CD Remasters question

[caupina]

I have an question, actually 2: are the CD re-masters worth buying???. I bought PMG's "The Road to You" yesterday and compared it to the same Cd I'd bought years back using my current Onkyo DX-C390 and Onkyo DV-CP802 (I used them both just to be sure the equipment didn't make any difference) and definitely the remastered one sounded better. But I'm not sure if this applies to all re-masters. I'm a big Sade fan and I've seen that most of her catalog has been remastered which means buying the same Cd's I already own. The other question has to do with the CD durability, I read somewhere that after 10 years they lose their quality due the corrosion of the aluminum layer, Truth or Myth?????. If this is so, then it would most certainly be worth to buy the new re-masters copies. Any comments, please????

 

[Johnny Canuck]

Personally, I find the new remastered CD's to be worse. All they do is crank up the volume and it's often at clipping levels. When I convert CD's to MP3's for my Ipod, the new "remastered" CD's distort. Seriously. The Cars first album was a great example. New version is so loud, like Dire Straits Brothers In Arms. New versions are distorted. I compare it to a LP record Vs CD. I like the warm analog sound and the old CD's have that more I feel.

Just my 2 cents.

 

[krabapple]

Just because a CD is remastered doesn't mean it will sound better. As mentioned, the current fashion is to maximize the loudness level by reducing the dynamic range, which involves digital manipulations unforseen when CDs were developed. On top of that one may find aggressive digital noise reduction. The result is a remaster optimized for listening in a car, or on earbuds, but not necessarily pleasant to listen to at home.

But remasters can also be improvements on the original CD - using better source tapes, and more tasteful mastering choices and better mastering gear.

Unfortunately it's hit or miss, and the consumer can't know for sure without doing a direct comparison. The 'loudness wars' began circa 1990, and it's gotten much worse since the mid-90's. The 'golden age' of remastering is therefore probably the late 80's/early 90s. But even today excellent remastering still happens.

Don't worry about durability. Whoever told you that CDs 'lose their quality' and corrode after 10 years, is full of it. Tht would only happen on a shoddily-manuifactured disc that wasn't sealed properly. Your CDs will likely outlive you. I've got CDs that I bought in 1985, that still play perfectly.

 

[johndoe]

But remasters can also be improvements on the original CD - using better source tapes, and more tasteful mastering choices and better mastering gear.

Unfortunately it's hit or miss, and the consumer can't know for sure without doing a direct comparison.

agree 100%.
Is there any way to know prior to buying the cd? Is a particular label known for producing quality remastered cds? or a certain mastering engineer?

 

[krabapple]

Steve Hoffman takes a more purist approach than most; he only converts to digital at the final step, which means no digital domain processing (bad OR good). Before that he tends to run the signal through a tube stage 'cos he likes that sound, which you may or may not consider a 'purist' approach. He used to work mainly for DCC (now defunct) but IIRC is now a freelancer, doing CD and vinyl mastering for various big and small companies.

On his website forum there's reams of discussion about which remasters (and mastering engineers) sound good or bad, a lot of it nonsensical and grounded in faith or misunderstanding as much as reason, but you can glean some solid info there if you read diligently.

www.stevehoffman.tv

If you want to do your own 'research', various wave-editing software like Audacity or Audition can show you , visiually, what two different versions of the same track look like. The 'modern' mastering is easy to spot 'cos the waveforms look like green bricks instead of spiny caterpillars ;>. You can also measure the differences objectively to see how the dynamic range , EQ, etc has been changed.

 

[caupina]

Thanks Krabapple!!!!. I'm glad to hear that regarding CD durability.

As fas as re masters go, is like you mentioned, hit or miss. I bought the remastered Sade's "Love de luxe" Cd and compared it with the Cd I'd bought like 7 years ago, and the remastered one sounds louder and with a lot more emphasis on the bass, but not any better IMHO. I guess I'll keep my original Cds unless I come across some good remastered ones. By the way, I'm not really sure if a Cd that is remastered is the same as one that is remixed. You guys remember when the Cds used to have 3 words on the back of the case with "DDD", "ADD" or "AAD", which one in you opinion was better????

 

[krabapple]

Thanks Krabapple!!!!. I'm glad to hear that regarding CD durability.

As far as re masters go, is like you mentioned, hit or miss. I bought the remastered Sade's "Love de luxe" Cd and compared it with the Cd I'd bought like 7 years ago, and the remastered one sounds louder and with a lot more emphasis on the bass, but not any better IMHO. I guess I'll keep my original Cds unless I come across some good remastered ones. By the way, I'm not really sure if a Cd that is remastered is the same as one that is remixed.

Remixing means going back to the multi-track tapes and mixing the instruments together again into a (usually) two-track stereo master . Remastering for CD starts from the (usually analog) stereo master and produces a new digital version. Though nowadays even recordings that were made all-digitally, are getting remastered.

What it means is that all remixed CDs are necessarily also remastered, but all remastered CDs are not necessarily remixes. In fact few CD reamasters are also remixed, because it's a lot of bother to go through, and it's rare that the remix can perfectly re-create the beloved original stereo mix anyway. Remixing is more common when the product is a surround-sound disc -- SACD, DVD-A, etc. (although for that sometimes they just remaster from an old quadraphonic mix tape made in the 70s).

