-no. there's the well chronicled story about capitol losing the vocal tracks for 'take no prisoners', but some pretty radical adjustments are made to virtually all the tracks and it's a real shame.

Raw Power

oh god yeah the stooges ... fucking terrible

although there really is no good master of raw power

I've only heard Iggy's remaster and I like it.

the remaster of raw power is really, really loud. not sure it really needs it as the music is packed with so much intensity to start with.

I thought Murmur lost something with the muddiness taken away. Still great, but preferred it less pristine. Especially surprised by the extent of the bongo fest at the end of Pilgrimage.

xpost Yeah! It's really loud!

wasn't the celeste like completely buried in the original mix of "penetration"--i like hearing it... but ya they are so fuckin' loud.

haha. even the "quieter" songs ('gimme danger', 'i need somebody') take my head off on the remaster. i guess that's a good thing :)

yeah, they say the original master doesn't do the songs justice. i have it on vinyl but have only been able to listen to it a few times.

Yeah that's what I like about it. I like that I can make my ears ring with my headphones. Sounds like when a live band is so fucking loud that even with the drums cranked through the PA they manage to get buried. It's great!

But again, I haven't heard the Bowie mix that everyone prefers. (Or wait, was there a late '70s mix or something that was supposed to be a bit better? I have possibly made that up.)

I have both versions of the Cd.

dunno.

the shiny new(ish) Crooked Rain Crooked Rain one sounds a bit off somehow to me.

I have the Bowie mix CD and I think it suffers a bit from bad CD mastering cos it sounds a bit flat, and obviously it's not as loud as the Iggy CD, but if you turn it up loud I prefer it to the Iggy mix. Wish they'd do a remaster of the Bowie mix like they did with Funhouse and s/t.

Like the version of Search & Destroy on the Bowie mix is just way more all-over-the-place demented sounding. Plus Iggy added some extra grunts in on his remix that sound wrong because I'm not used to them being there.

This is a weird one, but my vinyl copy of Orange Juice's "You Can't Hide Your Love Forever" was much less crisp than the CD reissue. I think I liked it mushier.

wait, is the version of "search & destroy" that was regarded as bad enough to be remastered just the cd? or does that go all the way back to the original vinyl? i've got some version on my PC that definitely isn't the iggy version but sounds great to my ears.

Not so much Search & Destroy, that sounds great on the Bowie mix to me, but stuff like Your Pretty Face Is Going To Hell sounds badly mixed on my CD, but I'm just assuming that's bad CD mastering, I've never heard it on vinyl.

i always thought the issues with the sound dated back to the 1973 vinyl, but that there were a whole new set of problems associated with the 1989 CD release.

I just downloaded what is supposedly an original vinyl rip, I dunno how I feel about it just yet. It's...all the bite is gone. I'm gonna try turnin it up on the stereo tomorrow when everyone's actually awake.

iggy's mix is an abomination. and should not be included on a thread about "well-done" remasters.

Yeah, the Iggy mix of Raw Power is a fucking crime. I downloaded a slightly louderized and maybe tweaked-a-tiny-bit version of the Bowie/original mix and it sounded great.

And several of the Megadeth reissues were futzed around with by Mustaine - I think there are new vocals and new instrumental performances on Peace Sells, So Far...So Good...So What and even Rust in Peace. They didn't bother me, but I think other folks objected at the time.

i'm talking about proper remasters here, but the "i could never hear that instrument before!" effect backfiring

There's a couple of things I have where you can now hear the tambourine really clearly. Such an annoying instrument once you start tuning in on it.

which zappa record was it that had vocals added to the mix on the first incarnation of its cd reissue, was it one size fits all? those vocals sucked

I don't understand all this hate for the Iggy remaster of "Raw Power" - I normally enjoy a fucked-up recording, but I had the original on vinyl, and half the songs just seemed buried. I even preferred "Rough Power", which is a bootleg of rough mixes broadcast before release and taped off the radio IIRC.

yeah, i don't think the Iggy remaster of Raw Power is sacrilege, just for the reason you mention -- the original is all weirdly mixed too! Iggy remaster is powerful/blown out/crazy, just like the record should be, arguably. I'll have to track down the Rough Power bootleg thang ...

At this point I have to say -- Elvis Telecom to thread.

