Remastered much worse than the original!

[Mike H]

OK, my rant for the year.

I just bought the compilation "All Good Things, Jerry Garcia Studio Sessions". This is a compilation of the five studio albums issued in 1972-82, plus several hours of previously unissued material. I bought it to get the unissued material, but I was also hopeful that the remastered material might be better.

I can't believe how much worse the remastered material sounds! It is clearly louder, for starters. Not a problem, just turn down the knob. But the biggest issue by far is, the life has been sucked from the songs. For example, the original of "Mission in the Rain", from the Reflections album, is one of my favorites. Whenever it comes to the chorus, it has a wonderful lift to it; it just sweeps you along and into the song. The base is full but not boomy, a lot of vibrant energy, and it seems to drive the chorus along. There is just a sudden surge and lift at the start of each chorus; all the instruments just surge ahead together, and you can't help but feel the music and want to move around.

In the remastered version, there is no lift. Gone. Just some separate instruments playing. The bass is focused more up in the mids, and its vibrancy somehow has been lost. Also, the vocals are brittle, and the instruments just don't seem to mixed together well.

The original is much warmer, and the instruments blend so much better. I mean, I lean toward distinct instruments, but they have to mix and complement, feel like it is a band.

I'm in shock. I can't believe anybody would prefer the remastered version. Now, I will admit that I have listened to the original material for 2-3 decades, so I am certainly accustomed to the originals, and I like them a lot. But still, the differences are just too dramatic. And I return to the killer for me: the groove, the lift, the heart of the song has been lost somehow. How can this be??? What is more important than this? We can debate brittleness versus warmth, but you have to preserve the groove of a song or it isn't the same song anymore.

I have only A/B'ed three songs so far, so maybe everything isn't this way. But I've jumped through the songs on two of the CD's, and it appears to be the same.

Am I completely out of touch?

I doubt any of you happen to be Garcia fans and would buy this expensive compilation, but if any of you do, please let me know if you hear the same thing. This can't be where mastering is headed.

Thanks for the indulgence.
Mike

[echorec]

It sucks,

That´s the loudness war removing all the dynamics in music.

[jazzius II]

i dunno the music in question but i'm not sure you can always put it completely down to loudness wars.

I guess Mike H is comparing an original vinyl release to a new CD remaster taken from analog tape.......

.....these 2 things could sound completely different...the vinyl process imparts a unique sound all its own.......this could be what he's missing......all i'm tring to say (not so eloquently) is that the signal chain is probably completely different between the 2 versions...it's not just a loudness issue.....a lot of old vinyl is very compressed and lacking in dynamic range, but in a different way.

[Mike H]

I have three large boxes of old vinyl albums stored away, but I haven't pull them out for over twenty years. I'm comparing the CD releases to the remastered compilation, so I assume both began with the same analog tape.

I don't think it is only the volume war, either, although that might be some of it. These are just sonically very different.

I checked to see if the originals had been remixed, but the only mixing that is credited is on the previously unreleased material. So, the difference is just due to remastering. This implies to me that it is just reprocessing of the mix, rather than reprocessing of the individual tracks. I don't see how you could do this much damage without screwing around with the original mix.

Note that I am not trying to criticize the remastering engineer (although I guess I am in fact doing that......sorry). My point is that I am so amazed that this could be judged to be an improvement by somebody...........whoever made the decision to "go with that as the final". Why not just keep the originals as-is, and just mix/master the previously unreleased material? Yes, the volume was lower on the original material than is expected today................but so what?
Mike

[Mike H]

Well, it is official now. My wife A/B'ed Mission in the Rain, and selected the original as her favorite hands down.

OK, I won't belabor it any more. None of you have heard it, and so you can't really comment. It is just a kick in the stomach, and makes me sad, to hear material done wonderfully in the first place, and hear it altered to something that is so much poorer (yes, in my subjective opinion, definitely), and issued as "better". Goodness, am I out of calibration with somebody.

That's what makes it nice that I have a home studio to mix my material as I like.

Thanks again for listening.
Mike

[NeoVXR]

here is something I did in spare time.
I got a fantastic old LP that a friend gave me, she bought it from a small second hand place.

I sampled it to HD and .. well .. played around.
Here is what came out.
(Cut together some interesting parts, the full song has 6 minutes. I left some noise at the start to show how much would be there without noise processing, when everything else is pushed up as it was. Watch also the acoustic guitar solo, the transient enhancer raises his head here.. [addendum:] ehh and sorry, I wouldn't say this is actually a high end contribution so the forum might not be appropriate )

[NeoVXR]

you surely want to know what the soundcard delivered (+slight EQ for loss of bass and treble)...


so.. Mike, in case you like to listen and compare, is this the kind of change you said it makes it worse? The vinyl is inside both takes, but the processing was designed to somewhat restore the material from the weaknesses of vinyl.

[shikawkee]

Nick Drake-Pink Moon

There are a few digital pops throughout the remaster.
Urrrggghhh ! I want my original back !

I've been trying to reach John Wood but can't find him anywhere and his old e-mail is no good anymore.

[DavidC]

Mike,

I think this is pretty normal for "Digital Remastering". I would say that a large percentage of the remasters are very different from the original CD releases.

