Led Zeppelin 2014 Remasters - I-III CD Format (part 2)

Yep, agreed. Zep II is the worst of the Classics, and IMHO Fremer's argument that it sounds better than the new remaster is quite suspect and diminishes his credibility.

 

His credibility went out the window for me long before that. His statements on the Beatles stereo reissues were all over the place, his comments on the two different Abkco Stones reissues were contradictory and his about-face on the Pet Sounds mono reissue without explanation sealed it. He still occasionally has sound advice, but like I say, you have to really sift through the BS.

 

Good points.

Reminds me of a saying a good friend of mine has (and which he also applies to himself): "Always certain, often wrong."

 

Um, this is the "CD format" thread, not the vinyl one, yes? Just checking...

 

Question for everybody - I see some basic 2014 remaster CDs for LZ 1-3 in stores with a label on the front that says "Free Digital Copy - details inside".

Does anyone know, does this get you an itunes download, or a hi-res 24/96 download (or something else)?

Thanks!
-Steve

 

I was just curious, I bought all 5 albums released so far (Zep I - Holy) in 2 CD deluxe format from Amazon a couple days ago and they came today, and when I put in the second disc of the Zeppelin IV set in my PC to rip it to iTunes it came back with the album title Led Zeppelin IV [2014 Remastered By Jimmy Page] (Disc 2) - The Muziq Mix. Also, the second CD for the Zeppelin I set came back with the album title Led Zeppelin I : Deluxe Edition [2014 Remastered by Jimmy Page] [Disc 2] Live at the Olympia - Paris, France (October 10, 1969). With the other three sets (Zep II, Zep III and Houses Of The Holy) just came back with the album title and disc 2 as the name.

What I am wondering is if there is a proper album title for the second CD in all the sets, I know the discs and the stickers on the wrapping call them Companion Audio but I'm just curious if anyone has any input on this. Also, does anyone know why the second CD for Zep IV came back with the name The Muziq Mix? For the second CD in each set I have used album cover negative that is shown on the back of each CD set, stupid I know but it looks kinda cool in my iTunes library and on my iPods. If there are any official names for the discs other than Companion Audio that anyone knows of I would appreciate the info.

I did listen to Zep IV on my stereo system and it sounded good, Page did a nice job, but I can't really tell if they sound that much better than the old version I have. But as I said it was just one listen, plus I haven't listened to any Zep in quite awhile so it will be nice to "rediscover" these albums, if that makes sense.

 

This is how I named them.

 

Those alt covers look nice all lined up together.

When I loaded the two new companion discs I iTunes it gave me several titles to choose from for each, including the strange Muziq titles. This means some other user sent this to Gracenote database.

 

Now, I don't know what I should do with my Japanese discs of the Marino remasters.

 

Around 1994 a young law clerk rushed into my office one morning, dropping some new Marino/Page remasters on my desk and crying out "What have THEY done to my SLUDGE?!?!? I WANT MY SLUDGE!!!!". From someone obviously not a forum member, his remarks did highlight the differences between the Diament and Marino masters. I think he was expecting some sharper definition and detail, but keeping his precious "sludge" (at least, that's what I always wanted). As for myself, I had always been unhappy with the sound quality of many Atlantic releases back in the day, as a high school kid listening on Thorens/Shure, Dynaco and Advent Loudspeakers. The worst offender of all was LZIII. That brand new vinyl 1970 sounded as though it had already been played a thousand times. Whip city. So it's been an even longer journey for me.

All of that said, my take on the Diaments is that they faithfully preserve my original vinyl sound, for better or worse, including everything I have always hated about LZIII in particular. But a bit muddy, and not the "improvement" that CDs supposedly offered.The Marinos clean and sharpen things up, but at the expense of the "sludge" my distraught young clerk was referring to. Not truly execrable, but still looking for the holy grail.

Now, I'm not a waveforms nerd, except sometimes in a forensic sense (looking for clues to why something sounds so lousy, rather than having them dictate how I think they will sound). But these new 2014 remasters, in my view, come closer to how I always WANTED LZ to sound, that being especially true for LZIII. I'll be keeping my Diament I+II and the SHM-CD LZI+IV, along with these new 2014s for now, as I hope for future SHM-SACD issues of LZI through PG to complement my redbooks and Classic vinyls. Could be worse, couldn't it?

 

Just to say today I managed to find a Diament of Led Zeppelin's debut album and a quick search on here indicated that this killed the 2014 remaster.

