Destroyer 666 remaster quality?
- Thread starter WNxScythe
- Start date
no country for old wainds
Active Member
- Nov 23, 2002
- 26,573
- 9,586
- 113
Krow
Garbage Connoisseur
The labels that did the remasters are all legit... Hells Headbangers, Van Records, and (maybe surprising to some here) Season of Mist Underground Activists all handle extreme metal pretty damn well.
I can't make side by side comparisons but my copies of Cold Steel and Phoenix are remasters and sound great. My copy of Unchain the Wolves is original so no idea there.
I can't make side by side comparisons but my copies of Cold Steel and Phoenix are remasters and sound great. My copy of Unchain the Wolves is original so no idea there.
BeyondTorment
Member
- Dec 28, 2014
- 83
- 1
- 6
just checked the waveforms of cold steel(remaster/original)
hardly any differences.
same goes for phoenix
get the remasters for the better artwork and inserts.
hardly any differences.
same goes for phoenix
get the remasters for the better artwork and inserts.
no country for old wainds
Active Member
- Nov 23, 2002
- 26,573
- 9,586
- 113
Rumpole
Dust and Bones
I can't comment on the Deströyer 666 release but I did want to address the issue of reissuing and, even more unfortunate than remastering, the idea of brickmastering.
Brickmastering is one of the reasons why I, despite my undying passion for buying music in physical form, don't blame people for filesharing and illegally downloading music; it's just nice to know if a reissue is worth buying or avoiding. Brickmastered releases are sometimes advertised as being remastered or issued without any indication of such tampering.
I find it hilarious when bands implicitly concede to such reprehensible activity by saying something like: "we initially wanted to remaster the album but instead we opted to keep the integrity of the original audio so it sounds the same, just b̶r̶i̶c̶k̶m̶a̶s̶t̶e̶r̶e̶d̶ ̶a̶n̶d̶ ̶c̶l̶i̶p̶p̶e̶d̶ a little bit louder. "
Brickmastering: when you want to give fans a reason for buying the album a second time but you can't be bothered to actually remix and remaster the audio properly.
Brickmastering is one of the reasons why I, despite my undying passion for buying music in physical form, don't blame people for filesharing and illegally downloading music; it's just nice to know if a reissue is worth buying or avoiding. Brickmastered releases are sometimes advertised as being remastered or issued without any indication of such tampering.
I find it hilarious when bands implicitly concede to such reprehensible activity by saying something like: "we initially wanted to remaster the album but instead we opted to keep the integrity of the original audio so it sounds the same, just b̶r̶i̶c̶k̶m̶a̶s̶t̶e̶r̶e̶d̶ ̶a̶n̶d̶ ̶c̶l̶i̶p̶p̶e̶d̶ a little bit louder. "
Brickmastering: when you want to give fans a reason for buying the album a second time but you can't be bothered to actually remix and remaster the audio properly.
Last edited:
Similar threads