Anybody heard the new Sundazed 180 gram edition of Raw Power? It's supposed to be the original mix.

The Motown remasters done for the "Hitsville" box set would be one example for me, but it's mainly a stereo/mono issue. I always want to hear as much as possible in stereo whenever possible, and that box set had the exact opposite approach. This works particularly bad in the case of Motown, because I feel that stereo Motown has the kind of "polish" and clarity that makes me like it much more than other R&B, while the mono mixes sound too rough and harsh and, well, simply too much like other typical R&B stuff from the 60s.

the iggy mix of Raw Power reveals the bassist to be a fucking disgrace. There's a reason Bowie cut 'im out. Plus the Bowie mix is all about following the vocals.
Too quiet? Turn it up. Too loud? Turn it down.

Never heard the original mix of Raw Power and have no basis for comparison, but I looooove the volume and the grimy urgency of the Iggy remaster. It sounds, well, raw. I might feel differently if I'd heard the Bowie mix, but I' haven't, so I don't.

Bowie mix is "tinny" but turned up to "maximum volume" replicates the "COCAINE FOR BREAKFAST" sensation.

the bowie mix is all about cocaine. the iggy mix is all about loudness war bullshit.

I've got Rough Power and tbh it's not really worth bothering with. The sound quality is really bad. It's more a hint of "what might have been" than something worth listening to in its own right.

Although I do like some of the quieter songs on that, e.g. Gimme Danger.

I liked my copy of Tears for Fears "Songs from the Big Chair" better before they remastered it. I don't know why. I new one is just too ... bright?

Absolutely, some things just sound better when you can't hear every single detail. An example for me is the PSB's Discography vs. PopArt. I like the former a lot better.

I found the Celtic Frost and Slayer remasters to sort of destroy the sonic integrity of the albums.

Even if the correct track names and orders have been restored, I want to hear music. Not kick drums with music fighting for air behind them.

the remaster of The Band seemed way too clear/bright the one time i played it--as if there could possibly be anything to gain by removing the funk/murk of the original master/mix? i just don't get it. anyhow, i was so put off by the new "improved" sound that i never bothered to pick up any of the others Band discs in the series.

the remaster of raw power is really, really loud

That's not a remaster, that's a remix surely?

remasters of the early Return to Forever stuff make it sound too clean, like suddenly I realize they don't sound that different from one of those shitty fusion bands that you'd hear backing up some shredder at a guitar clinic.

sorry tom, simply meant to say that the music coming out of the speakers when i play iggy's remastered version of raw power is really, really loud. presumably he did a whole bunch of stuff with the mixes. i'm not familiar with the finer details of all that.

Well we agree that it's loud, at least! I think the slower tracks work best, "I Need Somebody" is really good

Wasn't the remaster of Rock For Light seriously screwed either? A friend of mine lost his original CD copy and bought the remaster. He disliked the album ever since. I still own the original pressing and never heard the remaster, so I do not know.

According to wiki: The reissued version features some extra tracks, but also an altered track order, significantly different mixes, and on most tracks, a speed increase of the master which results in a raising of the pitch by one-half step.

Anyone else who owns this and can elaborate?

xpost: yep, that song sounds really fleshed out on the 1997 take.

it's another question altogether as to whether a track like 'your pretty face is going to hell' benefits from all the instruments being so sharply and discordantly accentuated. think i may prefer the "buried" mix of that one.

the remaster of The Band seemed way too clear/bright the one time i played it--as if there could possibly be anything to gain by removing the funk/murk of the original master/mix? i just don't get it. anyhow, i was so put off by the new "improved" sound that i never bothered to pick up any of the others Band discs in the series.

― all you need is love vs. money (that's what i want) (Ioannis), Thursday, September 10, 2009 11:40 AM (3 hours ago) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink

stage fright is worth getting i think the remaster benefits that the most, also you get a few crucial non-rundgren mixes which makes you wish he could have kept his antiseptic hands off the whole album to begin with

I really hate the Rust In Peace remaster Megadeth/Dave Mustaine did. He changed the lyrics to some of my favorite songs, and thus spoiled my memories of those. Especially Five Magics, which opens with a different words.

in an interview with guitar world from 1997 dave mustaine had the following to say:

"When Jimmy Page went back and redid those songs for the Zeppelin remasters, that, to me, was sacrilege - I mean, I'm used to hearing all those little noises."