I have to totally disagree from the opening seconds the new remaster is more detailed and better resolved (the cowbell or whatever percussive instrument that we hear is completely more detailed on the 2014) and indeed better separation overall.

 

It has slightly reduced DR and is brighter, the old 'detail' thing strikes again.

 

Drink coasters?

 

Keepem!

 

I like both the Diament and new remaster versions of Zep I. I've written several times that I slightly prefer the Diament for the non-acoustic (or not-primarily-acoustic) tracks, and I slightly prefer the new remaster for the acoustic-y tracks. I agree with you 100% that the new remaster is "more detailed and better resolved," and if someone told me I could never listen to the Diament again, I would still be very happy just having the new remaster.

Why I still like the Diament is that it's got slightly fatter and more organic/"vinyl" sounding bass. It's got that mid-bass resonance that I think suits some of the tracks really well.

If folks are saying the Diament "kills" the new remaster, I think that's just hyperbole. And if folks are saying the new clarity you hear is just an artifact of "compression," I think they are mistaken - if you carefully level-match the two versions, you might hear the slightly increased dynamics of the peaks on the Diament, but you also will still hear the increased clarity of the new remaster. In my experience it's audible at any volume level.

 

No the detail is there in the new one, it's not even close to being a debate on my system. I can't talk for other people's systems. As tmtomh says it's quite clear and doesn't have that marginal difference that volume differences can confuse on.

For the record the two Diaments I've heard do have a nice sound and I can see where tmtomh is coming from.

As for the Marino set I was never a harsh critic of those either-I have the box set.

I was keen to hear the BD versions picking up three today for £8 was a nice piece of shopping.

 

Yes I'm surprised at the love for these, I had the remasters and have moved them on. The critical factors to me were the lack of weight and change to the natural vocal balance. I don't criticise the preference of others, but I really don't 'get' them at all. I hear slight reduction in DR and brightening. Mind you, I started from a position of thinking the Diaments were pretty good. The Marinos are not the worst but were too harsh at higher volumes - and turning up the wick is, after all, the point of Zep.

 

So if the Marinos are not the worst, does that mean the new remasters are?

 

No, just that there are worse remasters than those. If we are talking Zep, then 'Mothership' springs to mind but some folk like that.

 

Which Marino discs do you think sound harsh? Are you aware that these are harsh recordings and mixes?

You actually prefer Diament discs for Led Zeppelin II and Led Zeppelin III? Have you ever done an A/B test between the Marino crop circles box and Diaments for tracks from these two albums?

 

Zep II not even close, imo. The Diament is my preferred of any of them. I grew up with the original UK vinyl, so I think I'm reasonably au fait with them.

I've not heard crop circles but having tried the individual I, II, III, IV, HOTH and PG - I didn't like them - is there anything about the box that changes those masterings?

 

The 1990 4 CD box has no compression, while the individual titles and the 1993 2 CD box have compression or clipping on many tracks. I made a hybrid CD for the second and third albums, using the 1990 box as my primary source.

 

Ah OK, I can see how that might work. No, I haven't heard them in that guise. As I said earlier, I've always been pretty happy with the Diaments (save for some channel reversal compared to the vinyl that was easy to correct in Audacity). As for Joe Sidore's IV, I had high hopes of the latest remaster but was disappointed, no biggie I still love playing Joe's - loud.

 

The weight is there as well in my opinion. As for the vocal balance that to me ties into the separation aspect-to me the remasters deliver a more clear individual instrument layering but without crucially losing a coherent sound. As a result the vocals seem clearer to me, more lifelike. The Diaments present a more cohesive sound if you like-if you had a lesser system I would have said that was the issue but you look to have a very good system.

My gut reaction on hearing the Diaments today was that inherent sound (for want of a better expression) might work better in lesser systems that couldn't resolve the new remasters fully...........certainly I've changed my front end recently and that has really brought home the benefits of the new remasters even more.

I'm with you in that I actually think most of the available Zep CD versions are at least good with the exception of the Mothership compilation which seems over cranked.

People should go with what they find best for them I had never heard any Diament's until today and to repeat I can see the attraction-these sound very good especially considering the age of them-they have a nice warm sound however the differences between them and the new remasters are to my ears a lot easier to categorise than comparing a lot of other variations of remasters by other artists where personally I can get bored or confused trying to differentiate.

 

Nice score - they are not expensive on the used market, but that's still a great deal you got.