Achtung Baby

[wado1942]

This was discussed a bit in another thread, but I just revisited this album for the first time in about a decade and am surprised at how inconsistent it is. Some songs are really loud while others with just as much drive are much lower. Some are bright but most are really muddy sounding, lots of energy in the 500Hz range on most songs. If I didn't already know it took like two years to make, using some of the top engineers & producers of the time, I'd say it's a pretty amateurish mix/master done in a hurry.

Oh, and it's always nice to hear a non-crushed rock album. It sounds like it has less compression than most of their albums, even earlier ones.

[fradoca]

i guess the "improper" use of different formats from 2 inch to 1/2 inch to dat tape brought a lot of "confusion"
on the final sound of the mixes.
Few things were added during the mastering sessions.
At least all the dynamics are pretty intact.It's one of those albums
that the louder you play it the better you listen to it.
Even if i've bought the super deluxe box-set i stick with the original release on cd.
It sounds better.But that's my modest point of view.

[Silver Sonya]

The new version is not remastered, apparently.

Very strange situation.

I wish someone in the U2 camp could be clear on the process.

- c

[fradoca]

sorry silver sonya but the new version IS remastered.
I've compared it side by side and the new one sounds 1-1,5 db louder
and more compressed in the bass frequency area.

i hope this will clear up things a little bit

[wado1942]

I'm listening to the original version and don't really know anything about the remaster. Another thing I've noticed is the material is better than I remember. I remember thinking there's two or three good songs and the rest were annoying noise. Now it's shifted somewhat in the other direction.

[MGB]

for me that was their last great album...glad to hear it hasn't been crushed as it would be such a shame

[ARIEL]

I worked at a record store back when that came out , and I heard it everyday for a long time 3 months i think !! I still have some of those songs in my head whenever someone mentions this title I have not listened to it since it cam out . But back then I didn't notice too many dips or changes as it was played in the store system . This I don't think the average listener would notice . But I am sure I f i did put it on now I would agree with the OP . They need to work with a producer that would bring back some of their 80's bite and cool unique vibe they had going on in those days. It seemed like their music back then was more mature sounding .

[Silver Sonya]

Originally Posted by fradoca

sorry silver sonya but the new version IS remastered.
I've compared it side by side and the new one sounds 1-1,5 db louder
and more compressed in the bass frequency area.

i hope this will clear up things a little bit

No, unfortunately, it doesn't. The band insists it is not remastered. This is why I say it's confusing.

- c

[fradoca]

First Mr McCornick does not understand a damn thing about audio mastering.
Second thing as i've stated before i've done comparisons side by side between the original cd and the new release.
Opening the tracks in wavelab you can see that the new release sounds
1,5 db louder compared to the original one.If you do a critical listening session you can hear a boost in the 6-8 khz area and more evident compression in the bass frequency area.So it's not the same master.
It's a different new master.So there' s a new glass master hence
it has been remastered.
If you buy the new release you can read in the credits:
Re-mastering directed by The Edge.Remastered by Arnie Acosta and Scott Sedillo at Bernie Grundman Mastering.

Clear?

[Silver Sonya]

Originally Posted by fradoca

First Mr McCornick does not understand a damn thing about audio mastering.
Second thing as i've stated before i've done comparisons side by side between the original cd and the new release.
Opening the tracks in wavelab you can see that the new release sounds
1,5 db louder compared to the original one.If you do a critical listening session you can hear a boost in the 6-8 khz area and more evident compression in the bass frequency area.So it's not the same master.
It's a different new master.So there' s a new glass master hence
it has been remastered.
If you buy the new release you can read in the credits:
Re-mastering directed by The Edge.Remastered by Arnie Acosta and Scott Sedillo at Bernie Grundman Mastering.

Clear?

I'm not doubting you at all. I'm sure it's different.

It is curious, however, that the band's site said it was "not remastered, just boosted."

In this interview, Edge explains that basically the new master is the old master with some augmentation (as opposed to going back to the source mixes).



- c

[themaidsroom]

I got a german vinyl copy of this record some years back that sounds
really good.

[fradoca]

Originally Posted by Silver Sonya

I'm not doubting you at all. I'm sure it's different.

It is curious, however, that the band's site said it was "not remastered, just boosted."

In this interview, Edge explains that basically the new master is the old master with some augmentation (as opposed to going back to the source mixes).



- c

ok..i've seen the video...it's funny because the original cd sounds better!
Even if it sounds only 1,5 db quieter you can still hear more dynamics
on the original release than on the newest one...but at the end it can be only a matter of taste on which one someone prefers...

[wado1942]

Even if they did take the old master and "augment" it, that's still remastering. BTW, I don't think they could do it any other way since the mixes didn't exist until the final master came together.

[Cheebs Goat]

How is this even an argument? It is so easy to tell with a digital recording. If it does not 100% completely and totally null against the older version, it is a new master. It has to be by definition.

[Silver Sonya]

Originally Posted by Cheebs Goat

How is this even an argument? It is so easy to tell with a digital recording. If it does not 100% completely and totally null against the older version, it is a new master. It has to be by definition.

Yes, technically.

And nobody's arguing.

Popping the 16-bit CD into Wavelab or Pewak and adding 2dB of brickwall limiting is hardly what we expect when some says U2 remastering, though (read: infinite budget). That's where the confusion lies.

The band's press release keeps insisting it is not a remastering, but a "polishing" or "boosting." So clearly, they're making a distinction between a thorough, from-the-ground-up remastering and what happened here.

But you're right: technically any change results in a new glass master.

- c

[Santiago]

As I said in another thread, it does seem that the final stereo mixes (that the master was made from) were actually lost:

"Hi, I have followed the controversy I think I know what's going on:

The original mixing mastering process of AB was quite chaotic. On U2 by U2 it is described how The Edge flew to the US with the master tapes. It is even alleged that some guitar overdubs were added at this stage (on Mysterious ways and One, apparently)!

When the 1990-2000 best of came out (for which the songs were remastered) it was noticed that Mysterious ways had some differences in the vocal track from the AB version (there was one line that was different). There was some speculation as to why this was the case.

Well, my theory is that this was due to the fact that they had lost the original stereo mix tapes from which the master had been made, and the closest version of MW they found was this near final mix.

So when it came to re-master AB they were lacking several of the final stereo mixes they would have needed to remaster the album. Judging by what Neil McCormick has said, it seems they have taken the original master and tweaked it to make it louder and re-eq'd it.

So it is not really a re-master, rather a (probably slight, other U2 re-masters have gone easy on the compression) re-tweak of the original master tapes.

I have no proof for this (other than the re-mastered Mysterious ways on the 1990-2000 best of with a slightly different lyric), but it makes sense to me."

[Sound4LifeStudio]

I do really like the old CD and how it was mastered at that time.
The new version sounds and feels strange to me, I would recommend anyone buying the CD try to get the "old" version.