SH Spotlight Compact Disc mastering: 1980's vs. "newly remastered"--Steve's thoughts in 2003 and 2018

No. Not with record companies. Then those people will be out of a job. Just like you will never be rid of those consultants who are constantly trying to find ways to tinker with your job/organization to 'improve' and 'streamline' and 'cut expenses', not realizing that that in itself is a major expense..

I picked up an older CBS "Some Girls" for $5 yesterday, and it sounds unfettered, tape hiss and everything intact. Also an old Warner CD of Van Morrison "Wavelength". Same thing. Sounds great.

 

For 70's Stones I like the Virgin remasters in plastic sleeves - Any Opinions?

 

Me too. The old CBS CDs sounded "soft".

 

As recently as 1996, we were still getting compilations that did not have the songs over-limited for maximum volume. Some remasters of albums still had their dynamics pretty much intact. Loudness maximization still seemed to be confined to new albums by mainly alternative and rap music. Things started to change for the worst for remasters the very next year.

One ridiculous excuse I heard for it was that radio wouldn't play the new remaster if it wasn't loud.

 

I agree I blame rap/alternative producers, engineers, etc. - It's another case of the lowest common denominator theory - it seems they boost vol, screw with the EQ and Compress the **** out of things so they sound great to the most people who buy new CD's: Teens and subteens with boom boxes!

 

Examples of current "newly remastered" CD catalogs better than the '80's verions

Beach Boys
Byrds
Grateful Dead
Jimi Hendrix
Joni Mitchell
Monkees
Moody Blues
Bonnie Raitt
Simon & Garfunkel
Steely Dan
10cc

 

Well, I was speaking specifically of the stuff on Elektra that isn't on US Rhino...i.e. Love, Da Capo, and False Start (or is it Four Sail? Whichever).

-D

 

I found the exact opposite in some cases, where the Virgins are warm and soft, the CBS are a bit more open and bright, at least on Sticky Fingers, Exile and Some Girls. The CBS Some Girls is close to the vinyl, the Virgin SF is closer to the original SF LP. The CBS Exile is a washout anyway.

 

BTW, I made parts of the 1980s remastering of Wind Up by Jethro Tull more open and dynamic when it was just too soft using Cool Edit Pro and subtracted a light amount of the hiss throughout the track and have gotten a more decent result.

 

When were the Cocteau Twins re-mastered?

Ok, I just found them on Amazon. I didn't know they were remastered - must have been recent.

I only have the original CD imports on the 4AD label up until Capitol signed them for Blue Bell Knoll. I also have all the 4AD LP's and EP's up to that time - which would be up to about 1987. The only release I'm missing is Milk & Kisses

I've always thought the the original CD's sounded quite comparable to the LP's. Treasure always had a very open, very wide sound to it - almost distant - and the CD does match that.

Now I'm curious about the remasters.

Just as I am about the Simple Minds UK remasters (all the old stuff, that is).

Joel

 

My receiver does have a high filter which tames the shrillness quite a bit. I'd forgotten about that.

 

That is quite rediculous. When I volunteered at a local college radio station (WMEB) they had just started with the hyper loud, hyper compressed CD's. I hated playing those because they would peg the VU's if I wasn't expecting it and ended up having to do more knob twiddling than normal. A veritble pain in the behind.

 

Re: Examples of current "newly remastered" CD catalogs better than the '80's verions

With all due respect, I have to take exception to a couple of these. The new Steely Dan remasters sound bright, compressed, and no-noised to me. The compression is easy to verify via the dreaded waveform analysis, but it's easily audible too. I believe Roger Nichols has even gone on the record at some point in the process of the many SD remasterings to say that he has compressed the audio for all the CDs after the first run (post-Steve on Aja and Katy Lied, of course). Compression per se isn't necessarily anti-musical, but when its sole purpose is to take a final mix and make it "louder" for CD release, I say let me hear the mix, not the mastering!

I used to think the latest SD remasters sounded pretty good, but then I did some serious A/B listening tests (sometimes A/B/C/D/E, depending on how many versions I had ), and concluded that the first SD CDs clearly sounded the best. One may prefer the new remasters, but they're definitely compressed compared to the old ones.

As for the Moodies, the new remasters sound different from the first issues, but I wouldn't say the difference is all to the good. They sound brighter to me, with a little more articulation in the bass and mids and a little less ease in the presence and treble bands. The old issues sound warmer and more relaxed, but also a bit less defined. This is very much a personal preference call, I think. I do appreciate the way the new remasters did NOT cross-fade into "It's Up To You" on A Question of Balance, however.

 

If I may say so, that's one reason I always verify what I'm hearing in these cases with a waveform analysis on my computer. If a remaster (or whatever) sounds louder than another mastering, I want to know whether the peaks have been normalized to 0, or whether it's a matter of that PLUS digital compression. When I see the average RMS level and the peak level, I can see the dynamic range very easily and thus know better what it is I'm hearing.

Recently I compared the remaster of Stevie Wonder's SITKOL with my original issue CD. To my ears, the remaster sounded thin (the horns especially), and on "Sir Duke" I could hear what sounded like level changes when everything in the intro drops out except for the kick. As far as I was concerned, the original issue beat the remaster handily, though the original issue is far from perfect in this incarnation. To get more of the lowdown, I did a waveform/spectrum analysis and confirmed that what I was hearing was real.

So yes, I always check to be sure that I'm really hearing digital compression in the mastering stage, and not merely a louder mastering.

 

I have the remastered English Settlement. I got rid of the original CD before I joined this forum and got wise, but the good news is that in direct comparison to the import vinyl, the remastered CD sounds quite good to my ears. No added digital mastering compression that I've been able to detect. In fact, I prefer the remaster to the LP: better depth and width, better transient response, better midrange and bass articulation. And my LP sounds very good indeed.

Now, the remaster of The Big Express is another story. Digital mastering compression (verified), screechy treble, and at one point (the beginning of "Wake Up") there's gross distortion on the transients. Easily audible. (Thanks to whoever it was on the Forum who pointed that one out!) I returned the CD for store credit. The original import CD I have sounds much better, though it's not perfect either.

Steve's right on two counts, IMO:

1. The digital mastering compression that's grown more prevalent since the mid-90's usually destroys the music, and thus earlier CDs will often sound better even though their tape sources are sometimes inferior.

2. Even with the general principle in 1, it's a case-by-case call in many instances. That's what this Forum has helped me with, as much as anything, especially now that we have our own official guinea pig, GoldenBoy.

 

The latest Steely Dan remasters just sound way too bright to me.

 

Can someone explain what it is that makes cymbals sound like eggs frying when it comes to digital playback? I cannot listen to the majority of my CD's because of this artifact. The pop/rock genre seems to be the worst.
I have an Anita Baker CD(Rapture) from the 80's that sounds extremely nice, I highly recommend that one.

 

If you aren't happy with an 80s CD and you aren't happy with a remaster, either stick with the vinyl or take the 80s CD and make it sound better than the CD source using the sound editor of your choice.

 

Re: Examples of current "newly remastered" CD catalogs better than the '80's verions

I always thought that the Grateful Dead CD's from the 80's sounded just fine. Very open and smooth. I have yet to hear the remasters though.

 

Have you ever compared them to the original vinyl?

 

They sound much brighter than my original vinyl, to my ears.

 

Well Gardo, I did an A/B test by loading a bit from the Aja LP and the 1999 remaster into Cool Edit and compared them. No difference.