| Munchsack 26.02.2006 11:01 |
link Why rerelease stuff like this while we are still waiting for things like, oh, I dunno, GVH3? Unreleased tracks? Live At The Rainbow? A Deaky solo album? Although that last one may be asking a bit too much... Anyway, they should do some new stuff, or even, god forbid, a new compilation instead of rereleasing an old one. Who agrees? |
| beautifulsoup 26.02.2006 11:47 |
Sometimes I think we'll *never* get GVH3. |
| Saint Jiub 26.02.2006 12:43 |
Recycling is good for the environment. |
| martin S 26.02.2006 13:25 |
Fully agree. I almost couldn't believe it when I saw it. Another slap in the face. Is it the 3rd,4th,5th re-release under the label "remastered" ? cheers |
| deleted user 26.02.2006 13:35 |
I love the GH album. I'll buy it if it is being re-released. |
| Adam Baboolal 26.02.2006 16:20 |
And is this a worldwide re-release? Or is it a new remaster release in a lone country? Peace, Adam. |
| martin S 26.02.2006 16:37 |
Hi @ Adam, Shortly after I found that on the german amazon page I look at amazon.com and found nothing announced on that site. So maybe it's just in Germany, I don't know. There were several albums which get a re-release in March. God knows what that means, oh lord..... cheers |
| Adam Baboolal 26.02.2006 16:44 |
So, in other words, Germany could just be getting what happened with the 2004 remasters in the UK?? Peace, Adam. |
| martin S 26.02.2006 16:51 |
I think so. As I said there are several other Cd's which gets re-released on the 27th February. So silly, but hey the last degital remasters series here over was in 1994. So it was time...;-). Looking for the boxes with all that again in 3 years. Or Mr.May finds another "revelutionary" remaster tool to present the entire cataloque again before that happens... cheers |
| john bodega 26.02.2006 22:57 |
(Reads label on a copy of GH I've had since I was about 4) Yep. Digitally remastered. Why exactly are they doing this again? |
| Ziggy_SD 27.02.2006 00:02 |
Digital remastering is so full of shit. In this age of freeware DIY mastering software, I'd think DR would be redundant in 2006. All it does is add bass and volume to the original recording. Press release for the new Queen CDs: "You only need to buy these CDs if your stereo doesn't have a bass and volume knob." |
| Adam Baboolal 27.02.2006 00:40 |
The Flash Danny Project wrote: Digital remastering is so full of shit. In this age of freeware DIY mastering software, I'd think DR would be redundant in 2006. All it does is add bass and volume to the original recording. Press release for the new Queen CDs: "You only need to buy these CDs if your stereo doesn't have a bass and volume knob."Don't take offence here, but... you don't have a clue about Remastering. I do and I can say in quite certain terms, it ain't NOTHING to do with turning up the treble and bass! It covers the entire spectrum plus audio compression types. Plus anything else that might help the sound in the mastering engineer's ey... er... ears..! I was most glad to see the ANATO 2005 cd remaster. It's very well done. Anyway, I hope you are somehow enlightened by this. Peace, Adam. |
| Ziggy_SD 27.02.2006 02:24 |
Adam Baboolal wrote:No offence taken. I'm an audio engineer (apparantley like yourself) but I try to steer clear of tech talk in forums. You ask the everyman (or woman) what they consider the difference between an original issue album and its digital remaster and 7 times out of 10, they will say "it's louder" and/or "it has more bass". Tech-wise, it obviously goes way beyond that, but explaining to the aforementioned people that we gained access to the original masters, converted them to 9600/24 on HD, applied EQ, multi-band compression, multi-band exciter together with some stereo widening and finally dithered and re-converted to 16 bit for CD mastering does little to significantly boost sales. These days, I just say "this is the reason why you put that woofer in your car". ;-)The Flash Danny Project wrote: Digital remastering is so full of shit. In this age of freeware DIY mastering software, I'd think DR would be redundant in 2006. All it does is add bass and volume to the original recording. Press release for the new Queen CDs: "You only need to buy these CDs if your stereo doesn't have a bass and volume knob."Don't take offence here, but... you don't have a clue about Remastering. I do and I can say in quite certain terms, it ain't NOTHING to do with turning up the treble and bass! It covers the entire spectrum plus audio compression types. Plus anything else that might help the sound in the mastering engineer's ey... er... ears..! I was most glad to see the ANATO 2005 cd remaster. It's very well done. Anyway, I hope you are somehow enlightened by this. Peace, Adam. |
| john bodega 27.02.2006 04:54 |
I just don't see a reason. It sounded better on vinyl anyway. |
| Rick 27.02.2006 07:17 |
Congratulations, QP! You did it again. Wow, I'm so excited. I couldn't sleep all night. |
| Adam Baboolal 27.02.2006 07:58 |
The Flash Danny Project wrote:Good to know you actually do have a clue! But you see, I had to step-in when you said that thing about bass and treble etc. People are smart enough to get a fair amount of what you said. But you just need to word it like how I did. Just mention the basic idea of it and it still stands true.Adam Baboolal wrote:No offence taken. I'm an audio engineer (apparantley like yourself) but I try to steer clear of tech talk in forums. You ask the everyman (or woman) what they consider the difference between an original issue album and its digital remaster and 7 times out of 10, they will say "it's louder" and/or "it has more bass". Tech-wise, it obviously goes way beyond that, but explaining to the aforementioned people that we gained access to the original masters, converted them to 9600/24 on HD, applied EQ, multi-band compression, multi-band exciter together with some stereo widening and finally dithered and re-converted to 16 bit for CD mastering does little to