|
|
Post by MartinT on May 16, 2016 19:47:58 GMT
I bought the first four albums remastered by Jimmy Page when I was in Houston but I didn't get to play them much for a while. I'm really kicking myself now but I've enjoyed the catching up. These remasters are much, much better than your average 'compress the hell out of it and bring the level up' shockers that have come to market of late. It's clear when you listen to them that Jimmy has done a superb job of bringing the detail, dynamics and impact up a lot compared with, say, the vinyl pressings or even the last batch of CD releases.    The band member who most benefits from this treatment is John Bonham, whose drumming has all the seismic impact it should always have had. It makes a remarkable difference to the whole sound. It's perhaps unsurprising that Mojo don't mention the renewed sound quality at all but wax lyrical over the additional material. For me, it's the revelatory insight into what was laid down in the masters that I find so rewarding. However, the extras are nice to have. If you like Led Zeppelin even a bit, you need to hear these. Start with II, but buy them all. |
|
|
|
Post by John on May 16, 2016 20:24:29 GMT
I was very impressed they have that Zep energy you expect
|
|
|
|
Post by ChrisB on May 16, 2016 20:33:55 GMT
Has anyone compared these CD versions to the equivalent vinyl remasters?
|
|
|
|
Post by MikeMusic on May 16, 2016 20:34:11 GMT
Been a while since I played LZ but I was sure there was lots more there/
I think most was the immediacy of the presentation. More 'real' than before and I have played the albums a lot since they came out, so that's quite a lot
|
|
|
|
Post by John on May 16, 2016 20:42:50 GMT
Just got them
|
|
|
|
Post by canetoad on May 17, 2016 9:33:48 GMT
I thought we were talking about vinyl.
|
|
|
|
Post by MartinT on May 17, 2016 11:14:20 GMT
They have been released in both CD and vinyl formats. I bought the CDs.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 17, 2016 11:34:13 GMT
Has anyone compared these CD versions to the equivalent vinyl remasters? I have the vinyl versions but don't bother with duplicating stuff on CD. I would expect the vinyl to be better than red book CD because the source is hi-res digital transfers. I would be surprised if these come near an original vinyl pressing or the Classic Records versions. The vinyl versions though very good fall short of the Classics except LZ III which sounds very close. This is the best mastered of the series. Some people on Hoffman forum have both CD and vinyl so I suggest to look there for comparisons. The vinyl is certainly an essential buy if you don't own mint originals or Classic Records reissues. They appear to be mastered closer to the warmth of original UK rather than the brighter more open Classic Records presentation. |
|
|
|
Post by MartinT on May 17, 2016 12:03:56 GMT
The CD remasters are way better than the original vinyl pressings. Do not underestimate just how good they are.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 17, 2016 13:40:51 GMT
Sometime ago I was able to compare Classic LZ II with a plum label. Result was I sold the plum label on. Does that mean originals are overrated? A lot of people prefer it. Based on the vinyl the new mastering varies from close to well behind the all analogue Classic pressings. They can be more impressive due to a more extended bass but not so good for higher frequencies. They do sound a little compressed to me. My guess is they are likely close to original pressing, (since at present only have the Classic records releases), but general consensus is they are not as good. I would only say that I hardly ever have found a CD mastering better than a vinyl version providing the later was done with some care. 16 bit digital is going to be less resolving than 24/92 cut to vinyl. It's a case of 'your mileage may vary' I think.
|
|
|
|
Post by MartinT on May 17, 2016 20:17:19 GMT
You're forgetting that these are Jimmy Page remasters. They're remixed and they actually sound different, so we're not just talking about minor format differences here.
|
|
|
|
Post by John on May 17, 2016 20:30:23 GMT
Agree This is more like Zep live
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 17, 2016 21:24:38 GMT
You're forgetting that these are Jimmy Page remasters. They're remixed and they actually sound different, so we're not just talking about minor format differences here. Remastered rather than remixed. They are original mixes though EQ differences. They don't sound entirely different except there is more slam. More in your face and some added compression to my ears but less air (typical digital trait). A decent effort for a digital remaster. Bought them for the unreleased material which in some cases sounds better - but since it is almost entirely alternate takes or work in progress is not that exciting. |
|
|
|
Post by John on May 18, 2016 3:55:32 GMT
I certainly thought it had a lot of air. What came across was a more open dynamic sound than I am used too
|
|
|
|
Post by MartinT on May 18, 2016 5:51:40 GMT
They are original mixes though EQ differences. Whatever he did, they sound very much more lively and dynamic than before. As I said earlier, Bonham's drumming is a revelation, we all three sat wondering at it when I played tracks for John and Mike. |
|
|
|
Post by davidf on May 19, 2016 23:54:25 GMT
I was led to believe that the drums had been subdued a little compared to the original masters?
|
|
|
|
Post by John on May 20, 2016 4:32:17 GMT
Not to my ears they are more clear you can really hear what John is doing it gave me a deeper appreciation of his playing
|
|
|
|
Post by MartinT on May 20, 2016 5:27:34 GMT
No way, the drums are a revelation.
|
|
|
|
Post by Stratmangler on May 20, 2016 9:05:32 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by John on May 20, 2016 11:09:47 GMT
For me what matters is the improved SQ
|
|
