Why is most everything remastered?


It's becoming more and more difficult to find what sound signature was originally meant by the artist. I have examples that sound terrible after remastering. I understand why it has to be this way, If and only it improves the original, if not... leave it alone!

voodoolounge

Showing 2 responses by stuartk

@tylermunns 

"ideally, communities like like this one can help music fans discern which releases are worth buying"

This is what the Steve Hoffman site is purportedly focused upon. However, what I've encountered over there is that participants fail to disclose their systems and so, discussions are focused entirely upon comparing one mastering to another, as though everyone is listening through the same system, in the same room, which doesn't make sense to me. 

 

My experience has been extremely varied-- some remasters sound better to me and some sound worse. I made the mistake of buying the version of Layla most favored on the Steve Hoffman site (a Japanese SHM) and found it unlistenably bright. My system was quite warm and I failed to comprehend why the Hoffmanites liked it so much, given its (for me) fatiguing sonics. On the other hand, my Japanese DSD mastering of Blow By Blow sounds fuller and warmer than the generic domestic version. I prefer the Virgin remasters of Sticky Fingers. Let It Bleed and Exile On Main Street as well. These are just a few examples. 

Everyone hears differently but my experience has definitely not been that all remasters have consistent sonics. Unfortunately, some albums were simply not well recorded to begin with.