No, it has to do with the lossy encoding: the higher peaks it creates fool the DR meter into thinking the master is more dynamic than it really is.
From the UK or German Onkyo Music site. Not sure if you can purchase from those sites from the States though, but Iron Maiden's site says there'll be an American option soon.
One of the several original POM CD DR logs below. Interesting that you have DR's of 12, 13 and 14 when on the 2015 it's "I see sixes all the way" (to quote from a different album that's 7's all the way in DR now) - every track is 6. I think that although the first impression of the 2015 is that it seems fuller and richer and it certainly has more low end, when you listen for dynamics and openness/air, it's not there. There's a sacrifice and you have to choose your poison. I've learned over the long term, the better the dynamics and openness are, the more enjoyable it is for me to listen to (and the more frequently I play it) and all of the compressed and dynamically deficient remasters I've bought over the years with the promise of better sound are collecting dust, with the exception of a small handful that were done well. DR12 -0.24 dB -14.53 dB 6:13 ?-01 Where Eagles Dare DR13 -0.16 dB -15.73 dB 6:49 ?-02 Revelations DR12 0.00 dB -12.96 dB 3:50 ?-03 Flight Of Icarus DR12 0.00 dB -13.53 dB 5:26 ?-04 Die With Your Boots On DR12 -0.02 dB -14.95 dB 4:12 ?-05 The Trooper DR14 0.00 dB -16.56 dB 4:56 ?-06 Still Life DR14 0.00 dB -16.21 dB 3:42 ?-07 Quest For Fire DR12 -0.90 dB -15.34 dB 3:27 ?-08 Sun And Steel DR13 -0.48 dB -16.30 dB 7:26 ?-09 To Tame A Land Number of tracks: 9 Official DR value: DR13 Samplerate: 44100 Hz Channels: 2 Bits per sample: 16 Bitrate: 1411 kbps Codec: PCM
Totally agree. The thing about modern remasters - and heck, even back in the 90s - is the constant sound, hence the constant DR 6 you mentioned, and that these pre-1990 masterings have differing peaks. Somewhere in the 90s apparently they figured out how to MAKE EVERYTHING THE SAME CONSTANT VOLUME. I was listening to Ludwig's 1995 Ozzy remasters, and the guitar is dominating, constant, never lets up! Drowns out Ozzy. This is the norm, now, in modern music. I find it odd that rhythm guitar during verses is SO BLARING. In the old days, it would hang back, because what's the main focus of a verse? Uh, the vocal line, yes? Now vocals are dominated by a constant wall of guitars (double, triple, quadruple tracked) playing the riff over and over... So, Maiden apparently felt it the compulsion to apply this mentality to their old albums. To quote Faith No More: IF I SPEAK AT ONE CONSTANT VOLUME AT ONE CONSTANT PITCH AT ONE CONSTANT RHYTHM.....
I ordered an original British NotB from eBay. It's coming from Germany so I might not get it for a while, but I'd like to hear how it sounds compared to the 1996 Best, 1998 remaster, and the current 24/96. My concern with some (non-Maiden) CDs from those days is that they weren't mastered well. The Universal CDs come to mind from those early days. That's why I blindly ditched a lot of old CDs and went with remasters. Wasn't there a problem with weak guitars on the right channel on NotB? While I've known about the loudness wars for a long time, I never really stopped to look at my own collection to see what's been messed up for so long. Looks like my 98 Maiden CDs need replacing.
Actually i find very few remasters to sound better than the orginal discs due to abuse of compression and eq. Mastered well is a subjective thing, in the 80's they didn't have time to really sit down and master stuff. Many cd's are more or less flat-transfers from tape with minor eq tweaks just to push product. By coincidence this can sometimes be a very good thing for us music-lovers! Nowadays they tend to overthink the process and use way too much eq, compression and noise-reduction which make them sound "plastic". If you wanna hear what actually got recorded in the studio those 80's discs are your best bet. Sure they hiss, can be a bit muddy and thin but they represent what's on tape. The 1st UK Maiden orginals are fantastic... All the 1st discs are more or less flat-transfers from the original mixdown-masters (the real deal!!). Never noticed the weak guitars on TNOTB, if it has it's inherit from the source-tapes. Compared to the 1996 Best, 1998 remaster and the current 24/96 no contest! The orginals are waaay better, they sound so much more alive and vibrant.
Yes, I noticed that with vocals too. On the 2015 sample of "To Tame a Land" Bruce's voice didn't soar above the instruments like on the original. That song was the most telling sample to me. I tried in vein for some time to switch to those Ozzy '95 remasters. I bought every one. Especially with the bad dropout on the original Diary CD on "Flying High Again" I wanted to like the remasters. I eventually went back to the originals on all every Ozzy disc. The '95's weren't overly loud (unlike the 2002's and 2011's) but they were compressed and had their own issues like the volume drop in the intro of "Steal Away", the edit in "Shot In the Dark" and the odd EQ of Diary. I guess they are like these Maiden remasters where some will like them and some won't. All depends on what you're looking for.
The High-Res versions of the Maiden albums i own, sound wonderful in my opinion......even they don't show the best DR.....
Has anyone bought Final Frontier and if so, is there any noticeable difference from the CD? Happy with my original CDs for most Maiden but curious about BNW, DoD and FF.
From the samples, it sounds marginally better than the CD but it still doesn't justify a purchase for me because I'd still end up listening to the vinyl rip.
I got the original UK Number of the Beast CD. You can definitely tell the difference between it and the 1998 remaster. The DR on the UK CD is 12, the '98 remaster is 6. I think I read here that the 24/96 NotB is also DR 6?
It really does. I haven't given it a critical listen, yet. I've been listening to specifics like drums and how the guitars breathe more. I popped a few tracks into Audacity and the levels move much more on the UK CD. Hopefully over the weekend I'll be able to do a better comparison on my real system.
All the 1st-cd's sound awesome compared to the remasters. Powerslave and onwards US/UK/JPN 1st-cd's are all the same mastering. Only S/T, Killers, TNOTB and POM are different on the UK 1st cd's. For S/T you have to pick your poison, the US 1st sounds a tad louder and fuller than the UK 1st but still good. JPN is same as US i think.
POM is the same too, no? All my original POM's have the same mastering (just the usual pressing differences among them). The ones I have are the Japan black triangle, UK for UK EMI, UK for US Nimbus, 2CD US Castle and US record club pressing.
This thread will tell all, my friend. http://forums.stevehoffman.tv/threads/the-big-comparison-of-iron-maiden-cd-masterings.177921/
I'm starting to read that thread. It's actually something I was going to start myself. One thing - why not list the DR in these charts? At least for completion.
The DR meter didn't exist or wasn't widely used back then. EAC logs are a very good way to figure out if CD's are identical masterings or close but level shifted. EAC logs are also more reliable, whereas DR meters seem to be more subject to variance, particularly in the RMS calculation.