2011 Remasters Improvement ?

Discuss current and upcoming Queen projects.

Re: 2011 Remasters Improvement ?

Postby Kes » Tue Jun 03, 2014 9:54 am

Well, in a lot of cases, like the tracks on GHII, they aren't exactly the same as their album counterparts, like the songs have been edited, etc.
What is left of your dream?
Just the words on your stone.
A man who learnt how to teach,
But forgot how to learn.
 
Kes
Moderator
 
User avatar

 
 
Posts: 14278
Images: 747
Joined: Tue Apr 13, 2010 8:41 am
Location: London, England
Gender: Male
Has thanked: 7 times
Been thanked: 289 times

Re: 2011 Remasters Improvement ?

Postby Leigh Burne » Tue Jun 03, 2014 9:57 am

Well yes, but I assumed the masterings were done at the same time.

I really don't have a clue how it works, but I assumed it would be possible to quickly run the GH edited version through the same process that you'd carefully worked out while doing the album tracks and get the same end result, sonically. After all, the edits are just trims for time, there's nothing different about the tracks per se.

Or is that not at all how it works...? :P
"I always knew I was a star. And now, the rest of the world seems to agree with me." — Freddie Mercury
 
Leigh Burne
Don't Stop Me Now
 
User avatar

 
 
Posts: 2014
Joined: Thu Feb 09, 2012 9:57 am
Gender: Male
Has thanked: 74 times
Been thanked: 82 times

Re: 2011 Remasters Improvement ?

Postby WeeMann » Tue Jun 03, 2014 10:21 am

One of the reasons for mastering is to ensure that all the tracks across an album have a similar level and overall tone, so the mastering for Bo Rhap from ANATO might not fit on GH. The differences will only be subtle, but it means that different masters are more likely.
DISCLAIMER: If you find a posting or message from me offensive, inappropriate, or disruptive, please ignore it. If you don't know how to ignore a post, complain to me and I will be only too happy to demonstrate.
 
WeeMann
Moderator
 
User avatar

 

Not even on the B list...

      
 
Posts: 6121
Images: 101
Joined: Mon Apr 12, 2010 7:37 pm
Location: Shropshire
Gender: Male
Has thanked: 73 times
Been thanked: 145 times

Re: 2011 Remasters Improvement ?

Postby Leigh Burne » Tue Jun 03, 2014 10:31 am

Ah OK. Interesting. Like I said, I'm pretty ignorant of the actual processes involved.
"I always knew I was a star. And now, the rest of the world seems to agree with me." — Freddie Mercury
 
Leigh Burne
Don't Stop Me Now
 
User avatar

 
 
Posts: 2014
Joined: Thu Feb 09, 2012 9:57 am
Gender: Male
Has thanked: 74 times
Been thanked: 82 times

Re: 2011 Remasters Improvement ?

Postby WeeMann » Tue Jun 03, 2014 11:24 am

I read an interesting interview with Bob Ludwig recently. It dates back about 10 years, so pre-dates the Queen remasters, but it's worth a read if you're interested.

http://www.musictap.net/Interviews/Ludw ... rview.html

*edit*

Just found another one:

http://thetrichordist.com/2012/06/28/re ... mastering/
DISCLAIMER: If you find a posting or message from me offensive, inappropriate, or disruptive, please ignore it. If you don't know how to ignore a post, complain to me and I will be only too happy to demonstrate.
 
WeeMann
Moderator
 
User avatar

 

Not even on the B list...

      
 
Posts: 6121
Images: 101
Joined: Mon Apr 12, 2010 7:37 pm
Location: Shropshire
Gender: Male
Has thanked: 73 times
Been thanked: 145 times

Re: 2011 Remasters Improvement ?

