A thread in which to discuss the first tranche of Led Zeppelin reissues

LZ II remaster is particularly fine. It does the hifi stuff, but also communicates the power and excitement of those extraordinary performances.

By the way, I read an interview with the people who mastered the Beatles vinyl reissues (in Hi-Fi World). They are cut from 24/44 files. When asked why, they said that a higher rate would cause the cutter to overheat :-/

Keith

....hmmm.  I've always felt II had the best fidelity so might start here with the 24bit version.

A project for the weekend.

G

Just got Led Zeppelin on vinyl as a belated fathers day present.

First impressions of Good times... compared with my Pum/Red copy.

The bass drum and especially the triplets are overblown compared to the original giving a fuller fatter sound which takes away the rawness of the original. The guitar parts are not as sharp, the vocals have been cleaned up making them sound refined, again the rawness has gone.

Dazed and Confused sounds the same the rawness has gone.

The recording is also quite loud compared to the original which is not quite. This gives a rather forward presentation and with the fuller bass has one yearning for the original.

I am going to try to play the album all the way through tomorrow, the Paris gig sounds a bit washy but will have a proper listen.

My Verdict: The vinyl re-issue is fine if that is all you have heard, but the original captures the band as they were at the time. Re-mastering 45 years later has not improved on the original just altered the presentation, some may like it , not I.

A quick check of the DR database website shows that these records have always had a relatively limited dynamic range. 

Those lucky enough to own high quality early pressings in good condition probably have no need of the remasters. For those of us who don't, and don't fancy taking a chance on silly money for used copies, the new versions are an absolute delight.

Keith

Led Zeppelin re-master on vinyl has had the life sucked out of it. It is too polite and polished the edge has gone. Robert Plant's vocal has lost some of its rawness and power. The drive of John Bonham riding the crash cymbal during 'Babe I'm gonna leave you' is pushed to the back in the mix with everything else lifted to compensate. As mentioned the bass is overblown in parts

Mr Page has tried to create a modern Audiophile copy and has succeeded but at the expense of the power in the original recording.

The Paris recording is not very good the mix fades in and out. I have the BBC Sessions 1969-71 quad vinyl box set, the recording on there is far better and covers all the Paris material and more.

I will probably buy II and III if only for the extra material

Swithering here too G. Only 6 months ago I forked out for the "Definitive Collection".... are these really that much better? Maybe it's something that Kevin-W could give an opinion on.

Haven't had a chance to compare these CDs with those in the "Definitive" box, Stevee, but I will try and do one at the weekend and report back.

Many thanks Kevin that will be a really interesting review whenever you have the time to do so.

Steve

Sorry, I'm just wondering what tune dem'd means?
Cheers

Richard

I have been following this thread and the one over at Analog Planet with interest. I have purchased 1 to 3 single albums only as I consider myself a fan with a small f.
I don't have much in the way of reference point, my only Led Zep vinyl at the moment is Mothership which evidently is not widely respected. I have the Early Years/Later Years cd comps and iv on George Marino cd. So I am looking forward to playing these new remasters on my preferred format.
I was interested to note that Michael Fremer found that these re-issues were sonically very similar to plum copies, and although many people rave about the Classics he notes that they have a "tipped up treble and less than muscular bottom". Clearly all these sonic differences are likely to be system dependent and different issues of a record for a multitude of reasons are going to sound different, also contemporary remasters are likely to utilise more modern and sonically advanced equipment in the process resulting in a sound that arguably represents how the music would sound, for better or worse, now. 
I am not opposed to vinyl mastered from a digital source as long as it is done at a suitably hi res and with care, I think a degree of pragmatism is required as like it or not, particularly with the advent of hi res streaming solutions, record companies will be transferring analogue to hi res digital both to preserve aging and deteriorating master tapes and to enter the streaming market. Furthermore the majority of new music being released on vinyl will come from a digital source. The important thing to me is that it is done with care and quality. 24/192 would have been nice so its a bit disappointing that those responsible chose to go 24/92. I will be giving the reissues a good listen over the weekend without prejudice as I don't have a decent reference, so fingers crossed.

Also, in response to comments that view going for the digital downloads as having these on vinyl is pointless, I would say that if you don't own didital downloading/replay equipment then hi res on vinyl is a good way to go, its only the means to the end.
 

As part of the DAC assessment I've been doing this week I played this superb live recording of the Earl's Court concerts which put's the recently released Paris concert, on vinyl, to shame.

Personally I bought a Japanese copy of the Deluxe II as I have always loved that album for sentimental reasons and I don't like this new version.

Goosed treble, lack of bass and narrow stereo field. I think I will stick with my Japanese 1st pressings as they are good not great but better than this newer version.

I really wanted to like it but it will now get sold on a well known auction site.

Steve, all five of those Earls Court gigs are available in pristine stereo and all five are well worth seeking out or downloading. The last two nights are especially good performances. There's also a triple DVD set on Empress Valley called Heavy Metal Kids which contains all of the 24th May and some of the 25th. The source i the same as was used in the 1975 segment of the 2003 DVD.

