KISS' Lick it Up CD - Best Version

KISS' Lick it Up CD

In your opinion which one is better sounding, the 1983 original release or the 98 remaster?

Thanks

 

The 1998 remaster sounds great.

 

Thanks

 

No offense, but I beg to differ. The remaster is destroyed with compression and EQ and clips peaks *constantly*.

Get the Atomic Mercury CD from 1983, if you value your hearing.

 

Do I get the same sound with the average non-remastered silver pressing?
(in case I don't find the atomic)

 

The remaster does sound very good to these ears.

Avoid the 1986-87 US CD's at all costs.

 

I like the remaster. In fact, I find the Kiss remasters to be consistently good. And they're all dirt cheap!

 

When the 1986-1987 kiss catalog was issued on compact disc, was lick it up modified from it's original sound? I mean, the cd was released in 83 along with the lp and cassette, I think there was no need to modify an album that was originally released on the format.

 

All the mastering was done for the CD releases at that time. There were no Kiss CD's in the US prior to 1986 -- any previous masters for foreign CD releases were not used for the catalog reissue.

 

I think this title was mastered 3 times over the years. (1983, 1987, and 1997)

As long as you find a Mercury Atomic label *without the "Mastered By George Marino at Sterling Sound"* on the back, you should be okay. This Marino CD is *not all that bad*, at least it's not compressed.

The newer version is even worse, besides having the rasp of the Marino CD, they are very compressed heavily EQ'd to the point of being harsh. Not sure who mastered the latest ones, maybe it was Suha Gur from Polygram.

 

The remaster sounds fine to me as well.

 

Just found an bought the 87 version at amazon. Hope it sounds great to these ears.

 

Gotta love that 98 remaster. Yes it's loud. It's supposed to be!

 

The 1997 remasters are all good and corrected all sonic glitches associated with the early albums. The 1998 remasters for the "non makeup" KISS are better as well.

The only one there's no real improvement sonically on is Crazy Nights. If you have the original CD, there's no need to get the remaster.

In a nutshell, go with the remaster.

 

Yep, go with the remaster.

 

Even that album seems a bit punchier -- with less over-the-top brightness.

 

I remember comparing the original vs remaster of Crazy Nights and did not find any difference (just that the artwork was ruined on the remaster) The same went on with Dressed To Kill (the album was improved on the remaster though)

 

A slight improvement, but not enough for me to recommend an upgrade. But for a newbie, go with the remaster, of course.

 

Totally agree.

 

Of course, being a KISS fan I bought the remaster first and did the a-b comparison afterwards. Oh well...

 

I wasn't that smart either by selling the original in favor of keeping the remaster...

 

That's when I said "If they ever do Hot In The Shade remastered, I'll pass. Even a sonic upgrade still wouldn't improve the music!"

 

Ended up buying the WG Atomic Mercury version and cancelled the 1987 pressing I originally got.

 

It was Joseph Palmaccio.

 

So, is the Marino version not good then? There's a copy for 3 bucks at the used CD shop and I'm wondering if I should get it.