# Digitally remastered Vinyl



## Jeff Flowerday (Jan 23, 2006)

LMAO.

I was in a downtown store that has really started stocking a good selection of new vinyl.

I was amazed at how many reissue albums advertised digitally remastered.

hwopv


----------



## ne1roc (Mar 4, 2006)

I don't understand the technicalities but could they not remaster the original recordings digitally and use that to cut the record?


----------



## guitarman2 (Aug 25, 2006)

ne1roc said:


> I don't understand the technicalities but could they not remaster the original recordings digitally and use that to cut the record?


If possible what would be the point?


----------



## WarrenG (Feb 3, 2006)

Uh oh. Sounds like they're doing a vinyl pressing of a re-mastered recording intended for CD/downloads. 

This is really bad because the "trend" in CD masters is to increase the compression and limit the dynamic headroom - just to make it sound louder. In essence they're taking all the "snap" out of recordings (it's really noticeable on drum tracks) and replacing it with big noise.


----------



## Jeff Flowerday (Jan 23, 2006)

ne1roc said:


> I don't understand the technicalities but could they not remaster the original recordings digital and use that to cut the record?


Absolutely, but the reason people still love vinyl is it's all analog.

It has to be assumed it was digitally remastered at 24/96 or higher but it was still ran through an A/D converter, then mastered and then ran back through a D/A for pressing.

If you are going to digitallly remaster it just release it on Blu-Ray at 24/96 or 24/192. Putting it on vinyl is pointless, IMO, unless someone is partial to the noise that eventually will happen after to listening to it a few time.


----------



## Jeff Flowerday (Jan 23, 2006)

WarrenG said:


> Uh oh. Sounds like they're doing a vinyl pressing of a re-mastered recording intended for CD/downloads.
> 
> This is really bad because the "trend" in CD masters is to increase the compression and limit the dynamic headroom - just to make it sound louder. In essence they're taking all the "snap" out of recordings (it's really noticeable on drum tracks) and replacing it with big noise.


Very true with regards to CD mastering. But in this case if they did remaster it in 24/96 or 24/192 they would have had some additional head room before digital clipping. Hopefully they didn't compress it but just expanded things slightly and used digital tools to clean up the original recordings a bit.

Either way I don't think I'll be picking up any of the digitally remastered vinyl, I'll just wait for a blu-ray version.


----------



## hollowbody (Jan 15, 2008)

Jeff Flowerday said:


> Absolutely, but the reason people still love vinyl is it's all analog.
> 
> It has to be assumed it was digitally remastered at 24/96 or higher but it was still ran through an A/D converter, then mastered and then ran back through a D/A for pressing.
> 
> If you are going to digitallly remaster it just release it on Blu-Ray at 24/96 or 24/192. Putting it on vinyl is pointless, IMO, unless someone is partial to the noise that eventually will happen after to listening to it a few time.


Yeah, I don't get why you would impose a 16 or 24 character count on something that is, essentially, of an infinite bit-rate. Factor into this the fact that a 16 or 24 bitrate doesn't necessarily mean that you get all 16 or 24 bits, and you have a watered down version of something that is artificially imposed on a medium that doesn't need it (most Red Book cds are actually 11 or 12 bits, some higher some lower, the rest is dither or just plain filler, I forget where I heard this but it was a reputable source, like Phillips or someone).

It may sound good on SACD or Blu Ray on a gee-whiz stereo, but an original analogue master used to press an original piece of vinyl played back on a decent table with a solid arm and cartridge is going to let you hear deeper into the mix than something that has been digitized and sanitized to hell and back.


----------



## ne1roc (Mar 4, 2006)

I would think that with digital mastering technology you have more control over the final product. Processing out original tape noise, Digital enhancements, etc.
Using the final Digital Master as the source from which all copies will be produced has still got to be different (better is subjective) then an analog source?


----------



## hollowbody (Jan 15, 2008)

ne1roc said:


> I would think that with digital mastering technology you have more control over the final product. Processing out original tape noise, Digital enhancements, etc.
> Using the final Digital Master as the source from which all copies will be produced has still got to be different (better is subjective) then an analog source?


Not really. When you digitize a recording, you're imposing a certain word-length on the original analogue tapes (16bit, 24bit, etc.), which can have a negative effect. 

Think of it this way: a guitar plugged directly into an amp sounds better than a guitar that goes through a digital processor and then into an amp.

The process of converting analog to digital, only to reconvert digital to analog is an extra step which introduces the potential for problems. Especially when you consider how crummy the D/A converters in most mass-produced CD and DVD players are.


----------



## Sneaky (Feb 14, 2006)

Let's not forget that before the days of CD's and downloads, many 1980's LP's were pressed from digital masters. Some of those LP's still sound fantastic to me (Ry Cooder's Bop til You Drop for example). 