Postby vinylman » Wed Jun 04, 2014 2:03 pm

I think I should point out that even the most famous remastering engineers usually take orders from the record company or artist concerned. The reason that so many CDs are loud these days is because record companies want their product to sound louder than anyone else's on the radio. That is how we arrived at the 'loudness wars'. The more compressed the sound is on a disc, the louder it will sound; unfortunately, it also means there are less dynamics in the music. Noise reduction is also overused (and very rarely needed). I've spent the last ten years or so replacing my remasters (by several artists) with the original '80s CDs. They are - almost without exception - superior to the remasters, simply because they have not been - to use a technical phrase - dicked around with.
 
vinylman
Spread Your Wings
 
User avatar

 
 
Posts: 49
Joined: Mon Apr 19, 2010 4:32 pm
Gender: None specified
Has thanked: 0 time
Been thanked: 1 time

Re: 2011 Remasters Improvement ?

Postby vinylman » Wed Jun 04, 2014 2:12 pm

blueviolin wrote:
Kes wrote:Personally, I think the Japanese mini-vinyl ones probably sound the best to me, well, they're the ones that had the most impact on ME, however, beauty is in the eye of the beholder, so it's really a case of choosing for yourself what you prefer.


Thanks for advice! As that's the case for you and 'vinylman', I'll definitely try it!



You won't be sorry. But you'll have to be careful; don't buy any that are sent from Thailand, Hong Kong, China, The Russian Federation or Latvia, those are fakes. The ones you need are the ones with the grey and white 'diamond' obi strip. Some of them are getting a bit expensive now, but you will play them a lot. They have the bass weight of the original vinyl pressings, but without the boosted midrange of the 2011 remasters. Since they were first made available in the UK, they've been my 'go-to' for Queen on CD. I'll never understand why they didn't just replace the '93 remasters with these MiniVinyls.
 
vinylman
Spread Your Wings
 
User avatar

 
 
Posts: 49
Joined: Mon Apr 19, 2010 4:32 pm
Gender: None specified
Has thanked: 0 time
Been thanked: 1 time

Re: 2011 Remasters Improvement ?

Postby DREAMASTER » Wed Jun 04, 2014 8:48 pm

Kes wrote:Oh yeah. If I was to pick just one track, then above all else, Mustapha now sounds the dog's nuts.

Where once the sudden change from equalised mono to full power stereo used to shock you, it now scares the living crap out of your sound system too!



Indeed. What a power.




I'm Back to the 3rd Round.
Bring It On.
 
DREAMASTER
Spread Your Wings
 
User avatar

 
 
Posts: 417
Joined: Fri Apr 16, 2010 7:50 pm
Location: Portugal
Gender: Male
Has thanked: 11 times
Been thanked: 6 times

Re: 2011 Remasters Improvement ?

Postby DREAMASTER » Wed Jun 04, 2014 9:04 pm

error.
Last edited by DREAMASTER on Wed Jun 04, 2014 9:06 pm, edited 1 time in total.
I'm Back to the 3rd Round.
Bring It On.
 
DREAMASTER
Spread Your Wings
 
User avatar

 
 
Posts: 417
Joined: Fri Apr 16, 2010 7:50 pm
Location: Portugal
Gender: Male
Has thanked: 11 times
Been thanked: 6 times

Re: 2011 Remasters Improvement ?

Postby DREAMASTER » Wed Jun 04, 2014 9:05 pm

Kes wrote:Saying that, I think the Island 2011 remaster of Jazz, leaves all the previous releases of that album behind it. Innuendo also benefits in places for the recent remaster.


Yeah. "Jealousy" have the drums back for the first time: "the bass drum, accidentally left out of the mix on the original album version, has been reinstated here, offering the song as it was always intended to be".
I'm Back to the 3rd Round.
Bring It On.
 
DREAMASTER
Spread Your Wings
 
User avatar

 
 
Posts: 417
Joined: Fri Apr 16, 2010 7:50 pm
Location: Portugal
Gender: Male
Has thanked: 11 times
Been thanked: 6 times

Re: 2011 Remasters Improvement ?

Postby WiseMan » Thu Jun 05, 2014 12:49 pm

I like new remasters
 
WiseMan
Spread Your Wings
 
User avatar

 
 
Posts: 382
Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2014 7:11 am
Gender: None specified
Has thanked: 42 times
Been thanked: 9 times

Re: 2011 Remasters Improvement ?

