Is there really,really any good reason to replace the original album you already have for a remastered edition?
I've paid a small fortune for the Echo and the Bunnymen Collection (Remastered).I don't know if i did the right thing,though.

BadComrade wrote:
Sometimes. The original Led Zeppelin CDs all sounded like shit, and the remasters sound a lot better. A lot of early CDs sounded like shit, so it's nice when a better sounding version comes out..

Actually, that's not the case here.The Bunnymen original recordings generally sound fine.

Brilliant marketing scheme, it is.

Compress the shit out of the recording...check
Boost the high end, for no particular reason...check.
Bonus material (better still -> bonus disk), comprised of crap...check.

98% crap

Sid Hartha wrote:Brilliant marketing scheme, it is.

Compress the shit out of the recording...check
Boost the high end, for no particular reason...check.
Bonus material (better still -> bonus disk), comprised of crap...check.

98% crap

yep, for the most part.

although, when done right (like the King Crimson stuff or recent Eno reissues) it's a real treat.

Well, if you have no way of hearing the vinyl... I suppose you must make do .

Coincidence: I had Larks' Tongues In Aspic on earlier today - a U.S. Atlantic pressing I've had since I was a kid. Atlantic was incredible in the '70s, terrific mastering (goes for Led Zeppelin too, come to think of it).

I swear that some albums of that period sound like they were recorded with the vinyl medium in mind. There's only so much that can be done with mastering - so much seems to get lost in translation.

Before buying a remaster you have to ask yourself "how much more 5k can they really add before it starts to hurt?"

The answer is not much so you will realize you are probably just fine with the original masters.

For certain records, it is a godsend.
For others, it is a marketing ploy.

Yet, it almost universally awesome when it comes to really old films.

BadComrade wrote:Sometimes. The original Led Zeppelin CDs all sounded like shit, and the remasters sound a lot better. A lot of early CDs sounded like shit

Actually, the original LZ issues are very much sought after. They only sounded like shit when compared to the vinyl versions. The remasters are all loud, clipped, cuts, whatever, all the info can be found on the steve hoffman forums

The reissue of Faith by George Mich.... erm no, The Cure, is fantastic.
The bass has been boosted significantly and reverb has been added. It's not been mastered subtly by any stretch of the imagination, but it sounds so much better than the original that I'm not too concerned with the philosphy of what mastering should and shouldn't be in this case.

The bonus material is also exceptional, including a 30 minute instrumental originally only available on the cassette version of the album. Some of the demos are pointless however.

I don't mind paying again for an album so long as I get something worth listening to again! I gave my orginal copy to my girlfriend, which I'm sure cheered her up no end.

Rape me like a child, christened in blood... indeed.

Yes, I heard those, very good sound.

The Siouxsie & The Banshees first LP, however, is enhanced in such a way that now bass and drums drowns all the voice and guitars. It may sound boomy on your ipod, but it's not the original LP to me.

I think the art of mastering is enhanced whatever is there, not destroying the original balance of the mix to satisfy the ipod generation.