I personally would like the remasters to be the same, but with just the benefits of newer conversion technology. Instead we get a brighter eq, with the dynamics changed to create separation and bring out detail. I suspect that the sound has to be different to persuade people to buy another copy. They will hear things they never heard on the original.

What is missing (to greater or lesser degrees) is warmth, emotion, swing, rhythm, timing, beauty, etc, etc.

It find it interesting that record companies are pissed about decling sales. Well with the lack of promotion or real talent, watermarking & copy protection sytems, and digital remastering of the back catalogue, they have lost my $ (£ actually). I only buy second hand, non remastered cds.

I have to add that it is not all remasters that are like this. Some of the remastered Frank Sinatra CDs are excellent.

Best Regards

David C

[ttauri]

Originally posted by DavidC
I personally would like the remasters to be the same, but with just the benefits of newer conversion technology. Instead we get a brighter eq, with the dynamics changed to create separation and bring out detail. I suspect that the sound has to be different to persuade people to buy another copy. They will hear things they never heard on the original.

Yup.

If 5.1 takes hold, I predict a whole 'nother level of potential abuses.

Peece,
T. Tauri

[NeoVXR]

I think it could be done correctly, but this is not likely, because eventually they want to sell the stuff and listening habits have changed. There are many kids who didn't ever hear a good vinyl in their lives. All they know is the sound of the billboard charts and a few radios. In the mainstream audiences, is there still any perception of the kind of warmth you are talking of? As we know good perception has to be learned, much of it in an early age.

Problem is, the material was not composed and arranged for that "modern" sound.
But how would audiophile people like it, if the remaster is just without hissing and crackle, and only minimally enhanced at the edges of the spectrum, IF there is enough "music" in the extreme low and high bands?
I can never understand why artists add vinyl noise samples to their CDs?! Personally, I have hated the noise and distortion since ever and was quite happy with CD, I mean the second generation of CDs, that did not sound so "digital" any more.

[robdarling]

I've run into this several times recently, where I was getting to the point where my 80's issue cd, which was probably done in the time it took to transfer the tape to 1630, sounds much better than the new remaster, which has been manipulated. Makes me wish I wasn't such a philistine and had taken better care of all my cd's.

Note to mastering engineers: don't screw with old records, please.

[NeoVXR]

IMHO oldies should be released with 2 versions in one package: 1 to 1 and remastered to state of the art.

there are people who love the experience they had in their youth and won't allow any change, this is their total taboo, and there are others, who love the melody and the original singing and playing, but hate the degraded sound of these times (which they likely compare to SACD or whatever comes up).
so there is no solution but that of business.

it resembles the business of remakes and cover versions. some are unhappy to see their idols perverted by some boygroup
to me, if it's not really bad, it adds to the fun I had with the original.

if digital and CD was available in the fifties, elvis, bernstein and karajan would have used that !
but quality takes time and good professionals, and this is likely the relevant issue here, rather than running 1000 recordings all through an automated setup.

[Frost]

I havent heard the new Jerry stuff but will since my audiophile friend just bought the whole set. I do own a bunch of Marley remasters which sound WAAAY better than the originals. I also agree with the comment that a remaster shoudl include the original tracks after the remastered tracks as long as the album permits. My copy of pet sounds is setup that way and I like it.
Frost

[DavidC]

Originally posted by Frost
I havent heard the new Jerry stuff but will since my audiophile friend just bought the whole set. I do own a bunch of Marley remasters which sound WAAAY better than the originals. I also agree with the comment that a remaster shoudl include the original tracks after the remastered tracks as long as the album permits. My copy of pet sounds is setup that way and I like it.
Frost

Frost,

I haven't heard the Marley remasters, so I cannot comment. Can I ask do they sound WAAAY different, or just more refined?

A lot of people actually prefer the "digitally remastered sound" over the original, including many music and hifi reviewers. Often they have a deeper bass, more polished & refined treble, greater soundstage, more detail, etc. We all listen to music differently. For me, I find most remastered CD's unlistenable.

Best Regards

David C

[Dixiechicken4414]

Peter Gabriel SO remastered CD is not quite a success in a remastering point of view...
And i still wonder what they did for the Capricorn Classics' Allman Bros "Brothers and Sisters"...

[mwagener]

I absolutely hated the re-master of Ozzy's No More Tears, it was unlistenable to me.

[andyspiller]

Originally Posted by Dixiechicken4414

Peter Gabriel SO remastered CD is not quite a success in a remastering point of view...

At the time of original release Digital vs Vinyl was definitely Chalk and Cheese - it was as though the Mastering Engineer had walked out of the room and the assistant let loose...

Of course I am sure that it was just the transition to the new media, however it is an amazingly different sound - the vinyl is so much sparklier and detailed.

[radicalron]

Thanks for the Heads Up! - I am a big Garcia fan, and will avoid this compilation.
Many Wanna be, Hack Mastering Engineers out there. If Jerry were still alive, he would not stand for it!

[AlexK]

Originally Posted by andyspiller

At the time of original release Digital vs Vinyl was definitely Chalk and Cheese - it was as though the Mastering Engineer had walked out of the room and the assistant let loose...

