Remasters can invade your memories

Posted by: Clive B on 22 May 2005

Just happened to be strolling past Fopp on Saturday when I noticed yet more bargain remastered classic albums for just £5 each. Re-re-masters of all those Yes classics looked tempting, but then I noticed "Dark Side of the Moon" in its 30th year SACD hybrid reissue with 2003 remastering for just £8 and couldn't resist.

Well, this album formed a cornerstone of my youth. I remember being forced to listen over and over again to the intro just to hear the then controversial "I've been mad for ... years" bit with the volume turned down so low that my friend's parents wouldn't hear the expletive on the record. Then there were the alarm clocks, the stunning guitar solos in Time and Money (which proved for all time that great guitar solos didn't have to be at break neck speed). Then The Great Gig in the Sky. Wow! Hopefully, you'll see how I mean that this record record became a major part of my youth. In fact, I bought many copies but kept taking them back because my stylus wouldn't track properly (fortunately, neither would the one in the record shop). I eventually got it on PRC then, many years later when I'd got a beter turntable, I got it on record again. Then I got it on CD which just sounded so much better. With each new version (format) I felt closer to this great music (forgive the effect of the passage of time).

Then this 2003 remaster. OK, there's less background hiss. But somehow the remaster seems to have affected the tonal balance and thereby, somehow, the overall dynamic of the music. Even the timing seems to have been affected - the first guitar chord in Breathe seems to be slurred. I must admit that I am listening to the CD layer, not the SACD, but I didn't expect the recent remastering to have such a drastic and adverse effect.

Other 'life classics' which I have also found to have been adversely affected in the latest mastering have been "Cunning Stunts" by Caravan and "The Royal Scam" by Steely Dan. I remember reading once that George Martin even insisted on the same inter-track intervals on the Beatles remasters as on the original LP's for fear of screwing up people's memories.

Music hides subliminal powers. I wish those responsible for some of the recent reissues would remember that.

Regards,
CB
Posted on: 22 May 2005 by J.N.
Clive;

A valid and thought provoking post.

Some do get it right. I'm in the process of replacing my favourite albums on CD with Japanese made versions as (like vinyl) they simply sound better.

I have a Japanese remaster of Elton John's 'Tumbleweed Connection' and it has retained a great analogue quality, but remains open and clean.

The recent USA remaster of Fleetwood Mac's 'Rumours' is another good one, but I'm decidedly unimpressed with a remaster of Robin Trower's 'Bridge Of Sighs' so I know what you're getting at.

The real pisser is that by and large, nothing beats the sound of the original vinyl on a good turntable.

Progress or marketing?

John.
Posted on: 23 May 2005 by bhazen
Can't say about DSOTM, they all sound good to me (I have four copies of it!!); most remasters are great, although a recent version of Free Hand by Gentle Giant seemed a bit off. I waited for years for a decent version of Grand Hotel by Procol Harum, finally got one when Repertoire remastered it a few years ago. Recent early Stones stuff is great as well.

When will the Beatles finally get the treatment?
Posted on: 23 May 2005 by Clive B
John said:
quote:
The real pisser is that by and large, nothing beats the sound of the original vinyl on a good turntable.


I know what you mean (more depth, more soul etc.), but could part of that be simply that those masters are the ones we grew up with? And I wonder do those going through their teens today enjoy the same passionate identity with contemporary music? And on CD or, even worse, mp3 format?

There's a thought...
CB
Posted on: 23 May 2005 by Tam
It is, of course, very true that remastering is as much an art as it is a science and for every wonderfully remastered record there is one that sounds terrible. I never cease to be amazed at how much better Miles Davis' Kind of Blue gets each time the reissue it.

As far as DSOTM goes, I have the sacd hybrid disc in question, and my experience has been the opposite, I was impressed by the new mastering and felt that a good job had been done.


regards,

Tam
Posted on: 23 May 2005 by Paul Davies
The King Crimsom remasters have generally been of outstanding quality largely because, I suspect, of the involvement of Robert Fripp in the remastering process. In an interview in Stereo Review in 1992, Fripp admits that:

"None of the mechanics of reproducing music interest me at all. What interests me are the rare moments when music leans over and takes you into its confidence."

The interview goes on to state that the composer/guitarist's reasonable belief that such moments that have been documented on vinyl should make the transition to a new storage-medium intact has forced him to take an active interest in this process.

I suspect that Fripp's greater interest in the music rather than the mechanics of its reproduction is one reason why the the quality of the King Crimson remasters has been so good.

Given what the King Crimson remasters show is possible, the poor quality of the remasters of some of my favourite albums is all the more disappointing. If only Morrissey or Marr had been similarly involved in the transfer to CD of The Queen Is Dead...
Posted on: 23 May 2005 by Aric
Yes, the Fleetwood Mac Rumors remastering job was beautifully done.