|
Post by MikeMusic on Jan 6, 2018 16:27:41 GMT
How to spot a good one ?
Steven Wilson has certainly done nicely with King Crimson and Caravan. Close to guaranteed all his others are top notch.
Amazon reviews is a place to look but I would not be 100% convinced. They also mix original and remasters together. Discogs doesn't seem to do it
What favourite remastering people do we have ? Any good pointers ?
|
|
|
Post by MartinT on Jan 6, 2018 17:01:01 GMT
Bernie Grundman. Anything he has done sounds good.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 6, 2018 18:11:44 GMT
As long as we all understand what a true Re master actually should be.
|
|
|
Post by MartinT on Jan 6, 2018 18:42:01 GMT
Good remaster: getting a better result from a master tape in terms of resolution, dynamic range, noise and using more up-to-date ADC technology in order to derive a superior digital transfer.
Bad remaster: compressing the hell out of the music in an attempt to lift the overall volume to make it 'sound more impressive'.
(my definitions)
|
|
|
Post by MikeMusic on Jan 6, 2018 19:02:16 GMT
Bernie Grundman. Anything he has done sounds good. Not finding much looking him up. Some clues please
|
|
|
Post by MikeMusic on Jan 6, 2018 19:03:17 GMT
As long as we all understand what a true Re master actually should be. Broadly : Once upon a time remaster meant buggered. Recently... it now means from buggered to excellent Finding the good ones not easy
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 6, 2018 19:08:45 GMT
Good remaster: getting a better result from a master tape in terms of resolution, dynamic range, noise and using more up-to-date ADC technology in order to derive a superior digital transfer. Bad remaster: compressing the hell out of the music in an attempt to lift the overall volume to make it 'sound more impressive'. (my definitions) Regarding old Music Remastering from the original Analogue Master tapes using sound techniques un available at the time [My Idea of a Good Remaster] Remastering an Analogue recording taken from a Digital source at some point is totally not my idea of Remastering.
|
|
|
Post by MartinT on Jan 6, 2018 20:40:11 GMT
I always cite Jennifer Warnes' Famous Blue Raincoat (the songs of Leonard Cohen). The Grundman remaster is superb. Here's a list
|
|
|
Post by MikeMusic on Jan 6, 2018 21:04:02 GMT
Thanks Martin.
The information is there. Just need to ask the right questions. Thought I was good at that.....
|
|
|
Post by daytona600 on Jan 7, 2018 11:35:27 GMT
Mastering - Finished product sounds as close to the mastertape as possible Re-Mastering - Smiley EQ , Compression etc , etc
|
|
|
Post by MartinT on Jan 7, 2018 11:56:14 GMT
Mastering - Finished product sounds as close to the mastertape as possible Re-Mastering - Smiley EQ , Compression etc , etc Not necessarily. Do you think the Coldplay master tapes sound as bad as the execrable finished CDs? Do you not agree that Jennifer Warnes' remastered Famous Blue Raincoat sounds considerably better than the original release?
|
|
|
Post by Stratmangler on Jan 7, 2018 13:12:17 GMT
How to spot a good one ? Steven Wilson has certainly done nicely with King Crimson and Caravan. The stuff Steven Wilson has been involved with is generally taken from the session tapes (ie the raw form), and involves doing a new mix, with reference to any available production notes, and referencing as many good condition original release copies as can be obtained. Because of the age and fragility of the session multitracks it probably goes without saying that the multitracks are transferred to the digital domain before anything else gets done. To merely call the work a remaster is to understate things massively. That said, his work on the KC stuff sounds great, as does his work on Aqualung. He's done a lot of work for both artists. There is one thing in common with all artists concerned - they all own their own copyright, so the record company doesn't dictate how the final production item ends up sounding. The masters Steven Wilson produces have probably been moved straight to manufacturing. blog.musoscribe.com/index.php/2011/01/24/interview-steven-wilson-on-the-king-crimson-40th-anniversary-reissue-project/ultimateclassicrock.com/jethro-tull-aqualung-40th-anniversary-edition-album-review/
|
|
|
Post by MikeMusic on Jan 7, 2018 16:20:02 GMT
Nice detail, thanks.
Remanufactured might be better !
Wonder how many levels of re "something" there are
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 7, 2018 16:22:53 GMT
Re Fleecing might be even better!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 8, 2018 18:19:55 GMT
Some definitions for you chaps
Mastering:-
"Mastering is the ultimate stage for the preparation of an album release. Mastering engineers are responsible for sequencing all of the tracks, establishing transitions between tracks (Segues), the tonal balancing, amplitude leveling, and delivering the overall sound work within the target market (Radio edit anyone?), which on the whole means using large amounts of dynamic compression. The source mixes (either analog tapes or digital files) enter the mastering processes sounding very different than when they leave."
Remastering:-
With the exception of following peers Peter Mew, Steve Hoffman, Bob Katz, Bob Ludwig, Ray Staff, Bob Webber, James Guthrie, Scott Hull etc.
The ability to take a perfectly good recording, apply a FOBAR filter and produce a compressed mess that's seen an the inside of 80's Pioneer graphic equalizer.
On the whole remasters are not up to the original properly master recordings, YES they are exceptions but these are in the minority.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 8, 2018 19:08:14 GMT
The Multi Track tapes are the raw recording, Each instrument is recorded onto its own individual track, unless they were very very early Multi track machines in which something called Track bouncing was used due to lack of available tracks.The master tapes are the final recording after the Sound Engineer, Band etc are happy with all the work applied to the whole. This is the final product or a copy of that went to the pressing plant. A Remaster donkies years down the line should be worked on from the original Master tapes. Applying what ever they want to apply before Re-press onto what ever format.
The Achilles of the recording imho was the transfer to Vinyl not the actual master as proven with new CD's taken from the original master tapes. Even the original vinyl pressings that sound good could have sounded better in my view. There is no other explanation for a a better sounding original master recording these days. However a lot of people find the original less resolute sounding album pressing more to their liking.
|
|
|
Post by MartinT on Jan 8, 2018 21:01:11 GMT
In the majority of cases, remasters are rubbish. A few (like the aforementioned Grundman) really do improve on the original.
|
|