Best Ever Albums

Re: Mono or stereo version? Original or remastered?

JOSweetHeart — Mon, 12 Mar 2018 18:44:35 GMT

Author: JOSweetHeart

Posted: 03/12/2018 22:44

I guess that if an album can be remastered, going with that copy is the better option, but if such an option didn't exist, I would still be able to sleep when going to bed. Having one copy of your favorite music at all in my opinion is better than not having it at all.

God bless you always!!!

Holly

Re: Mono or stereo version? Original or remastered?

PurpleHazel — Mon, 12 Mar 2018 06:45:55 GMT

Author: PurpleHazel

Posted: 03/12/2018 10:45

Lachapelle wrote:

I had only ever heard the original mix on CD and Spotify

You're obviously well aware of these issues, but for clarity's sake, I just wanted to point out there's a huge difference between the original vinyl and the first CD release if the CD came out before the mid-90s (Octopus' first CD reissue was released in 1990). Most back catalog CD releases from the 80s and early 90s sound terrible to my ears. New releases from the era might not sound so hot either, but most of the catalog ones, particularly from Warner Bros. (including Atlantic and Elektra) and CBS/Sony sound shitty to me.

Not an audiophile, but a vinyl rerelease from a digital source sounds completely self-defeating to me.

Re: Mono or stereo version? Original or remastered?

Graeme2 — Mon, 12 Mar 2018 05:47:13 GMT

Author: Graeme2

Posted: 03/12/2018 09:47

I don't have much in depth technical knowledge in this area but when thinking of buying any new vinyl reissues of mass produced classic albums, best just avoid. Most I think are done on the cheap from some digital source and nearly always sound shite. If you see something along these lines you want and there is no sticker on the front giving extra info, avoid. I bought a "back to black" version of Nevermind as it was cheap. I knew it would be rubbish but because it was 8 quid I had a punt. Worst vinyl I've ever heard. Took it back for refund.
The Otis Blue I bought had a sticker on saying how it was mastered, that care had been taken to produce the best sound ever for the release. I do laugh though when I see stickers on vinyl only saying "pressed on 180g audiophile vinyl". Save your money on all theses mass produced mega sales albums and either buy an original or just get the cd for a fiver. Unless you want to frame the cover (cover art is normally spot on) or just play it on one of those portable things.

Re: Mono or stereo version? Original or remastered?

RoundTheBend — Sun, 11 Mar 2018 23:26:09 GMT

Author: RoundTheBend

Posted: 03/12/2018 03:26

rkm wrote:

sethmadsen wrote:

I've noticed this as well on quite a few vinyl releases. Even when compared to FLAC.

The Smashing Pumpkins' Siamese Dream I bought for example said specifically mastered for vinyl... I thought it was a marketing gimmick, but I was picking up all kinds of subtleties I didn't get before after years of listening to them via CD/digitally.

Then there's the vinyl which comes from the digital masters.

Anyone know if in this case the medium matters or just the master was improved/changed (either as it got digitized or vice versa)? (I imagine the latter).

Ideally, a remaster should be done from the original studio mixes, not from an already mastered version. It’s mostly unclear with new vinyl exactly where the audio was sourced from.

Mastering is a broad term, but even if the source is a digital master, getting it onto vinyl may require some tweaking. By nature, vinyl has limitations. There’s only so much bottom end it can handle, and if the music is constantly loud there won’t be much recording time on offer. The medium of vinyl benefits from requiring more dynamic range.

Those things aside, even if a digital master was directly transferred to vinyl, there is the RIAA curve that is coded into the pressing, and decoded by your phono preamp. Some people feel that this process contributes a particular sound. There’s also the colouring that your particular gear: turntable, cartridge, phono preamp are contributing. So, at the end of the day, even if the mastering is intended to be the same on CD or Vinyl, you may hear a difference.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/RIAA_equalization

Thanks for the info mate!

Re: Mono or stereo version? Original or remastered?

