Best Ever Albums

Re: Remasters - Which Ones are Essential?

craola — Sun, 17 Sep 2017 21:06:41 GMT

Author: craola

Posted: 09/18/2017 01:06

Romanelli wrote:

For the most part, I believe, a great money making scam by the labels to move move units.

For the most part, I believe, little or no difference from the originals.

For the most part, I believe, bad. For the consumer. If they are fooled into believing that this is great new relevant music...which it is not.

But good for everyone who stands to make money from it...

i was stoked for the remaster of the joshua tree back in the day - particularly due to exit, and i walked away feeling scammed. i hardly heard a difference, and the track that needed it the most (really a remix and remaster) was still screwed up. keep in mind, this is the same band that scammed me with how to dismantle an atomic bomb. so yeah, i can understand this attitude.

i can't think of a great remaster off the top of my head, though i know i've heard a couple that've surprised me in the good look. genesis' 2009 remaster of selling england by the pound was pretty bad though, getting that brickwall ouch my ears treatment.

Re: Remasters - Which Ones are Essential?

RoundTheBend — Sun, 17 Sep 2017 20:59:17 GMT

Author: RoundTheBend

Posted: 09/18/2017 00:59

Romanelli wrote:

97% truth.

Re: Remasters - Which Ones are Essential?

RoundTheBend — Sun, 17 Sep 2017 20:58:41 GMT

Author: RoundTheBend

Posted: 09/18/2017 00:58

kickerofelves wrote:

Are we talking just remasters here or remixes as well?

Remixes are much more likely to be of dubious quality than remasters. The engineer has a lot more control over the sound since they have access to the individual stems and not just a single audio file.
The recent Sargent Pepper re-release is a remix, ditto those two Ozzy Osbourne albums mentioned above.

I rarely double dip on an album but I'm sorely tempted by the recent remix of XTCs English Settlement. The original album is a bit murky and lacks the polish of their other albums. Has anyone heard the new version?

I realized remaster vs remixes aren't the same. And some releases are remastered only and some are remixed and remastered. I thought to me self, meh, and carried on. But fantastic point nonetheless.

Re: Remasters - Which Ones are Essential?

Romanelli — Sun, 17 Sep 2017 19:09:27 GMT

Author: Romanelli

Posted: 09/17/2017 23:09

For the most part, I believe, a great money making scam by the labels to move move units.

For the most part, I believe, little or no difference from the originals.

For the most part, I believe, bad. For the consumer. If they are fooled into believing that this is great new relevant music...which it is not.

But good for everyone who stands to make money from it...

Re: Remasters - Which Ones are Essential?

Repo — Sun, 17 Sep 2017 19:06:48 GMT

Author: Repo

Posted: 09/17/2017 23:06

The Legacy edition of Sweetheart of The Rodeo is essential for Byrds fans or fans of country rock in general. Features Parsons on vocals (he had to excluded in the original release due to contractual issues. Obs this changes everything!)

Re: Remasters - Which Ones are Essential?

Repo — Sun, 17 Sep 2017 19:05:08 GMT

Author: Repo

Posted: 09/17/2017 23:05

dividesbyzero wrote:

the remaster quality on "The Billie Holiday Collection" series is some kind of fucking miracle. Volume 2 in particular sounds like the songs could've been recorded 30 years later than they actually were

ooh. Might have to get on this!

Nice to see ya, DBZ!!! 😁

Re: Remasters - Which Ones are Essential?

Jimmy Dread — Sun, 17 Sep 2017 16:49:27 GMT

Author: Jimmy Dread

Posted: 09/17/2017 20:49

For an album I've listened to so much I know it back to front and sideways, the Analogue Productions remaster of Pet Sounds made my jaw drop when I first heard it (I ended up selling Lel my old copy). Even on my modest set-up the soundstage and instrument separation are unlike anything I'd ever heard.

Going the other way, listening to the original Scratch mix of Heart Of The Congos has made me fall in love with it all over again. I picked it up 3 days after RSD from Honest Jon's for £15 and it's already going for close-on £100, but once you listen to it (essentially a 'dry' mix, without the echo and reverb) you can see why.

Re: Remasters - Which Ones are Essential?

kickerofelves — Sun, 17 Sep 2017 07:54:50 GMT

Author: kickerofelves

Posted: 09/17/2017 11:54

Are we talking just remasters here or remixes as well?

