I've noticed that over the last couple of years there have seemed to be a lot of reissues, remasters, anniversary etc. releases. The Stones Exile on Main Street is what got me thinking. Judas Priest just did an anniversary release of British Steel with a supposedly great concert DVD. Of course there was the Beatles back catalog. Do you really think its necessary or are we just getting a tweaked version of the original with a few extras to get us to buy the same product again? I'll probably get Exile because for some reason I'm 43 and managed to NEVER purchase a Stones cd. I have British Steel and love it, but don't know if I want to buy it again just to get a concert DVD I probably will never get to watch more than once or twice. What are you thoughts?

I love this!

I am all for "restoring" the original recording if it really needs it. But I see a ton of albums being remastered, and all they seem to do is maybe a minor tweak to the eq, but most of all make it louder.
The whole loudness factor is a bone of contention with many audiophiles and music enthusiasts. Nowadays, they just brickwall the waveform until its pushing the db's to the max, while sacrificing the dynamic range, which gives it depth. This is supposed to be better?
Its a touchy subject, and a matter of personal preference, but I listened to the re-mastered Smiths boxset, and while it was louder, it didn't have the warmth and dynamic depth of the original releases. For me, louder isn't exactly better, but it will sure sound cool blaring in the parking garage!

_________________

- Fender USA Select Stratocaster
- Marshall JVM 410H
- Marshall 4x12 cab
- Macbook; Snow Leopard
- MOTU Traveler Audio Interface

I just bought Exil and Hendrix Are You Experienced.

Both are great, never heard the first straight through and haven't heard the second for about 30 years. I plan on picking up a few of the Beatle releases and maybe a few more Stones.

If the engineer uses compression to up the volume, very bad.

If they mix carefully and process carefully can be good. Two I mentioned above sounded great, much improved over what was available 30 years ago. The Beatles are now in stereo and were processed to remove some noise in the masters. You got me thinking so I'll head out at lunch and pick up a couple.

I just bought Exil and Hendrix Are You Experienced.

Both are great, never heard the first straight through and haven't heard the second for about 30 years. I plan on picking up a few of the Beatle releases and maybe a few more Stones.

If the engineer uses compression to up the volume, very bad.

If they mix carefully and process carefully can be good. Two I mentioned above sounded great, much improved over what was available 30 years ago. The Beatles are now in stereo and were processed to remove some noise in the masters. You got me thinking so I'll head out at lunch and pick up a couple.

I just bought Exil and Hendrix Are You Experienced.

Both are great, never heard the first straight through and haven't heard the second for about 30 years. I plan on picking up a few of the Beatle releases and maybe a few more Stones.

If the engineer uses compression to up the volume, very bad.

If they mix carefully and process carefully can be good. Two I mentioned above sounded great, much improved over what was available 30 years ago. The Beatles are now in stereo and were processed to remove some noise in the masters. You got me thinking so I'll head out at lunch and pick up a couple.

I just bought Exil and Hendrix Are You Experienced.

Both are great, never heard the first straight through and haven't heard the second for about 30 years. I plan on picking up a few of the Beatle releases and maybe a few more Stones.

If the engineer uses compression to up the volume, very bad.

If they mix carefully and process carefully can be good. Two I mentioned above sounded great, much improved over what was available 30 years ago. The Beatles are now in stereo and were processed to remove some noise in the masters. You got me thinking so I'll head out at lunch and pick up a couple.

I'm all for it.

As said above, its only minor tweaks and they are mastered hotter. A hot track deserves Hot levels I always say.

I have Iron Maiden Seventh Son of a Seventh Son but not the remastered version, and its a bummer one of my favorite albums needs be cranked nearly all the way to get a respectable level.

Thumbs up from me...lossless would be cool too.

http://flac.sourceforge.net/

_________________
Being able to play and enjoy music is a gift that's often taken for granted.

Don't leave home without it!

I have both of the Beatles sets reissues and they are extremely well-done. George Martin's son definitely has his father's skills.

_________________
Current Gear: Ron Kirn Barnbuster Tele,
Marshall: 1971 SuperLead 100>1997 1960-TV, bunch of pedals
and a 1987 Porsche 911 Carrera coupe named Veronica

I've just been collecting some Blue Horizon re-mastered stuff. They are the label Peter Greens' Fleetwood Mac recorded with and in the late sixties they did some sessions with the likes of Otis Spann and Eddie Boyd.
These recordings were very rare on vinyl but are now readily available for about 6 quids, which is what? 10 bucks? on cd.
The quality is very good. The only thing that irritates me a bit, is that they have left some of the 'takes' in. You know? take 1....take 2.....take 3. It's only on a few songs but I could live without that.
I've been buying quite a lot of blues stuff lately, from the old masters.
Yeah, some good ones out there.

_________________

I just about get the point of directors' cuts of films - sometimes.

Far as music is concerned, I still haven't got used to my Beatles albums without the scratches and jumps they'd accumulated on vinyl. Remastered? I'm not ready!

Cheers - C

As an addition to Ceri's comments I think it all depends on what you want from a re-release. Do you want a very produced version of your favorite or do you want to have a time capsule of what that music sounded like when it originally came out? Like he mentioned with the Beatles recordings and their quirks we can all relate to our favorite albums odd sounds and quirks as well. I can definitely appreciate the new technology and the crisp sounds it can create but there's something to be said about the feel of the old production techniques and their sound as well. It's apples and oranges really.

I think its cool to bring a past great album up to date with technology and make it sound even better as long as it is not in place of something new for the purpose of laziness. A lot of bands are resting on their laurels and re releasing and touring old records (for nostalgia purposes, no for laziness)….. a lot of the old stuff I have on record or tape and welcome a re-mastered version that I can put onto my I pod or computer or whatever……

Cheers
Bill

_________________
(80’s Hair Metal) = A snapshot in time before Grunge ruined Rock & Roll forever!!!!

Depends. $@!& that only had like a 7" release I'm all for it.

_________________

It's not always just minor tweaks. Some remixes create a totally different song by superimposing new tracks over the old. I'm not in favor of that at all.

Sometimes it's not necessarily louder but the stereo imaging is improved and I don't mind those.

The first one I heard that I actually liked was Stone Cold Crazy from Sheer Heart Attack. That's a number of years ago now.

_________________

Just think of how awesome a guitar player you could have been by now if you had only spent the last 10 years practicing instead of obsessing over pickups and roasted maple necks.