RoundTheBend — Sun, 11 Mar 2018 23:25:50 GMT

Author: RoundTheBend

Posted: 03/12/2018 03:25

You know one thing I really think I understand and then realize I have no idea what I'm talking about:
mono vs panned

Re: Mono or stereo version? Original or remastered?

bobbyb5 — Sun, 11 Mar 2018 22:43:17 GMT

Author: bobbyb5

Posted: 03/12/2018 02:43

It varies so much. Sometimes remastered and stereo versions just sound all wrong. And other times they sound fuller and more exciting than the original. More often than not I find them disorienting. This could be because I'm so used to the original, but a lot of times it sounds like the singer's voice or the instruments are coming from the wrong place. As if the musicians took the wrong positions in the studio. I'm like... "Why is that guitar over here when it used to be over there?" Or maybe.. "Why is he singing in my right ear when he used to be singing right in front of me???". LMAO

Re: Mono or stereo version? Original or remastered?

rkm — Sun, 11 Mar 2018 20:21:22 GMT

Author: rkm

Posted: 03/12/2018 00:21

For a long time I’ve wanted to buy the Beatles Mono Vinyl Box Set. Ideally, you need a mono cartridge for your turntable, apparently.

Re: Mono or stereo version? Original or remastered?

rkm — Sun, 11 Mar 2018 20:17:26 GMT

Author: rkm

Posted: 03/12/2018 00:17

sethmadsen wrote:

Re: Mono or stereo version? Original or remastered?

RoundTheBend — Sun, 11 Mar 2018 19:49:22 GMT

Author: RoundTheBend

Posted: 03/11/2018 23:49

Graeme2 wrote:

Brings out stuff you don't pick up on the cd version I have.

Re: Mono or stereo version? Original or remastered?

YoungPunk — Sun, 11 Mar 2018 19:30:17 GMT

Author: YoungPunk

Posted: 03/11/2018 23:30

I think it can go both ways. While I appreciated how Prince stuck to the original version of his album to maintain artistic control and integrity over his CDs, I must admit that I really like what Fleetwood Mac is doing with their remasters (Now just getting that old stuff off of YouTube :P)

Re: Mono or stereo version? Original or remastered?

Graeme2 — Sun, 11 Mar 2018 19:23:11 GMT

Author: Graeme2

Posted: 03/11/2018 23:23

As has been said, just read the Steve Hoffman forum. I've been visiting that plenty of late as have been buying a few vinyl reissues and it's a good place to get general opinion if they any good. Mono or stereo? I tend to find neither from the 60s sound fantastic on headphones. I'm happy either way played through speakers. I know plenty audiophiles always seem to pick mono over stereo when a record has been issued in both.
On remastering I recently got a cd version of Otis Blue I think from the 80s. The horns sounded a bit shrill and digital on the high notes so when I came across what looked like a decent recent vinyl remaster, I bought it. The difference is quite notable. The horns sound as they should but the vocal sounds absolutely incredible. Brings out stuff you don't pick up on the cd version I have. Been playing and buying a bit of 60s RnB/Soul vinyl and I'm not fussed if its mono or stereo a long as its a decent version.

Re: Mono or stereo version? Original or remastered?

LedZep — Sun, 11 Mar 2018 19:11:59 GMT

Author: LedZep

Posted: 03/11/2018 23:11

sethmadsen wrote:

remastering a stereo album is mostly silly, but sometimes brings out interesting aspects of the music mixed too low or whatever.

Yep I agree, but in some famous cases (khm Justice) I think it would benefit the album greatly.
I do know a thing or two about modern production (not an expert mind you), so I know that loud and dynamic but bland production is taking over the industry. But for example, if you give the album to Steven Wilson for remixing I don't think he'd ruin it by trying to catch up with the mainstream production. It depends on who does the remasters I think.

Re: Mono or stereo version? Original or remastered?

RoundTheBend — Sun, 11 Mar 2018 18:40:50 GMT

Author: RoundTheBend

Posted: 03/11/2018 22:40

remastering a stereo album is mostly silly, but sometimes brings out interesting aspects of the music mixed too low or whatever.

Re: Mono or stereo version? Original or remastered?