The '69 Paris and '75 shows aren't really comparable, they are almost two different bands. I love the Paris gig because it's the performance of a very young, very hungry and supremely confident band; Earls Court '75 is Imperial Zep, the band at their zenith. They are the biggest and best band in the world at this point, and they know it; in personal, and to a degree, musical (although not commercial) terms, it would be downhill from here, despite moments of magnificence.

In terms of SQ, there's no comparison either - the Paris show was recorded in mono for AM radio and the official release is an improvement on the boots (anyway, it's the performance that counts, not the SQ); the '75 shows were professionally recorded - on multi-track in some cases.

We tested the new cuts versus original plum and orange first pressings in the shop. System was rega RP10/Apheta/Rega IOS Reference/282/hicap/250.2/Rega RS10 speakers. We spent quite some time doing the testing and eventually caused the 250.2 to cry 'foul' and switch off in thermal trip!

Overall, we still preferred the original pressings, but there were many very good moments with the reissues and in some places, particularly the quieter moments the extra richness of the reissues was welcome. However, overall, the first pressings were generally more emotionally involviong and had better drive.

At least that's the conclusion we came to...

Regards,
Frank.
All opinions are my own and do not reflect the opinion of any organisations I work for, except where this is stated explicitly.

If anyone can enlighten me I really would like to know what a tune dem is?

Richard

I have been listening to my single vinyl copies of I,II, & III on their own merits and overall feel that they are worthy.
Firstly, my pressing of 1 was not quite flat and had some patches of surface noise, I will be getting a replacement copy. The others were well pressed and silent.
I played them in chronological order and first impression, particularly on 1, is that the sound is unmistakeably digital, having that polished digital sheen and little depth in the stereo image. That said the sound is clearly from a hi res digital source, sounding very smooth and detailed with none of the harshness or grain sometimes associated with lower resolution digital "remasters" There does to my ears seem to be some dynamic limiting or compression, but whether this is due to the remastering I don't know.
Academic criticisms aside, I soon found these to be a very musical and involving listen, air drums and guitars to thje fore. Robert Plants vocals also seem a lot more intelligible than I remember them. There is a certain boogie factor (cliché alert) to this mastering which makes it an enjoyable listening experience in my system.
If you don't own any decent Led Zeppelin vinyl, then these are worthwile and at around 16 quid good value. It is a pity that those responsible couldn't have gone AAA, but that is another discussion.
I give them 8 out of 10 and happy to have these in my collection.

Richard,

Whatever a 'tune dem' is, it sounds like you have just done one without even knowing it!

Cheers

David

I've been comparing the HD downloads on USB stick thru ND5X with new CD ripped to Unitserve and am clear that the HD is much fuller and less trebly.  This applies to all three releases. I have original UK pressings on vinyl only for some later releases by LZ so direct vinyl comparisons will need to wait for the next phase in autumn. 

I'm a digital convert for ease of delivery and surfing etc.

Jatr

I'm a bit late to this party, but some have used the word "remix."  It's my understanding that these are not remixes, but (merely) remasters.  What might sound like a change to the mix must be due to something else, as again, it's my understanding that no remixing from 'single tracks' occurred. 

I have the hi def digital downloads, and I find them to be the preferable digital sources.  I lost my Led Zep lp's years ago and have no vinyl replay at home, so I cannot comment on the lp releases.  The Barry Diament masters on cd are also very good.  But overall I seem to prefer these latest versions.

They were remixed as well Bart. 

No mixing, just mastering on these

No, I don't think these were remixed either, just remastered - although the presentation is quite different from previous CDs and vinyl, so I can see why people might think they are remixes.

On another note, I listened to the hi-rez 24/96 files this morning on a friend's system (Mac, Audiolab M-DAC, AVI active speakers and I have to say I was extremely impressed. We also listened to the 24/96 files of Floyd's The Division Bell - again, a remarkable listening experience.

I'm beginning to wonder if there might be something in this hi-rez malarkey...

I believe these new releases are remasters only, but I thought I read a Page quote that some of the deluxe versions came with different, so-called “working mixes” that were produced during the course of the sessions.

Also, not to be pedantic, but just to make sure we are all using these terms in the same way, a remastering is a new release with different definitions for equalization, compression, and so on, but using the original master. Remixing, on the other hand, means taking the original multitrack tapes and creating a new master. Sorry, it's a pet-peeve of mine -- the two words are so often used interchangeably, while clearly they are two separate and distinct operations.

ATB.

Hook

This is what a Mastering engineer who has 1:1 safety master tape copies of the first 4 Zepp albums said about the downloads in reply to a post on another forum.

"They sound great"??? Sorry, but I beg to differ.
These are not good at all - narrow stereo field, blurred phantom centre losing definition & location and very nasal sounding.
You obviously only ever had crap versions before - so here's a test:
Send me a PM and pick any track from the first 3, and I will make an extract of the remaster & my copy (also 24/96 res) and equalize the level and then tell me these are "great sounding".

He has worked with Steven Wilson in the past on some releases that are highly regarded SQ wise.