You guys remember when the Cds used to have 3 words on the back of the case with "DDD", "ADD" or "AAD", which one in you opinion was better????

99% of the sound is the mastering, so those letters don't matter so much.
Nor were they necessarily accurate (i.e., sometimes a 'DDD' disc actually went through an analog stage).

 

[Hawkeye]

Steve Hoffman takes a more purist approach than most;

I believe Hoffman is responsible for the mastering on Steely Dan's Morph the Cat 180 gram vinyl release.

 

[sivadselim]

I'm a sucker for older, remastered jazz discs.

The Impulse, Verve, Blue Note (the Rudy Van Gelder series, for example), and a few other label's remasters from the 50s and 60s sound much better to my ears.

 

[Rock&Roll Ninja]

You guys remember when the Cds used to have 3 words on the back of the case with "DDD", "ADD" or "AAD", which one in you opinion was better????

I just got one of those in the mail the other day Trio Mediaeval - Stella Maris (DDD). It took me back to when CDs were new and people cared about recording technologies. My favorite example is a Telarc™ disk Time Warp (Erich Kunzel & the C.P.O.). It's book has a heavy-stock (almost a cardboard) cover, then a page of ricepaper, followed by several pages of glossy magazine-stock, with at least two pages of explaining the equipment used and the recording process. So far as to what brand of Monitors and speaker cable were used!. I'm somewhat amazed they stopped there and didn't sew the book together by hand.

Most new releases are just single piece of folded paper. Really cheap all-purpose printer paper in some cases (I'm looking at you The Go! Team).

 

[caupina]

Yeah that's right Ninja!!!!. Nowadays some record labels don't put much quality into the Cd cases. I'm the kind of guy who besides looking for a good sound on a CD , looks for a good package that it comes in, after all it's a lifetime collection I'm talking about!!!!. That's one of the reasons I never make CD copies, or accept them as a gift, I'd rather buy them from the store even though I pay more, but I'm getting a "piece of art" visually and musically.

 

[krabapple]

I'm a sucker for older, remastered jazz discs.

The Impulse, Verve, Blue Note (the Rudy Van Gelder series, for example), and a few other label's remasters from the 50s and 60s sound much better to my ears.

Van Gelder ruined some of his old recordings when he remastered them in the 90s, to my ears.

 

[sivadselim]

Van Gelder ruined some of his old recordings when he remastered them in the 90s, to my ears.

"Different strokes........", I guess.

Examples? He didn't remix them, he simply remastered them at 20 and 24-bit resolution.

I've never heard anyone complain about the RVG remasters series, which is still going strong, btw. There are scores (maybe hundreds) of titles available in this series, now.

Several titles in the series were never available on CD prior to being remastered.

But of those that were available prior to the RVG series, I can think of 2 off the top of my head that sound incredible (to me) compared to the original CD releases.

Herbie Hancock's - Maiden Voyage
McCoy Tyner's - The Real McCoy

 

[krabapple]

"Different strokes........", I guess

Examples? He didn't remix them, he simply remastered them at 20 and 24-bit resolution.

That's not all he did, by any means. He changed the size of the soundstage on some, digitally manipulating the stereo spread (generally to make the bands sound life-sized rather than with the common, and arguably unnatural, instrumental separation found on many old stereo recordings); that's fine by me but what was not good is that he jacked the volume up on every one I've heard and seems to have played around a lot with the EQ. Radical differences are apparent on some releases, e.g. Eric Dolphy 'Out to Lunch'. After living for awhile with it, I found it was just too overbearing, and have since gone back to listening to the older CD issue.

I've never heard anyone complain about the RVG remasters series,

I have, a number of times.

On the following thread, for example, two jazz fans got into it rather heatedly over the RVG reissues:

http://groups.google.com/group/rec.music.bluenote/browse_frm/thread/0549395a6d110ed4/6e54f7c22896e015?&hl=en#6e54f7c22896e015

 

[shokhead]

Bad Company ,Bad Co
Grand Funk Railroad,Grand Funk
Wings,Band on the Run 25 ann
Boston,Boston Gold Remastered
These are all killer remasters,at least to me and like others have said,others are no better then org.
Anything S Hoffman does will be great. Check out his website.

 

[caupina]

Have any of you had any experience with CDs made in Japan????. I was checking amazon.com and I came across the entire Pat Metheny Group collection made in Japan (even some limited edition ones), but they cost USD 30-USD 45 / each , so I was wondering if they are worth buying as opposed to the new Nonesuch catalog ones.
I pretty much have the entire collection which I bought along the years so I'm always looking for improved reissues, but unless a Cd comes up as SACD, I'm not that convinced that it will make a difference. I have noticed though that CDs I bought more than 8-10 years ago sound "quieter", I mean I have to turn the volume up to listen to them as opposed to the ones I've bought more recently which sound louder.

 

[shokhead]

My Grandfunk was a Japan import and is very good.