Remixes are much more likely to be of dubious quality than remasters. The engineer has a lot more control over the sound since they have access to the individual stems and not just a single audio file.
The recent Sargent Pepper re-release is a remix, ditto those two Ozzy Osbourne albums mentioned above.

I rarely double dip on an album but I'm sorely tempted by the recent remix of XTCs English Settlement. The original album is a bit murky and lacks the polish of their other albums. Has anyone heard the new version?

Re: Remasters - Which Ones are Essential?

Anonymous — Sun, 17 Sep 2017 03:47:45 GMT

Author: Anonymous

Posted: 09/17/2017 07:47

the remaster quality on "The Billie Holiday Collection" series is some kind of fucking miracle. Volume 2 in particular sounds like the songs could've been recorded 30 years later than they actually were

Re: Remasters - Which Ones are Essential?

Graeme2 — Sun, 17 Sep 2017 03:07:30 GMT

Author: Graeme2

Posted: 09/17/2017 07:07

This is a good topic. I really must listen to that sgt pepper one, everyone who talks about it is very impressed. My pal who is a massive Beatles fan said it's even made him rate the record higher.
Be good to see some suggestions here as I don't normally sit down and compare releases. Think I have that spiders from mars remaster on cd and the original on vinyl and though the cd is great, the vinyl is fine. Sometimes on albums I love I am happy with even what would be considered dodgy mixes as that is part of the thing I love, warts and all. The debut stone roses original version would never be considered a good master by today's standards but that is what I fell in love with. It has a horrible thin sound with the bass being far too low. But hey that's the 80s and I've heard the remaster which is fine but I'll live with the original. The smiths had a similar problem and their remasters sound great on the ones I've heard, much fuller bottom end. In fact when I listened to them before I always felt that a new master would improve my enjoyment.
The new ok computer is nice on the vinyl with a couple of tracks really standing out.
Couple of other very good ones I've picked up on vinyl are sleeps holy mountain and songs ohia steel magnolia electric company.

Re: Remasters - Which Ones are Essential?

RoundTheBend — Sun, 17 Sep 2017 02:34:13 GMT

Author: RoundTheBend

Posted: 09/17/2017 06:34

I think a few on this site have mentioned the remastered Sgt pepper was worth it.

I seem to remember being impressed with pretty hate machin remastered.

Siamese dream on vinyl mix (liner notes claims it used a different mix) sounded better to me.

The nevermind remaster was terrible. Drums and bass sound like shit.

Re: Remasters - Which Ones are Essential?

stangetzaway — Sun, 17 Sep 2017 02:24:03 GMT

Author: stangetzaway

Posted: 09/17/2017 06:24

The recent Led Zeppelin remasters were of a pretty high standard. Probably my favourites though they are fairly pricey now I'd imagine are the SACD surround sound versions of some of Dylan's releases. Especially Blonde on Blonde which comes in a double cd whilst the original press is a single cd. No less than 2 of the single versions have blown up on me and the sound on the SACD is much better to boot.

Re: Remasters - Which Ones are Essential?

Hayden — Sun, 17 Sep 2017 00:03:18 GMT

Author: Hayden

Posted: 09/17/2017 04:03

I'm not one for comparing remasters/originals (I usually veer for the original), but I have to admit the recent Purple Rain reissue sounds incredible. Far prefer this mix. Lot more punch.

Remasters - Which Ones are Essential?

Captain_Dude — Sat, 16 Sep 2017 22:50:25 GMT

Author: Captain_Dude

Posted: 09/17/2017 02:50

Audiophiles, this one is for you.

There have certainly been a lot of albums that have been "remastered."

Sometimes, it seems to make a big difference (for the better...sometimes for the worse) and other times I can barely tell.

I'm asking this because I just picked up a copy of the 2012 remaster version of David Bowie's The Rise and Fall of Ziggy Stardust and the Spiders from Mars on CD. I have re-bought this album several times now. This particular version seems much more crisp and dynamic and I do believe that it was well worth it to "upgrade" my CD version.

2002's remastered version of Ozzy Osbourne's first two albums were horrific (the bass and drums were re-recorded by his new drummer and bass player at that time). Avoid those 2002 remastered albums!!!!

Can you all chime in on what some of the more "essential" remastered albums are? Also, it'd be nice to know which remasters to completely avoid because they've messed it all up.

Format is a big issue here, too. If we could, can we just stick to the CD remasters for now? (We can visit the other formats later, okay?) 😁