Chain of Command remaster question

[IcedEarthguy]

Hi all,

I've been a fan around a year now. I have a question concerning the official release of Chain of Command:

I remember hearing that it would be remastered. Now, when I think "remastered", I think about how Dave Mustaine remastered his Megadeth albums with the tighter drum snare to replace the dreadful "how low can we tune this" 1980s drum snare, louder bass, more threatening-sounding guitars, and subtleties lost in analog. I had heard the bootleg Chain of Command, and it sounded okay, but when I popped in the official, supposedly "remastered" cd, expecting a real thorough cleaning up (like the Megadeth albums) I was dissappointed. The only real difference I could hear with Chain of Command is that the cymbals were slightly louder.

What kept whoever remastered the album from doing what I consider a proper "remaster" with the tighter snare and whatnot? Not enough money/time?

 

[Jean-Pierre]

I wasn't that keen on the remaster job either, but I had never purchased the bootleg, only downloaded it. So it didn't make that much of a different to me. Frankly, I like Metal recordings that have an 80's sound, so even though the Chain Of Command remaster sounds a bit weak to me, I have to commend Mark for not over-upgrading it.

 

[Briody]

There is a lot of confusion about the terms 'remaster' and 'remix'. Any changing of instruments, such as a new snare sound, constitutes a remix. Turning up the guitars is also a remix.

To 'remaster' means that you take the finished stereo mix and you change the e.q. and apply effects such as compression to the final mix. Keep in mind that the mix is done, you are simply fine tuning it.

The original 'Chain of Command' had a 4 second mastering job. Meaning it took the engineer 4 seconds to say 'Sounds good to me'. He really did no work on the final mix.

When I heard the final mix (from the original 2-track master) a couple of glaring flaws stuck out - 1. It was very noisy. The cuts and fades were awfull. 2. The top end sucked. The cymbals were equalized at a very unnatural frequency. 3. The low mids were weak.

It was these 3 things that I fixed in the remastering process. Did these changes make a huge difference? No. But the difference is there. Plus the bootlegs were created from cassettes. I actually did an A/B comparision with the bootleg and the new version. To me the new version sounds much better.

I agree that the album could have used a remix. But there are a few reasons why I choose not to do this. 1. There is no market for it. 'Chain of Command' will only sell a tiny fraction of 'Casting the Stones'. It would be a huge money loss to remix it. 2. It's an old album done by a lineup that doesn't exist anymore. 3. 90% of the people interested in it want it to sound they way it was intended to. 4. I don't have the time to invest in an old album with limited appeal.

Mark

 

[Mr Blackwell]

...Now, when I think "remastered", I think about how Dave Mustaine remastered his Megadeth albums with the tighter drum snare to replace the dreadful "how low can we tune this" 1980s drum snare, louder bass, more threatening-sounding guitars, and subtleties lost in analog... What kept whoever remastered the album from doing what I consider a proper "remaster" with the tighter snare and whatnot?...

Why should Mark do this?

He'd already upgraded the majority of the songs (Chain Of Command, Shadow Thief, She Waits, Never Surrender/Viper, Burning Heart, Sworn To Silence) with new drums, new guitars, new bass and new vocals on The Fourth Judgement, Age Of Mastery and Decade Of The Nail Spiked Bat.

The original Chain Of Command album is an 80s production. I'm glad that the official release sounds like one.

 

[IcedEarthguy]

My apologies to Briody then. I always confuse remaster and remix. Yes, the album could've used a remix, but I realize that's not cheap. Either way, great album.