Pete


----------



## Andy (Sep 23, 2007)

I don't see how this is possible -- if vinyl is pressed with ridiculous levels like those on a CD, the needle will jump out of the groove.

Either way, I've come to view "Digitally Remastered" as "Sounds nothing like the original". Vintage recordings sound like s**t when heavily compressed and limited.


----------



## Jeff Flowerday (Jan 23, 2006)

Sneaky said:


> Let's not forget that before the days of CD's and downloads, many 1980's LP's were pressed from digital masters. Some of those LP's still sound fantastic to me (Ry Cooder's Bop til You Drop for example).
> 
> Pete


Interesting...

I wonder what the standard bit depth and frequency sample rate were on these digital masters? HD space was a premium unless they were stored on tape digitally.


----------



## Geek (Jun 5, 2007)

I'd never touch a "remaster". Enthusiasts know where to find the good ones 

Cheers!


----------



## WarrenG (Feb 3, 2006)

Andy said:


> I don't see how this is possible -- if vinyl is pressed with ridiculous levels like those on a CD, the needle will jump out of the groove


Exactly. But nobody's putting the dollars these days into creating specific masters for CD and LP. So they're doing something like this:

Original recording master:










Re-master for CD:










CD/Digital Re-master (with a lower input signal for vinyl to prevent skipping):










The last signal bares little resemblance to the original recording. It's apparent and audible, to say the least.

The days of Bob Ludwig and Masterdisk are long gone...


----------



## WarrenG (Feb 3, 2006)

*Caveat*

Bob Ludwig has his only Mastering company called Gateway Mastering and DVD. Interestingly, one of his latest projects was G'n'R's Chinese Democracy which has 0/zero/nil/nada compression on it (as selected by the artist).

Maybe sanity has returned. I can't speak to the quality of the material, however...


----------



## Starbuck (Jun 15, 2007)

Jeff Flowerday said:


> Absolutely, but the reason people still love vinyl is it's all analog.


I know how much everyone loves KISS 9kkhhd They are recording their next album in analog. Neil Young loves analog as do the White Stripe, Sloan ect. I think people are finally coming to their senses. Especially when Death Magnetic has been reviled for it's awful sound! There is even a petition to re-produce it.. 

http://www.gopetition.com/petitions/re-mix-or-remaster-death-magnetic/signatures.html

I love my vinyl!


----------



## ezcomes (Jul 28, 2008)

yea vinyl sounds sooo much better...

cd's these days are WAY over compressed...

i miss the days when quietly strumming the guitar...and then bursting into an overdriven amp had a huge sound difference a la volume...now...a quietly strummed guitar is the same volume as that same over-driven amp...

the dynamics are all wrong...


----------



## hollowbody (Jan 15, 2008)

WarrenG said:


> Bob Ludwig has his only Mastering company called Gateway Mastering and DVD. Interestingly, one of his latest projects was G'n'R's Chinese Democracy which has 0/zero/nil/nada compression on it (as selected by the artist).
> 
> Maybe sanity has returned. I can't speak to the quality of the material, however...


Chinese Democracy certainly is a great-sounding disc (and an awesome one, as far as I'm concerned)



Starbuck said:


> I know how much everyone loves KISS 9kkhhd They are recording their next album in analog. Neil Young loves analog as do the White Stripe, Sloan ect. I think people are finally coming to their senses. Especially when Death Magnetic has been reviled for it's awful sound! There is even a petition to re-produce it..
> 
> http://www.gopetition.com/petitions/re-mix-or-remaster-death-magnetic/signatures.html
> 
> I love my vinyl!


Part of it is due to the lack of quality musicians these days. Analog recording and mastering is time consuming and expensive. If takes aren't good, it costs money; mixing properly takes a lot of skill and time. The days of guys walking into studios and laying down great takes and wrapping an album in a couple days are long gone. Nowadays you have the luxury of doing a hundred takes and picking the best, or picking and choosing parts of the best.

IMHO, this is the reason why the industry bottomed out. Gone are the days of bands earning their stripes on the road. The Beatles and Zeppelin had both honed their skills touring before they even cut a record. Now you have wannabes (like me) who can barely play, but given enough takes are capable of putting together a decent sounding track. But jeez, if someone gave me a record deal and put me on tour, I'd be pooping my pants, because I'm just not that great a musician. I shouldn't make money playing music, and neither should a lot of other people who are making millions.


----------



## Geek (Jun 5, 2007)

WarrenG said:


> Exactly. But nobody's putting the dollars these days into creating specific masters for CD and LP. So they're doing something like this:


Thanks for the lovely graphical representation of the ELIMINATION of dynamic range on remasters.

Man, a Classical artist would shoot that mixmaster


----------

