The DCC CD is nice in a warmish way but I prefer the clarity and detail of the hi res remaster. Of course one's opinion of the best mastering is to some extent subjective, so ymmv.
For once, the latest 201x remasters are excellent (especially the Hi-Res non-limited versions) and I would recommend them across the board as the very best versions, except for Flowers In The Dirt (the original CD mastering is better) and Tug Of War (it wasn't remastered but remixed, and the remix is atrocious for the most part). The DCCs are nice, but I can't help but think some of them are from inferior tapes, and they cost an arm and a leg.
The CDs from the Archive series are limited. If you want unlimited masterings, the hi-res is your only avenue.
It's a bit confusing but in this case limited means "with dynamic limiting used". I believe not all the 201x CDs used such limiting though, but I may be wrong, I only got the downloads.
The original CDs are good for the albums that weren't remastered. The 1993 remasters are better avoided. The DCCs were the best before the 201x remasters, IMO.
I do like the remasters a bit more. Fortunately, a good chunk of his catalog has now been remastered. The original Capitol Cds aren’t bad at all, but I wouldn’t keep the 1984 Columbia Band On The Run... only for curiosity/completist’s sake. You can tell it’s coming from a generation away just by the hissiness. I would stick with the 2010 and I’ve never had an issue with the 25th anniversary set. If you have the original Capitol CD, I believe it’s just a clone of the Columbia.
The 2011 CDs sound the same as the hi res downloads - well at least they do when compared blind, level matched etc.
I have a Black Triangle CD of RAM which to my ears sound just as good as the DCC CD, but in a different way - a bit less warmth but more clarity. Not sure if the B/T has a unique mastering compared to the Capitol releases - they do sound different though.
It does sound different (better) than my Capitol CD, though I also prefer the 2012 remaster. The B/T Ram probably shares the same mastering as other early Japan CDs.
Can anyone shed some more light and/or info on the dynamic limiting? Does all of the newer remasters have this applied? If the DCC discs are not always preferred masterings How good are the EMI/Fame cd's overall? It seems that the 1993's are not favorites because of the NR applied to them
I stand to be corrected... the "unlimited" on the hi res versions refer to the frequency response, ie not filtered above 20khz as for the CDs. We can't hear above those frequencies anyway - well certainly no-one north of their 20s. I can't pick any difference between the unlimited and CD versions in blind, level matched tests. For what it's worth, I prefer the 201x hi res/CD versions of Ram. Second preference is a toss up between the DCC and the Japan B/T (depending on mood) and then a gap between them and the Capital CD. I can't comment on the EMI/Fame. To my ears, the DCC CD mastering of Band on the Run is my favourite of that album. Doesn't quite have the clarity of the 201x release (or the B/T) but it is very punchy which suits the style of that album.
Great info thanks More members please post your feedback as well. So it sounds like these newer discs have better detail but are they compressed or better tapes were used? I noticed that some cds with any artist might have less clarity but more hiss or less hiss but more clarity and sometimes similar dynamics from different masterings.
If you're primary concern is dynamic range, you may well want to be careful about the DCCs. Believe it or not, they're louder - with more limiting - in some cases than the current 201x remasters. Check out Red Rose Speedway for example.
The dynamic range limiting is quite mild. I'm not convinced all the CDs have it, I think only the couple first ones were indeed different from the "unlimited" Hi-Res versions. Someone correct me if I'm wrong. The EMI/Fame CDs are good overall, not always excellent. I would rank them like this: 201x remasters > DCC > original CDs (including EMI/Fame and BT) > 1993 remasters. The 1993 remasters all have that same overall metallic processed sound some people seemed to favor at the time (see the Bowie Ryko CDs) and they used early NR, which was pretty bad.
Heh? In the case of the McCartney remasters, "limited/unlimited" refers to dynamic range limiting, not frequency response limiting. The first couple remasters (IIRC) were available in two Hi-Res versions, with dynamic limiting, and without. The corresponding CDs had the limiting (nothing to do with frequency response, CDs are 22kHz in any case).
I stand corrected. thanks. My hi res copy might not be the limited version as I couldn't pick a difference with the CD. How significant are the sound differences between the unlimited and limited versions?
I have the original Capitol and Columbia CD’s of BOTR and the mastering is totally different. The same goes for V&M. Tug of War was a digital master so they are the same.