Anonymous — Sun, 11 Mar 2018 18:21:24 GMT

Author: Anonymous

Posted: 03/11/2018 22:21

an important concern of the remastering is indeed the loudness, to catch up with today's standards (to the detriment of dynamic range).
The 1997 remaster of Raw Power is known to be very loud

Alan Parsons discussing loudness war with other producers (you may skip the 2 min intro)

Link

Re: Mono or stereo version? Original or remastered?

rkm — Sun, 11 Mar 2018 18:16:44 GMT

Author: rkm

Posted: 03/11/2018 22:16

It completely depends on the title. Spending time reading the Steve Hoffman forum, where they argue about various masterings, is enough to drain any love you had for music at all, but there is some truth to it.

Some things benefit from being remastered, but generally speaking most things end up brighter, louder, and worse.

Re: Mono or stereo version? Original or remastered?

RoundTheBend — Sun, 11 Mar 2018 17:48:31 GMT

Author: RoundTheBend

Posted: 03/11/2018 21:48

Michael1981 wrote:

I always would have thought it makes no difference to me. But weirdly I hugely prefer the Stereo versions of 60s albums than the Mono ones (which sound sleepy in comparison) to the point where I have a different emotional reaction to the music.

I'm thinking of the Beach Boys ones so don't know if I would feel differently with other artists.

I have to agree. When I'm listening to them digitally on a modern stereo, I totally prefer the stereo remixes. They often sound much better in terms of vibrancy or clarity.

I'm no audiophile, so this topic made me wonder more about it.

Here's a couple articles:
https://www.rarerecords.net/stereo-records-or-mono-records-which-one-to-buy/

https://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=112652937

Re: Mono or stereo version? Original or remastered?

Anonymous — Sun, 11 Mar 2018 17:40:07 GMT

Author: Anonymous

Posted: 03/11/2018 21:40

I always would have thought it makes no difference to me. But weirdly I hugely prefer the Stereo versions of 60s albums than the Mono ones (which sound sleepy in comparison) to the point where I have a different emotional reaction to the music.

I'm thinking of the Beach Boys ones so don't know if I would feel differently with other artists.

Re: Mono or stereo version? Original or remastered?

Lachapelle — Sun, 11 Mar 2018 17:10:01 GMT

Author: Lachapelle

Posted: 03/11/2018 21:10

I recently picked up a vinyl copy of Octopus by Gentle Giant that was newly mixed and mastered by none other than Steven Wilson.

I had only ever heard the original mix on CD and Spotify, but I can now truly say that this new remaster is so much better! Wilson seems to be going through many classic prog albums and giving them a modern remix which I've heard nothing but good news about.

I will say however that I am normally not a fan of remasters, but this is mostly due to the collector in me who would rather search down the original than pay for a new repress.

Re: Mono or stereo version? Original or remastered?

glynspsa — Sun, 11 Mar 2018 16:41:58 GMT

Author: glynspsa

Posted: 03/11/2018 20:41

Honestly i think it varies from record to record but overall i prefer to try and hear the version the artist intended if i can or know which that is.

Mono or stereo version? Original or remastered?

LedZep — Sun, 11 Mar 2018 16:33:12 GMT

Author: LedZep

Posted: 03/11/2018 20:33

For all the audiophiles and music lovers: do you prefer original versions of 50s and 60s classics (usually mono) or the remastered (stereo) versions? And generally, when you have an option to listen to the original album which has decent production for the time or the newly remastered version, which one do you take?

And here are some albums that I think need a good remaster (some may have been fixed already, not sure):
Killing Is My Business... And Business Is Good - Megadeth (terrible production, great songs)
Raw Power - Iggy & The Stooges (I've always thought the production sounded dated, but the songs themselves not, and I don't like the 2010 version as well)
...And Justice For All - Metallica (we need justice for Jason and his bass!)
Aqualung - Jethro Tull (never did like the production on this one)
Lizard - King Crimson (love the songs, but the mix sounds weird. I'm yet to listen to Steven Wilson remaster though)
Boy - U2 (just cheap production, it is part of the charm but it's more a problem than a benefit)
Almost all pre 1980 Judas Priest stuff; although their best work, all the albums are very poorly produced