PDA

View Full Version : Best remastered CD you've heard?


Bish
16-11-2011, 21:53
I'm not a fan of remastered CDs and special editions etc as most of the time they offer very little new and in some cases the new versions are not even that much better.

However the new 40th Anniversary version of the Jethro Tull classic Aqualung is nothing short of stunning. regardless if you like the music the transformation from previous versions is nothing short of amazing, it's like hearing it properly for the first time. Steven Wilson has done a superb job of this and it's by far the best Remastered album I own.

So not necessary the album you like the best but in terms of actual music quality, what is the best remastered disc you've heard?

Anorakus
17-11-2011, 00:45
Yes "The Yes Album" does it for me. The sound is so crisp, punchy and clear, it could have been recorded yesterday. Not bad for a 40 year old album :)

A.

sandg
17-11-2011, 06:29
Queensryche - Empire (The Steve Hoffman DCC Gold Disc), stunning job !

Bish
17-11-2011, 07:11
Yes "The Yes Album" does it for me. The sound is so crisp, punchy and clear, it could have been recorded yesterday. Not bad for a 40 year old album :)

A.

Same as the Tull release, it's hard to believe it's 40 years old!!!

Queensryche - Empire (The Steve Hoffman DCC Gold Disc), stunning job !

Is that the same version as the 20th Anniversary remaster or is it only available on the DCC gold disc?

LouBarlow
17-11-2011, 08:21
Anything mastered by Steve Hoffman will sound good.

Ste7en
17-11-2011, 10:37
I love the Audio Fidelity 24kt gold discs: http://www.audiofidelity.net/

The Alice Cooper ones are great. Dunno if it qualifies for remastered though...

Alan George
17-11-2011, 11:43
The Beatles remasters that I've heard sound really good, esp. Beatles For Sale. The original CD release was mono, so it's great to get it in stereo & sounding so punchy (& the same with A Hard Days Night). They didn't admit it, but I'm sure part of the remaster was to make them ipod friendly, they sound so good on 'phones now.

SimonI
17-11-2011, 11:54
Yes "The Yes Album" does it for me. The sound is so crisp, punchy and clear, it could have been recorded yesterday. Not bad for a 40 year old album :)

A. Exactly what I was going to say - the first time I heard the Japanese (c 2007) remaster of this playing through my hi-fi it blew me away. The bass on this version is the best I've heard on any album - punchy, full bodied and taut without overwhelming the rest of the instruments.

sandg
17-11-2011, 18:04
Same as the Tull release, it's hard to believe it's 40 years old!!!



Is that the same version as the 20th Anniversary remaster or is it only available on the DCC gold disc?

Only available on Gold Disc I think...the QR remasters were brickwalled to hell !

Bish
17-11-2011, 18:19
Only available on Gold Disc I think...the QR remasters were brickwalled to hell !

I guessed that was the case because the 20th anniversary remaster was nothing special.

sandg
18-11-2011, 17:00
I guessed that was the case because the 20th anniversary remaster was nothing special.

The DCC disc is stunning...like listening to a new album, it's got proper bass and everything ! :)

Wish someone would do the same on 'Rage...' sometime !

mriding
18-11-2011, 20:17
I'm not a fan of remastered CDs and special editions etc as most of the time they offer very little new and in some cases the new versions are not even that much better.

However the new 40th Anniversary version of the Jethro Tull classic Aqualung is nothing short of stunning. regardless if you like the music the transformation from previous versions is nothing short of amazing, it's like hearing it properly for the first time. Steven Wilson has done a superb job of this and it's by far the best Remastered album I own.

So not necessary the album you like the best but in terms of actual music quality, what is the best remastered disc you've heard?

Isn't it a new remix though and not a straight remaster. I haven't heard it yet but the Steve Hoffman forum gives it a thumbs up.

I'd love the box set but the 2CD set will have to do for now. There's definitely a swing towards expensive sets by the record labels. Perhaps that's the only way they'll be able to make money on physical formats in the future.

Violator
18-11-2011, 21:12
Beatles 24bit remasters :thumbs:

Depeche Mode SACD remasters :thumbs:

Bish
19-11-2011, 17:27
Isn't it a new remix though and not a straight remaster.
Yeah think you're right as they totally remixed by Wilson

[quoteI'd love the box set but the 2CD set will have to do for now. There's definitely a swing towards expensive sets by the record labels. Perhaps that's the only way they'll be able to make money on physical formats in the future.[/QUOTE]

Some lovely box sets around but the prices are a bit over the top for me :(

AndyH
29-11-2011, 17:36
Yes, Aqualung is a remix. The bluray is sublime.

I'm not sure the DM SACDs are remastered. The 5.1 versions were created using original instruments / samples / vocals. So that's obviously a remix. But I believe the CD layer is unchanged from the previous CD releases. If I'm right then I'm not sure what the SACD 2 channel layer is from.

Happy to be corrected on any of that. Edit - correcting myself, I now think the SACDs feature the remastered CD.


Thinking of this year, Abba's Super Trouper was a great remaster.

Roberto
29-11-2011, 17:51
So how do they do Album remasters? Are they clean up jobs like restoring movies? Or do they re-record the instrumental parts?

shaun
29-11-2011, 18:06
Another vote here for the (Depeche Mode) Violator SACD Remaster.
Heard bits in songs on that which I hadn't heard by playing the CD for fifteen years.

Ste7en
29-11-2011, 20:46
I also quite like the Talking Heads DualDiscs. Three times I've bought their back catalogue now!

AndyH
30-11-2011, 08:29
So how do they do Album remasters? Are they clean up jobs like restoring movies? Or do they re-record the instrumental parts?

With pre-digital recordings it is normally a case of going back to a master tape containing the stereo mix from the studio. At this stage all the levels of individual tracks will have been set, effects have been applied and tape edits made.

If you want to change things of that nature then its best to go back to a multi-track source and put it all back together again - that's remixing.

Mastering comes between that studio output and what ends up in your hands (in whatever format). I would liken the mastering stage to polishing a car after it's had a wash. It comes out better if you do it right, but its not radically different. And there is only so much you can do to polish out chips and scratches.

Two things commonly addressed with remastering are "loudness" and EQ. Music can get horribly compressed to give it a perceived loudness but in actual fact you're destroying dynamics and detail. Google for "loudness wars".

EQ is probably the most subjective element. This is what can change a recording from sounding bright to muddy or thick to thin. Sometimes the remastering is attempting to get it more like the original studio output (what I think people refer to as a "flat transfer"). Its highly subjective though, for instance, are you a bass or a treble person?


You're right though, clean up jobs can also be a part of this. The Beatles remasters are a good example. Tape drop out for instance is something that can miraculously be repaired using digital tools. Noise reduction is perhaps a more controversial example of tinkering during a remastering process.

Roberto
30-11-2011, 09:55
Thanks, that was really interesting