Like @WonkyWilly , I appreciate your insights from the world of mastering, and I agree with what you say about how the game has changed in terms of flat/accurate mastering based on the master tape vs. all kinds of butchery being done these days. And I agree 100% about the John Davis Zep remasters being "audiophile quality" relative to some of the terrible mastering done today. However, something that tends to get folks' backs up is when someone makes definitive-sounding assertions that prove to be untrue or unsubstantiated, and then does not correct themselves or show any accountability for what they previously said. You wrote, for example, that the 1980s Zep IV CD is based on a vinyl needledrop recorded to a TDK cassette, then digitized for CD production. This runs counter to all available evidence, and is highly implausible (to say the least) on its face. If you have no evidence for this claim, then you should retract it, or at the very least clarify what led you to say it - did someone tell you that? Did you read it online somewhere? Were you just intending it as part of a rant and you accidentally wrote it as if it were a fact? To angrily blame others for negatively reacting to this kind of thing (or to blame "MISINFORMATION" on the web) - that's probably just going to create more negative feedback. I offer this observation in a spirit of respect, and if you have other stories or insights from the mastering world to share, I'm sure we'd all like to hear more, either in this thread or in other threads.
Seems like another digiphobe thread. Maybe they should have visited Sony in Japan. Many of the early 1980s Sony mastered CDs did not have these so called flaws. In the studios I was involved we never had these issues either. We did proper double blind tests against the analog production masters and the only issue we had was the revelation of tape hiss of the masters but, unlike many others, we chose not to use noise reduction. This was back in the day when most CDs were flat transfers of whichever tape was around and most AAD CDs of that era carried a qualification on the back cover that it would reveal the limitations of the analog tape.
There are no "flaws" in the conversion and mastering on the original Led Zeppelin CD's either. Any claims to the contrary are pure conjecture, and quite frankly, a lot of hot air.
Did an a/b comparison between original and Davis remaster of Zep I yesterday. Definitely preferred the original Diament for that one. I liked the eq choices a bit better. Really enjoyed the Davis Zep II as well though! Did not a/b that one.
The original 80’s Atlantic CD of Houses of the Holy is hands down the best CD version I’ve heard. So much more depth and warmth than any of the remasters I also own. One of the best CD’s I’ve ever heard
The Davis and Diament II are very similar. That one is a matter of personal preference as opposed to source quality.
I need to replace my Diament LZ 3 and I found a Brazil import on line but would a 1990 issue be a BD master?Anybody know for sure? Thanks
O.k let me see if I got this correct. The 80's Zep CD were made from copy tapes. I don't know if this is a straight flat copy from the master or an Eq 'd copy tape for cutting. Both would be o.k. these were transferred with no compression and gentle mastering EQ. (1 to 2 db eq moves.) Led Zeppelin four was from the Master. These CD sound closest to the masters because they weren't fudged with. The 1990 remasters are from the original masters but they used noise reduction. I believe it's called No Noise Solutions. I have the 1990 box set and it's sounds like the life had been there but now it's gone. Did they overdo the No Noise? I remember listening to the tracks from Zep IV and thinking, "where's the top end? It sounds like it was recorded on a 1/2 inch 16 track at 7 1/2ips or a really good cassette 8 track. The second set in 1993 sounded great. The tracks from Zep IV had the breath of life and TREBLE. The new remasters were taken from the original masters with modern 24/192 converters. (176.4 khz would be better.)but they used compression and were a bit heavy handed with the eq. They sound great. Better than the 1990 ones but not better than the CD's from the 80's. Did I get it right guys?....This is what I have learned from this site regarding Zep compact disks. Did I miss anything?
Wrong in many cases. Wrong in at least one case where the 80's CD used the original master and the remaster did not.
Yes, thank you. I read it. Very revealing. MFSL modified an old Sony 1610 to record at 80khz!....And then at 100khz. Which Sony told them was impossible. Yes, they are a lot of compact disks from the 1981-1985 period that are crap-o-la. And then they are great sounding disks like those from DCC & MFSL. I know a lot of people knock em but those original Motown 1986 disks were fantastic. Flat transfers. I have the original Polydor, "The Very Best Of Supertramp" from 1990. (I think??). It says right on it - from the original masters. Master can mean the mixdown tape or the Eq's tape for cutting vinyl. The remastered version of this is garbage. It's now too loud from compression. I wonder why other mastering engineers were so satisfied with their Sony 1630's?... Maybe Sony threatened them. "If you use any other DAC we'll break your thumbs.." or something similar. A point of interest: I have mentioned several times about digital sweet spots. That is where the analog circuits of Pro DAC's sound there best at a certain level. It's 0VU but for digital. 