CD mastering: 1980's vs. "newly remastered" I get asked all the time why I prefer some older CD masters over the new loud ones. Frequent SH Forum members know why I do, but for some of you newbies, here is a "reprint" of my post from the Billy Joel thread: Remember, in the '80's, record companies used any old tape to make a CD master. THIS IS NOT ALWAYS A BAD THING! Why? Because, what ever tape they used, be it copy or cutting master, it's still an analog product, copied by a real engineer from the master tape. It might be with a little added compression or some slight EQ'ing, but for the most part, nice sounding. Today, one can take the original master and totally ruin it in one instant using digital processing insensitively. So who gives a da*m if they use the original master or not? It's pointless! For me, unless the new version is mastered by a trusted engineer like Doug Sax or someone who skips the careless digital tune-wrecking compression, I'll stick with the old versions. Think about it; those old tapes were used to cut the LP versions world wide. Some of them sound pretty good! Your comments and opinions (differing or otherwise) would be appreciated.