I assume the analog tapes were transferred in England. The record company used the best tapes that were on hand. Some might be masters,other albums were.made from copy tapes. The engineer transferred these to a Sony PCM 1610. After much a do the final albums would be on 1610 3/4 Umatic video tapes. The 1610 digital master would have all the: edits, tricks and pops removed, eq (if necessary) and the track numbers (sub data). The engineer would now make the numerous digital copies to send off to the affiliate labels. This could be as many as 12 tapes easy. So there can be only one master for a CD. A engineer in Australia, Hong Kong (pre 1998), West Germany or America gets the same tape. However, this doesn't stop an engineer from making a new digital master for cassette duplication. But why? Tape isn't vinyl. There is need to reduce the bass or treble.
The way I see (and hear) it (in most/many cases) is that whatever the manufacturing plant does with what's given to them, and also the equipment used as well. This has nothing to do with there being different mastering (not going to open that can, there are obviously). What I am trying to say (ask/confirm, and w/o arguments) is if any of us with an identical copy/pressing/format (even if we all passed it to the next after use) were to use to make a to market/commercial availability or a physical copy for self, I believe the equipment/materiel used to do so anywhere in the line of process in producing/making this will yield in minor to not minor sound to finished product. And who (aside from engineer/maker) really knows what they may or may not did or do when they made the final product/s as well. Cheers
The 1996 ‘Best Of The Beast’ comp was a decent remastering of the old material wasn’t it? Simon Heyworth at Chop Em Out (like the 98’s) and Murray Harris / I wonder if that was Dave n’ Steve?
As did the '14 Hi-Res versions. But other than that they have done very little with their catalogue as well.
Very interesting information, thank you. With Killers though, and a very select few of my other favorite artist’s albums, for whatever reason, different mastering or different master tapes got used for a particular pressing in a particular country. One example: Kiss' Dressed to Kill where all Japan CD's before 1997 used a different mastering from a different source tape. It's different from all other original Dressed to Kill CD releases in every other country. When they sneak stuff like this, the differences can be significant. Keeps things fun when you find out about something like that.
Love those 2014 Hi-res versions. They did a great job on those, at least the 1974-1981 albums which are my faves. Too bad Maiden didn't do their Hi-res as well.
The UK sounds like my UK record. I own both UK and US runs both record and cd up to 7th. Brighter punchier clearer. Better tapes sounds like the ticket.
No argument there. Remember how the orginal 1965 stereo mix of Rubber Soul was in the first pressings of the Canadian 1987 CD? It shocked me when I heard it. No doubt they were sent the wrong tapes. But that would have to mean that the engineers at Abbey Road had transferred the original 1965 stereo mix of Rubber Soul to digital. Wild eh?! Someone should right a book about this stuff. My new found Diabetes has left me with severely blurred vision. No writing books for me. Now I just hit into walls.
No, it was originally released in 1996. https://www.discogs.com/Iron-Maiden-Best-Of-The-Beast/master/21490
My CD has a 1998 date on it. And Virus was from 1997 which is on the CD. I am not at home to check. I will get back to you on it..
Yes you are right. That is the 1996 good double CD. I was talking about the super crappy 1998 single disk CD. They are 2 Best Of The Beast.
Single disc also released in 1996. https://www.discogs.com/Iron-Maiden-Best-Of-The-Beast/release/8123760
Could be.....Can't remember though. Probably. Unfortunately it doesn't have the FLIGHT OF ICARUS on it. Damn!
Strange. While I prefer Where Eagles Dare, I am pretty sure there is room to add Flight of Icarus on the 2CD set.
Album details - Dynamic Range Database Album details - Dynamic Range Database Looks to be a little more dynamic than the 98’s
Oh, they did - they sourced the 2015 Remasters from them! BUT looking at the waveforms reveal clean cuts in the bottom and top area, meaning you technically get hi-rez files with: a) nothing in the lower and higher spectrum that would do the format's available frequencies any justice b) a sound and a compression exactly as on the 2015 remasters I can tell you, I was flabbergasted when I saw it with my own eyes! Doing hi-Rez and then cutting off like that, that's... gosh, nothing less than an embarrassing cash-in for all the HDTracks consumers. BAD move!