with an album like RIP you can apply the "if it ain't broke..." logic. certainly 'killing is my business...' needed a lick of paint. and in fairness 'so far, so good... so what' sounded woeful the first time round. but how could it possibly be a good idea to substantially alter a thrash metal masterpiece that fans know and recognise every last little nuance of.

on a different note, this thread has inspired me to dig out 'raw power' and i'm into my third spin today. it really is a spectacular record when all is said and done. i'm itching to play my vinyl copy.

i heard the CD remasters of 'pacific ocean blue' are pretty crappy
i have the vinyl one & it sounds dope, tho

wait, what is Mustaine talking about re: the Zeppelin remasters?
Did Page re-mix anything other than the Moby Dick/Bonzo's Montreaux mash-up?

If you're adding vocals and changing the instruments, that's not remastering, it's remixing/editing. Mastering is simply a process of transferring what you've recorded to a physical CD/LP, you don't change the content of the original recordings at that point anymore.

Wasn't the remaster of Rock For Light seriously screwed too?

Yes. The original release, on PVC, is the best Bad Brains album - all the speed and fury of the self-titled cassette, but with a real producer (Ric Ocasek) who was able to put just the tiniest degree of polish on it. When Caroline reissued it, they sped it up, rejiggered the running order, and dropped all the bass out of the mix. It's awful.

This is a weird one, but my vinyl copy of Orange Juice's "You Can't Hide Your Love Forever" was much less crisp than the CD reissue. I think I liked it mushier.

Is that the Japanese reissue? I haven't been able to find that for less than like $30.

Iggy’s Raw Power isn’t even done from original tapes – at the time, Rollins somehow acquired the actual master tapes and had them lovingly remastered for, as I recall, either an Infinite Zero release or licensing to another major, depending on what Iggy could set up. He was then bemused when Iggy’s new mix came out instead.

xpost. I don't think my CD is Japanese, but it's been a while (and it's packed in a carton now). I remember that a bunch of OJ stuff suddenly appeared at Other Music some years ago and I snapped it up at the time. Maybe they were briefly reissued in the UK? I'm not sure...

yeah, the Iggy is a remix not remaster. I too like it more than the vinyl, though I like that too.

the waveform on iggy's mix is just an all-black bar

"When Jimmy Page went back and redid those songs for the Zeppelin remasters, that, to me, was sacrilege - I mean, I'm used to hearing all those little noises."

but weren't those little noises - like the cough at the end of in My Time Of Dying - exactly what was missing from the pre-remaster zep CDs? i only had II of the pre-remaster versions, and it sounded pretty awful

when I lost my CBS version of Skip Spence's Oar and replaced it with the newer more proper/fixed Sundazed version I didn't like the way it sounded as much.

i love the iggy remaster of raw power.

a lot of remasters i think can polish the source material too much or for modern tastes which is fine sometimes but a lot of the time its better just to leave it as it was at released at the time. the guy called gerald BST remaster/reissue was a bit louder and punchier but still not a great job.

I'm glad I'm not the only one, I had this premonition of me vs. all of ilm and thought I was gonna have to get all http://www.dailyraider.com/film/condor/stanlee1.png

That's not the right image at all!

Eh it'll do.

i love the iggy remaster of raw power.

― titchy (titchyschneiderMk2), Friday, September 11, 2009 9:15 AM (9 hours ago) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink

jeezus yr setting a record for rong

I'm confused about all this Led Zeppelin remastering talk. You mean the versions that came out in the boxed set? Or the versions on "Mothership?" Because "Mothership" is a lot more "remastered" sounding than the previous versions, but like I implied, they weren't really marketed as primo remasters, were they?

Actually, all the hullaballoo regarding the Beatles reissues underscores how many catalog acts have yet to get a big polish on CD. Springsteen, Zeppelin, Metallica, Dylan (or at least his b-list material) ... I'm sure there are more.

I picked up the hardcover-bound reissue of The Residents Present the Third Reich 'n' Roll a few years ago and really preferred the murkier sound of the ESD CD from '88 or so — much more mysterious. Maybe it helped that the liner notes didn't explain quite so much, too. Also a drag to lose the bonus tracks.

I felt the remaster of the Kinks' "Something Else" (c. 1997-1998) brought out sounds and instrument volumes that made it sound a lot worse.