Why do I keep torturing myself with remasters?


I am really beginning to believe these 180 remasters are mixed for a 500.00 system.It seems every one I buy it's either super bright,or has an ass load of bass in all the wrong places.The Bowie i have the soundstage is all wacked out .I have a decent setup but i can't imagine how much more obvious it must be on a serious setup.I can say the Yes fragile I got lately (cut fromt he original tapes) sounds pretty good ,Zeppelin In thru the outdoor Yikes! so bright waste of 25.00 again..... 
oleschool

Showing 7 responses by geoffkait

Judging from the data on the Unofficial Dynamic Range Database the term "remastered" can be translated to mean "overly compressed."
In the digital world there is no escaping the heavy hand of the modern remastering engineer. Not only do we have to endure the humiliation of classic albums being aggressively compressed but even new CD releases are getting the strangulation technique. The last few releases by the Stones, Dylan, Zeppelin? Compressed, compressed, compressed. As if that isn't enough now a lot of SACDs, Blu Ray, even the SHM Japanese remasters are showing up dead on arrival. Even Hi Res downloads. OMG!
Led zeppelin CDs and downloads from dynamic range database. Vinyl Zeppelin is very good as far as dynamic range goes. It’s the digital reissues are the problem. Early Zeppelin CDs from 80s and early 90s are OK, very good dynamic range wise. Of course dynamic range isn't everything. But it's a lot IMO.

The three numbers represent Average, lowest, highest dynamic range measured on the recording.

Good dynamic range starts at the number 14. Numbers 8 and 9 and lower are poor. 10-13 are just OK (transitional)

Led Zeppelin Mothership (Remastered) [MFiT] i 2015 09 08 11 lossy Download
Led Zeppelin Mothership - 2 CD - disc : 1 i 2007 07 06 08 lossless Unknown
Led Zeppelin Mothership - 2 CD - disc : 2 i 2007 08 06 09 lossless Unknown


Led Zeppelin Led Zeppelin I i 1994 10 09 11 lossless CD
Led Zeppelin Houses of the Holy i1994 12 11 13 lossy CD
Led Zeppelin Led Zeppelin IV i 1994 10 09 11 lossy CD
Led Zeppelin Led Zeppelin III i 1994 11 09 13 lossy CD
Led Zeppelin Led Zeppelin II i 1994 11 10 13 lossy CD

Led Zeppelin Led Zeppelin IV i 1984 12 11 13 lossless CD

Physical Graffiti [Disc 2] i 1990 12 11 13 lossless CD
Led Zeppelin Physical Graffiti [Disc 1] i 1990 13 12 15 lossless CD
Led Zeppelin Presence 1990 13 12 14 lossless CD

Vinyl examples

Led Zeppelin Houses of the Holy 1973 13 12 14 lossless Vinyl
Led Zeppelin Physical Graffiti 1975 13 12 14 lossless Vinyl
Led Zeppelin Presence i 2006 14 13 15 lossless Vinyl


Geoff Kait
machina dynamica




A strange as it might seem digitally remastered cassettes actually sound very good, even spectacular. Great dynamic range, low noise and that analog sound. Examples, ACDC You Want Blood You got It (live) and Miles Davis Kind of Blue.

I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again. Remastering has come to be synonymous with overly aggressive dynamic range compression. It’s gotten SO bad, in fact, that remasters that used to be say orange, red, green (Average, Lowest, Highest) are now red, red, red. Forget about it, Jake, it’s Chinatown. Add to that the fact that most CDs are in reverse absolute polarity and what you wind up with is a steaming pile of compost.

What ever happened to placing LPs between two sheets of glass in the over at 150 degrees for ten minutes?  Some experimentation with temperature and time might be advantageous.