The 2009 White Album does not sound like the original album at all. Wrong EQ. You might like it that way that's ok.
Just saying what I feel. Some of the 87 CDs are very poor and agree also the packaging was vert cheap,
Depends on the album. A definitive "yes", with the only caveat being the recordings weren't originally released on albums. The 2011 CD does blow away all previous LP and CD issues, however (with the caveat that the alternate take of Cross Road Blues was later improved upon). The only people that need a hearing test or are crackers are those that say things like "All the Beatles 2009 remasters saw a dramatic improvement on the 1987 CD's!" Anyone who has spent more than 5 seconds comparing knows it really depends on the song. Not to mention personal preference. As far as spending years in the studio for the end result to only be worse, well, sometimes that's exactly the case, yes. Doing something over doesn't always mean it will be better. If it did, every remaster would be better than the previous releases. Sometimes more time means more time to get it right, while other times it means more time to screw it up. Like the "fixes" to the start of the stereo mixes of A Hard Day's Night and Tell Me Why. I've never heard someone say they thought those sounded good or were an improvement over previous stereo issues. I also have no idea what "George Martin slated the 1987 CD's" means.
I actually haven't gotten around to getting those yet, are there any particular albums in question that are the biggest improvements you would recommend? To my ears Pop is the album I have always wanted to hear with a less muddied sound and more dynamic range so I am really interested in that!
The Mofi remaster of Showdown! by Albert Collins, Johnny Copeland, and Robert Cray vs. the original Alligator The 2019 Bob Clearmountain remix of The Band (brown album) vs. the original Capitol The Mofi mono remaster of Jefferson Airplane's Surrealistic Pillow vs. the original RCA The 2008 Peter Mew 40th anniversary remix of This Was by Jethro Tull vs. the original Chrysalis The Steven Wilson remix of Stand Up by Jethro Tull vs. the original Chrysalis The Kevin Gray second vinyl remaster of Raising Sand by Robert Plant and Alison Krauss vs. the original Rounder
Not many on my list...here are two Santana III- I prefer the remaster (Vic Anesini) over the US original. Santana Caravanserai- too much tape hiss on the orig. The Anesini remaster sounds nice.
The 1999 Prince remaster is really nice. It really sounds like a dance record. The 2012 remasters of Roxy Music are really good; the 2015 SHM-CDs are even a bit better. No abusive tweaking, it just sounds good as it is. I'm pretty happy with the 2010+ remasters of the Al Green catalogue, too. Nice warmth. Same thing for the Axis: Bold As Love remaster from Analogue Productions, really pleasing. I also think that the more modern remasters of Talking Heads and New Order are often better than that the previously available versions. So yeah, I haven't lost hope on modern remasters.
The SACD? It's very nice, but it doesn't really dramatically improve on anything; the original Reprise CD is very similar. And for some reason the channel alignment is slightly off.
This one really stands out against the original super compressed edition. It's like a completely different album on MFSL, they even included count ins that were missing on the original release. Love it
I have a first pressing Van Morrison Veedon Fleece that sounds muddy and awful on vinyl. The 2008-ish CD remaster was like a veil - or maybe a fleece- was lifted off the whole album. Can't go back to the original.
Slate | Definition of Slate by Oxford Dictionary on Lexico.com also meaning of Slate slate VERB British informal Criticize severely Evidently, he was a fan of the CD format itself - "without all the snap-crackle-pop of my nasty old vinyls"
Steven Wilson's remaster of Jethro Tull's Aqualung was a huge improvement, but then again that was a remix as well.
Is that opinion based on A/B comparisons of different pressings and formats? Or are you just spouting the standard "professionals know better" nonsense? I'm guessing the latter. Because in a lot of cases, professionals can screw things up with too much tinkering or just flat out making mistakes and still think they did a great job.
CD only, excluding audiophile reissues: I like the 1993 Aerosmith remasters over the original Columbia discs, but others disagree. I think they have good dynamics and EQ, nice clarity without being too bright. I prefer the first four Beatles albums from the mono box set over the 1987 CDs. It's not a night and day difference, though. I don't care enough to buy the Disque Americ CDs of Help and Rubber Soul to compare to the original stereo mix remasters from the mono box. Big Star's first two remasters from 2014 (which I *think* are the same as the two-fer SACD from 2004) are quite good. Bright, but it's Big Star. I liked the press release where they discussed how important retaining the dynamic range is. Black Sabbath - while I haven't compared every version, the 2016 US CDs are an improvement over the old Warner Bros. discs, especially Vol. 4 (the 2016 might not be the best version, but it's way better than the old WB, ugh). Led Zeppelin - I like the 2014/2015 remasters. I know some don't. Nick Lowe - the YepRoc remasters are bright, but very good. I prefer Labour Of Lust to my old Columbia CD (the only original I own). Pink Floyd - 2011 remasters are lovely. The compression is minor, I love the EQ. This is mostly very well-recorded music so they'd need to try hard to screw it up. I can see why others would prefer previous CDs, but the Guthrie/Plante discs are great IMO. The Rolling Stones - 1994 Virgin CDs are great (although the audiophile SHM stuff is better). Avoid the 2009 discs like the plague, they are horrible. Velvet Underground - the 2012 CD of VU & Nico sounds wonderful, I suspect the same holds true of the deluxe reissues of the next two albums. The Who - Tommy 2013 remaster is great. On par with the audiophile SHM reissue. Frank Zappa - most of the 2012 remasters.
I was amazed by the 2018 remasters of the Kate Bush albums. The same level - if not slightly quieter - than the original CDs, but with significantly improved A/D transfers. For me, they really set the benchmark for how catalogues should be reissued. Kate is obviously an artist who cares about sound quality.
2010 IconoClassic Remaster Robin Trower - Twice Removed From Yesterday 2013 IconoClassic Remaster Robin Trower - For Earth Below
Luk, it's been my contention for a while that even on this forum greater than 50% of the folks LOVE all things modern remastered. Although in the type of threads you and I tend t0 frequent that number may skew lower?