Postby Andrew K. » Sat Feb 20, 2016 10:32 am

Right, sorry for deliberately digging through the topic graveyard, but I wanted to write in the topic that is the most relevant to what I have to say. I finally got my hands on a copy of a 2011 A Kind of Magic album, so I could compare that to my 1986 European copy.

And here is what I saw and heard:

Image

This is Who Wants To Live Forever. I deliberately made the 2011 remaster about the same level as the 1986 copy, to give the latter one a level playing field. And as you can see, the 1986 copy just blows the remaster out of the water, and you can obviously hear the difference, the remaster sounds a bit more muffled, but still pretty good. But the 1986 copy just comes at you with full force. The 2011 remaster is unable to do so, as it plateaued at a certain level, whereas the original has no such restrictions.

The reason why I think the remasters sound better is just because the quieter parts are now louder, so you can hear them "clearer", whereas all you needed to do with the originals was just turn the volume knob up a bit.

Once again, apologies for resurrecting this topic here, but I just wanted to share my findings and state that, as always, there can be only one!!!

P.S. I am not saying that all remasters are bad, the Innuendo one seems to be fine, as they did say they found a new source for that, but still, had they not compressed it into oblivion, I still think that it would have sounded even better. Freddie did say that he Wants to Break Free, rather than have a limiter placed on his voice... :D
 
Andrew K.
Spread Your Wings
 
User avatar

 
 
Posts: 49
Joined: Tue Jul 10, 2012 8:48 pm
Location: London, UK
Gender: Male
Has thanked: 0 time
Been thanked: 3 times

Re: 2011 Remasters Improvement ?

Postby The__KingOfRhye » Sat Feb 20, 2016 1:44 pm

Just be glad Rick Rubin wasn't involved. (Metallica's Death Magnetic, Black Sabbaths 13...good albums, but ugh, the production. The 2011 remasters are definitely not as bad as those two!)
 
The__KingOfRhye
The Show Must Go On
 
User avatar

 

Would it save you a lot of time if I just gave up and went mad now?

      
 
Posts: 1293
Joined: Wed Jul 02, 2014 11:33 pm
Gender: Male
Has thanked: 226 times
Been thanked: 194 times

Re: 2011 Remasters Improvement ?

Postby vinylman » Thu Nov 17, 2016 7:55 pm

Andrew K. wrote:The reason why I think the remasters sound better is just because the quieter parts are now louder, so you can hear them "clearer", whereas all you needed to do with the originals was just turn the volume knob up a bit.



That is exactly why I think the 2011 remasters are so poor. Quiet parts are MEANT to be quiet. It's called 'dynamic range', which contrasts naturally with the genuinely louder parts. Once you start boosting the quieter parts, the dynamic range goes straight down the toilet and there is NO natural 'quiet and louder'. That's how we ended up with the awful 'loudness wars'. The sad part is that a lot of artists don't really care how their remasters sound; as long as there are new discs in the shops with nice big 'Digitally Remastered' stickers on the front, they're happy. The 2001/04 Japanese MiniLps are still my choice for Queen on CD. Yes, they were remastered by Peter Mew, who liked to smother everything in noise reduction (he also ruined McCartney's back catalogue in 1993), but for the Japanese MiniLps, he was supervised by Justin Shirley-Smith, who managed to curb any of Mew's excesses.
 
vinylman
Spread Your Wings
 
User avatar

 
 
Posts: 49
Joined: Mon Apr 19, 2010 4:32 pm
Gender: None specified
Has thanked: 0 time
Been thanked: 1 time

Re: 2011 Remasters Improvement ?

Postby Wild/Wind » Fri Nov 18, 2016 8:18 am

 
Wild/Wind
Spread Your Wings
 
User avatar

 
 
Posts: 362
Joined: Sun May 02, 2010 9:43 am
Location: Here There and Everywhere
Gender: Male
Has thanked: 4 times
Been thanked: 9 times

PreviousNext

Return to The Show Must Go On

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests