Remastered albums suck....

Till Fjalls

¥¤ÆZµ
May 21, 2001
1,024
1
38
43
* Toronto *
fade.to
Ok, I don't really know, since I haven't any to compare other than my own, but I think it's stupid when bands do this. And stupider of the fans to buy it.

As far as I'm concerned, If a label or band wants to go through the trouble of re-releasing an album, they might as well remix the whole thing, or add some new guitar tracks. I'd much rather buy this, since it would offer a totally new perspective on the album, let you hear things you hadn't heard before. For example, take emperor's IX equilibrium. I listened to it the other night, and just focussed on the guitars. When yu get the synths out of the foreground, you realize how many brilliant things are going on on the guitars.

Or still life. Some of the melodies on it are buried pretty deep. It's a great, possibly unbeateable production job, but I'd still love to hear someone else have a go at the mix and re-release it that way. Maybe add some effects here and there, or make it more lo-fi ala MAYH. It'd be a unique perspective, and for me, just as exciting as a new album from Opeth. But a remaster? Blah.....

And for an extreme example (though very, very good!), take a listen to the remix of Emperor's "Sworn" by Ulver....I'll be damned if a whole album of remixes of this quality wouldn't be a hell of a lot more intertersting thatn goddamned remasters!!! If you're gonna scam people into spending more money, at least let them enjoy themselves doing it.....

Anyone else feel this way?
 
depends on the disc....some things need a good remaster. for example the 30th Anniversary King Crimson remasters are pretty good. especially the early. Much more listenable now. but as for things like the Opeth remasters. Well I only bought them because my old Opeth discs were so worn out they needed to be replaced anyway. Especially Morningrise. but as for a dfifference in quality...I can't pick it.

BTW in an earlier post you said you like Anglagard. Any ideas where I can get their stuff? Particularly Epilog which seems quite hard to locate.

Cheers

Paul D.
 
Remastering is usually used when changing formats, for example, a LP record to CD, the sound mix needs to be adjusted for the new format (somtimes).
It is also possible that when bands (like Opeth) first Cut the record it sounds GOOD to them (after all they have been working on it for a long time) but after listening to the disc a few times they pick up things that are missing- ie that little section of riff is to quiet or so on, so it seems like a good idea to remaster.
 
WTF? You´re supposed to work, you stupid smilie.
uzi.gif
Die!


Remasters are pretty lame!
cartman.gif
 
I can respect re-mastering when changing from one format to another or when there's some artistic point to it, but mostly it just seems to be a label thing to sell more records.

On a side note, I recently got the Chaos AD original - no silly bonus tracks, no remastering and no bloody digipack. Whooo!
 
Sometimes it is a good thing, I generally don't buy re-masters if I have the original album, but I recently lost my CD's and have been building my collection again (good way to get rid of the crap too :D ). So far I have gotten one CD that I know for sure is a re-master, Barathrums Hailstorm/Eerie a double-CD actually.
The good thing about this was the the fact that I got 2 CD's for the price of 1 and I also got to hear Eerie which I wasn't able to find earlier. And everyone who has read any of my comments about Barathrum knows that the original Hailstorm sounded like shit :lol:
 
Originally posted by curbstone
Anglagard. Any ideas where I can get their stuff? Particularly Epilog which seems quite hard to locate.

Epilog is out of production, but it will hopefully be re-released again like hybris. You can buy hybris and buried alive (live album) at www.recordheaven.net
 
What really sucks are digipacks! Mainly the ones that the cd has been out for a week and the the label decides they should release the same fucking thing again with bonus tracks! Why not just release the bonus tracks as an ep or somethin? Once I've paid 16dollars for a cd Im not paying another 16dollars just for a couple extra tracks.

I like most remastered cds, especially the Ozzy Osbourne remasters. Everything sounds richer.
 
Most of the time remasters are simply done when the album was out of print and needed to be rereleased anyway. They just brush up the soundquality a bit when that happens. No one is twisting your arm to buy it again.

I don't see why that is stupid at all. Especially not when it concerns crappy early 80s recordings (old Iron Maiden, Metallica, Megadeth, etc). Those albums for the most part sound like crap if you compare them to the soundquality of albums that are released nowadays.

Some people like it better that way, but I REALLY prefer a clean and good sounding version if I'm going to shell out $15 for an album.

A general statement like "remasters suck" seems pretty dumb to me.
 
Originally posted by CAIRATH


A general statement like "remasters suck" seems pretty dumb to me.

Yes, as I indicated in my first post on the thread, I didn't really mean it that way. The thread explains what sucks... After all, I've never bought one (if I already had the original), so I was just trying to see some opinions on it.

And yes, re-releasing in digi-pak with bonus tracks is a lame money making scam. And I will probably fall for that one, since I have a thing for digipaks.......
 
To my knowledge there are no remasters of any Opeth material. There are re-releases, but as far as I know the music was never actually remastered.

The re-releases just come with extra bonus tracks and stuff, which sadly for the most part actually seem to do more harm than good. (they mess up the flow and some tracks are just nasty)
 
Shit. I´m mixing things up. I have nothing againast records with remastered sound, since they sound better. But what I do have something against is re-releases. Even if they fill them with bonus track (all bonus tracks tend to be quite boring and destroying the album. For example: Morningrise) they are quite meaningless.
:guh:
 
I have no problem with remastering, especially when the original sound really bad or is out of print. However, I prefer re-recording (when possible). Good examples of this, IMO, are the new Testament disc and the Iced Earth Days of Purgatory album (I'm not really into Iced Earth anymore, but I do believe that Barlow's voice is a definite improvement over the hacks they had before). I think re-recording provides the best of both worlds, classic songs and a powerful updated sound. I also think Best-Of albums would be more essential if the bands re-recorded older material where it was obviously needed.
 
the ones that the cd has been out for a week and the the label decides they should release the same fucking thing again with bonus tracks!

*cough*FearFactory-Obsolete,YouDamnBastards*Cough*
 
Nice planet photo.
wink2.gif


"What really sucks are digipacks! Mainly the ones that the cd has been out for a week and the label decides they should release the same fucking thing again with bonus tracks! Why not just release the bonus tracks as an ep or somethin? Once I've paid 16dollars for a cd Im not paying another 16dollars just for a couple extra tracks."

I heard that. I'd just download it from online and have a friend burn it for me. I am a sucker also for digi's though. EP is really the best way to go for people who may already have the albums. I wish the record companies would consider that, but no. It's just easier doing it that way.

"I like most remastered cds, especially the Ozzy Osbourne remasters. Everything sounds richer."

The words just reminded me of Ozzy's SITCOM again. What do you think of this? :err: How ODD.