Of course I am sure that it was just the transition to the new media, however it is an amazingly different sound - the vinyl is so much sparklier and detailed.

+1

So on vinyl is absolutely stunning. The pressing is great too - my copy is an original which my dad has played quite a few times through, and it's showing no signs of wear.

Lowest noise-shelf of any vinyl I own...

[AllAboutTone]

Originally Posted by mwagener

I absolutely hated the re-master of Ozzy's No More Tears, it was unlistenable to me.

I don't think I have heard that one......hmmm

Love that CD...

[haryy]

Ted Jensen remastered AC/DCs Back In Black. tutt

[Dixiechicken4414]

Originally Posted by andyspiller

At the time of original release Digital vs Vinyl was definitely Chalk and Cheese - it was as though the Mastering Engineer had walked out of the room and the assistant let loose...

Of course I am sure that it was just the transition to the new media, however it is an amazingly different sound - the vinyl is so much sparklier and detailed.

Definitely.

[waxx]

i got the same problem with the album the "heart of the congos" of the jamaican reggaegroup the congos. I have a digital copy (with lenco turntable, urei mixer/tt preamp, lavry a/d, no processing) version of the original Black Ark records label vinyl pressing, and the remastered VP Records version on vinyl, and the latter is sounding not so good while the first is one of the best sounding black ark/Lee Perry productions i know. That's why i mostly listen to the digitalised old lp in stead of the new VP lp.

[Mike H]

I will add to the list Dire Straits' CD Dire Straits.
Originally released in 1978, a "Warner Remasters" was released in 2000. The mid drive is gone on songs like Sultans of Swing........instead you get boosted highs.

[Jim Williams]

It's high time to call out those that destroy good music for fashion.

We need to know the mastering AE, the mastering house and the producer.

Then those folks need to hear from you. They need to be held accountable.

If you do nothing, expect more crap from these misguided so called professionals.

They get away with this crap 'cause we let them. That has to stop. A public lashing or two is in order at least, a protest and boycott at best.

If the "arteests" don't give a damm, we should. After all, we are the customers and have to listen to this crap.

Jim Williams
Audio Upgrades

[Waltz Mastering]

Originally Posted by Jim Williams

It's high time to call out those that destroy good music for fashion.

We need to know the mastering AE, the mastering house and the producer.

This would do no good as you would only have to look no further than the customer or client who request and approve this.

I agree. It sucks when things get over-cooked. Listening to music that fatigues your ears is not fun. But I do believe it is not as big as a pandemic as people on GS make it out to be, where it can get blown a little out of proportion.

An ME's first objective should be to make any corrective changes to help the music translate. Only if needed. Help the flow of songs on an album to have continuity, yet stand on their own.

The last thing that should be considered is loudness.

It's gotten to the point where, when I deal with a new client I will print 2 master's of the same song for them, same eq. One at a conservative level. One on the uber loud side.

Guess which one 9.5 out of 10 times they will pick?

All that I am saying is that ME's are getting a lot of heat for this, but it's a service industry, and clients are the ones this comes back to.

Back on topic, whether one likes then or not, look at the care that was put into the new Beatles re-masters.

Music is the best.

[MrVelvet]

Originally Posted by Mike H

I will add to the list Dire Straits' CD Dire Straits.
Originally released in 1978, a "Warner Remasters" was released in 2000. The mid drive is gone on songs like Sultans of Swing........instead you get boosted highs.

Just was going to add that one - actually, the whole remastered Dire Straits series, especially my favourite, "Communiqué", sounds worse than the original to me.

I don`t think the artists always know - or care - of the process, I do think it`s moreoften just approved by an overseeing A&R. It`s probably more of a "record company project" than an artist one, just like many compilations.

[Mike H]

Originally Posted by Waltz Mastering

The last thing that should be considered is loudness.

Loudness is certainly a huge issue today.
But the examples I mentioned weren't about compression/loudness.
They were primarily EQ issues where the mids were cut and the highs were boosted, so the songs end up basically weak imitations.
Possibly some would consider them more elegant, but the heart of the original was cut out.

And yes, that is probably just what the ME was asked to do........"make them sound more modern".

[Jim Williams]

Originally Posted by Waltz Mastering

This would do no good as you would only have to look no further than the customer or client who request and approve this.

We don't know as it's not been tried yet. How we got here is how we are going to get out. We must humiliate every bad ME and mastering house, and every producer that requires/allows such damage to occur. We must shame these people and do it in public. We need to make jokes about them and keep it up until they realize what they are doing is not cool and they will feel embarassed about it to the point where they will stop.

If that doesn't work, double up on the heat. Eventually, overcompressed CD's will go out of fashion, but we should not stand by and wait, we need to accelerate the demise of piss poor mastering by making personal examples of those doing the damage. Those folks need to change or get weeded out of the industry.

For me, no more Mr. Nice Guy, I'm out for ME blood now. If I can contribute to the demise of a bad mastering house, that will be wonderful.

At least I have my old catalog of 1630 CD's, they sound great next to the newer stuff.

Jim Williams
Audio Upgrades