Original vs. Remastered Albums? Options

[AlexanderMKD]

What do you think which ones are better, original recordings or remastered editions of music albums? I'm not a professional but many times a remaster sounded much better than original for my ears for example clearer and softer sound, but also many times a remaster sounded worse than original with too much loudness . So what's your opinion?


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7UjQc0dM4H4

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H9N9mUhd7lY

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xkkqsN69Jac

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-v6ML2DsBfA


What do you think about deep purples remasters, first three albums remastered in 2000 and other eight Anniversary Editions? They sound better to me than originals.

What about black sabbath... the first 8 albums with ozzy from 2004 black box remasters sound much clearer but they are a bit loud, also the 2008 remasters of Heaven And Hell and Mob Rules sound very rough and there is too much loudness.

What about Dire Straits, 1996 remasters? They are a bit louder but i like the clearer sound and the crisp treble.


I always use a equalizer when listening to music 2 equalizers exactly, one from Windows Media Player and one from pc's onboard Realtek sound card.










I use "Deluxe DLS 2118" 2.1 speakers 2 x 12.5w 4 OHM speakers and 40w 8 OHM subwoofer. It's not a professional equipment but still can hear the difference.

This post has been edited by AlexanderMKD: Feb 11 2012, 02:04

[slks]

Mhm, "Digitally mastered" on a CD doesn't really tell you anything. All CDs have to be digitally mastered at some point, since CDs are a digital format that only stores digital data.

Like mjb2006 said, the true original master recording is the tape reel that was sitting backstage recording the gig in 1982. The labels will have that one locked up in a vault somewhere. Everything else is a copy of some sort.

I don't think they usually do "flat transfers" from master tapes when pressing a CD. (Flat transfer = straight analog-to-digital conversion with absolutely no processing whatsoever.) Now the one that's closest to the master tape is probably going to be the 1989 CD. By 1996, though, the "loudness war" was already underway, so the 1996 and 2010 releases are likely to have stronger EQ, and possibly compression and clipping. It's been my experience that most remasters since the loudness war tend to be like that.

You say the 2010 version sounds "like a studio recording" at times - do you mean, less crowd noise? It's possible that they've remixed it to make the crowd quieter.

I know of one live album (The Kinks "Live at Kelvin Hall") where it was mixed much, much differently when it was re-released for CD, seemingly to reduce crowd noise. However, it made one of the guitars nearly inaudible... I guess they had an open mic in front of the amp to record, and it picked up a disproportionate amount of crowd noise, so that they lowered that channel way down in an attempt to mitigate the screaming girls.