significantly boost sales. These days, I just say "this is the reason why you put that woofer in your car". ;-)The Flash Danny Project wrote: Digital remastering is so full of shit. In this age of freeware DIY mastering software, I'd think DR would be redundant in 2006. All it does is add bass and volume to the original recording. Press release for the new Queen CDs: "You only need to buy these CDs if your stereo doesn't have a bass and volume knob."Don't take offence here, but... you don't have a clue about Remastering. I do and I can say in quite certain terms, it ain't NOTHING to do with turning up the treble and bass! It covers the entire spectrum plus audio compression types. Plus anything else that might help the sound in the mastering engineer's ey... er... ears..! I was most glad to see the ANATO 2005 cd remaster. It's very well done. Anyway, I hope you are somehow enlightened by this. Peace, Adam. Personally, I think this re-release is nothing to get all hot under the collar about. If Germany DID have the 2004 re-release like us, then obviously, I'd agree that it's a waste of time and money. But if someone can confirm that they don't, then we'll know why we should get annoyed. But I'm pretty sure they don't, otherwise the business sense of re-releasing the GH1 cd would be a weird move. Peace, Adam. |
| martin S 27.02.2006 08:42 |
According to QP the Box Sets will appear in 2009. I don't understand why they release the entire back cataloque these, while it's possible that those records will be released in the forthcoming box sets. No sense in that at all. I have the entire 1994 digital remasters series and God knows I would like to have them remastered with the standard of today. But I'm just a student and can't afford that... I really would like to have the ANATO CD/DVD too, but my birthday is 9 months ahead :-( cheers |
| NOTWMEDDLE 27.02.2006 15:41 |
The first eight Queen albums were remastered in 1998 for The Crown Jewels box set. The 1998 masters sounded better than the UK 1994 issues. News Of The World for instance, I swear the glass in my window rattled as We Will Rock You started with the stomp-stomp-clap beat. |
| Adam Baboolal 27.02.2006 17:31 |
<b><font color = "crimson">ThomasQuinn wrote: I'm NOT a professional engineer, but I must say: In the case of a remaster, the human audio perception does not range much further than recognizing new equalization and perhaps a more 'crisp' sound to the album in question (i.e. reduced noise/distorted frequencies). The large majority of improvements to the audio are simply inaudible for humans, even those with the best possible hearing.It is your opinion, TQ. But personally, I believe otherwise, e.g. The difference between 16-bit and 24-bit is heard by some, but others dismiss it. I'm one of those people who can hear the difference between the two. Brian said (back in 2003 I think) that 24-bit 96kHz sounds more like vinyl to him. Personally, I'm not sure about that. But it certainly is far better than the standard cd rate of playback. I recorded the noise of the street outside my window for some library sounds. And the difference at that higher rate just seemed more real. For instance, I remember recording it and hearing it all as it was happening. Then I played it back one day and I could swear that it sounded as if I'd hung a mic out the window again! It had a special something about it. Likewise, that frequency rate is way above human hearing. But then, why does the sound change when listening to a higher samplerate? It's down to how it affects our hearing and the effects can certainly be heard by humans. I believe that not everyone is blessed with such hearing. Either that, or my hearing over the years just gets more tuned into things. Peace, Adam. |
| Ziggy_SD 27.02.2006 18:10 |
Unless they release the remasters as DVD audio, there really isn't much point. You lose a crap load of clarity when you master for CD anyway. I haven't heard the DVD-A of ANATO, but I do have the GVH DVDs and must say they sound superb. |
| Micrówave 27.02.2006 18:15 |
Well, Adam, all I got from your posts is that the remastering is only appreciated by someone as astute as you and the rest of us knuckleheads aren't trained in the Jedi art of Sound. Sounds to me like another remaster is a waste of time. |
| Adam Baboolal 27.02.2006 19:22 |
Mircrowave wrote: Well, Adam, all I got from your posts is that the remastering is only appreciated by someone as astute as you and the rest of us knuckleheads aren't trained in the Jedi art of Sound. Sounds to me like another remaster is a waste of time.I'm sorry if it came across like that. But as evidenced on this very board, the fans CAN hear the difference. But the only thing you have to remember is that we're all built differently and because of this, we all hear things in life differently. Quite scary when you think about it. And that's why some people like the 2001 remasters and some don't. Oh and btw, it's not another remaster. It's the same one that's been used for the last, what, 2/5 years. It's just about making that one available to the public in as many places as possible. Peace, Adam. |
| NOTWMEDDLE 28.02.2006 00:50 |
The Flash Danny Project wrote: Unless they release the remasters as DVD audio, there really isn't much point. You lose a crap load of clarity when you master for CD anyway. I haven't heard the DVD-A of ANATO, but I do have the GVH DVDs and must say they sound superb.DVD Audio is a dead format now. Even Hybrid SACDs outsold DVD-A, thanks to Pink Floyd's The Dark Side of the Moon being issued in that format(Hybrid SACD). Also, dual-discs are taking over for DVD-A. |
| Asterik 02.03.2006 17:00 |
I don't see the point of all this remastering- just give us something new for gooodness sake! |
| Micrówave 02.03.2006 17:42 |
Adam Baboolal wrote: Oh and btw, it's not another remaster. It's the same one that's been used for the last, what, 2/5 years.Cool. Well, at least I don't have to buy a fifth CD release of it!!! Thanks for the info, Adam. |