0vu for 16 bit = -12 dbfs rms (average level). Don't peak over -3 dbfs. (Peak level) 0vu for 24 bit = -18 dbfs rms (average level). Don't peak over -6 dbfs. (Peak level) In Europe it's -20 dbfs. rms (average level) They didn't normalize (bringing the digital level up so it peaks at 0dbfs.) back in the 80's. Add to that most engineers averaging their signal at -12 dbfs rms and you have a low CD levels. Even if the signal was peaking at -7 dbfs. Nope. Don't touch the level. Remember the sweet spot! However those Sony 1630's didn't sound good at lower levels because of the lack of sufficient resolution at lower levels. It was the analog sweet spot but not the digital one. Better to push the beast for all it would give. Max it out to zero as Steve did. Doing that with a modern professional converter would be pointless but back in those days with those Flinstone DAC's days the more bits the better. Which led to the current myth about using up all the bits. In 1988 I had a Toshiba DX-900C VHS HI-FI VCR with a built in 1986 Sony 14 bit, 44.1 PCM processor. You can't get more primitive than that. But to record 8 hours (T-160 on EP mode) of digital sound was a dream come true back in those days. With my Sony CD changer and my PCM recorder I was in digital heaven. It would be garbage today but back then it was something. But even with my Dennon intergrated amp, my Boston Acoutic (A100) speakers, and my $130 headphones I could tell that the VHS HI-FI sounded way better than the 14 bit PCM. The PCM was good - Full flat frequency response, no wow and flutter, 86db signal to noise ratio, low distortion, etc. But.....It was ahhhhh....mmm...rather cold and lifeless. I mixed a lot of band demos to 14 bit 1/2 inch. If you used the Hi-Fi (AFM) stereo tracks with the PCM ones you could record 4 tracks. The unit had separate outputs and inputs for both the Hi-Fi and PCM. There is a 2 milisecond delay between the PCM and Hi-Fi tracks but it was never a problem for me and I never heard it. Great to back up 4 track reel to reel or 4 track cassettes. But in three years these tapes would no longer play. Before that happened I would transfer all my 14 bit PCM masters to VHS HI-FI. And then years later when those tapes began to mistrack and were in danger of dying I transferred them again to another VHS HI-FI tape. By this time things began to sound funny...The full frequency response was there and the s/n ratio but....The sound of my original digital master was gone. If I had access to a good 3 head cassette deck one copy to Metal tape and I would still have the sound of my masters. A few years ago I went back to the cassette 4 tracks and remixed them. Not the same.....
You're absolutely right about that, but many of the early Zeppelin discs fall into that category as well, rather than the "crap-ola" category. "Houses Of The Holy" is DCC quality. They really messed up the remaster of that one. But as others have pointed out, it depends on the album.
There is an interview with the mastering engineer where he says they were copy tapes. A copy of the master can be very good. Most of those great CD'S from the 80's were made from Eq'd copy tapes for cutting. And a lot of them sound fantastic. And a note of caution. The original master can the mixdown tape from the multi-track and the Eq'd copy for cutting. The latter is also called a master. So when an engineer says the master tape it doesn't always mean what you think it means. But again an Eq'd copy tape for cutting is not a poor copy.
Wait...Say what?!....They messed up Houses Of The Holy remaster. In what way? Too much compression? Heavy handed with the Eq? I won't buy the thing if it's sounds like dog poop.
Well that's wrong. We've covered this a great deal and on more than one occasion he said that he wasn't exactly sure what tapes were used, and he appears to have a flimsy memory. Kind of like George Martin saying that the early Beatles albums were never mixed for stereo. Also keep in mind that the assistant engineer has said that the masters were used because they had splices. You can hear the splices on HOTH, at least, while the remaster does not have them and just dissolves into hiss. Also, of course, comparing the discs directly is even more helpful. The difference between the original HOTH and the remastered version is very obvious when you analyze them closely.
Yes, your right. The interview says most were masters (what do they mean by Master?) And only a few were copy tapes. My mistake.
They used a post-dated UK copy tape (pictured in the liner notes), while the original CD likely used the US master tape that's in Atlantic's vaults.
My Dad has that but I haven't heard it in years, since the mid 90s and even then on a crappy CD player. I do remember thinking it had loads of tape hiss on No Quarter that isn't on the original vinyl. Is that true or is my mind playing tricks? I'll borrow it from him next time I'm there. He also has the original I & III CDs.
Yes, my mistake. I keep reading different things. You are right. But your speculation of Houses of The Holy being a copy tape because you can't hear the splices and it dissolves into hiss is incorrect. The sound of splices is removed with editing software. And the hiss is because the mastering engineer choose not to do a digital fade out. It was common mastering practice and still is to do a digital fade outs and fade ins.. For example if the fade out time of a song is 12 seconds then the mastering engineer will set the "ramp" time to 12 seconds. That's why you don't hear hiss on the 80's disk. He faded it out. Also Eq choices can bring out hiss. Listen ing to hiss to tell if it's a copy or not is a good idea. But not on the fade out. In fact very early compact disks were not faded out at all. (1981-1984) Not even at the very end of the fade. For older recordings this was a problem. The song would fade out and as it did you would hear the sound of hiss rising and then all of a sudden - BAM...Digital silence. Very disconcerning.
A copy?....Why did they use a copy? Did a cloaked Romulian War Bird steal it? Did they get them mixed up?
I agree with the (strong) consensus here that Diament's Houses of the Holy CD is the best-sounding CD version of this album. But whatever source John Davis did or didn't use for the 2014 remaster of the album, I strongly disagree with the claim that the remaster is "messed up" or deeply flawed. IMHO - and I acknowledge this is just my subjective listening opinion - it's a very good sounding mastering. It's just not as good as the Diament, and so it's not worth buying unless you're a hardcore Zep collector or you really want the companion disc material that comes with the Deluxe 2-disc edition of the remaster. If I were not as hardcore of a Zep fan as I am, I'd pass on the Houses remaster and stick with the Diament - but I probably would buy an a la carte digital download of the first track on the remaster companion disc: the instrumental version of The Song Remains the Same with additional guitar overdubs. That was a bit of a grail in the Zep world before it finally got released.
I don't think they messed up the mastering itself. The whole point is that they used an inferior tape. So it is what it is.
