Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Rose

Houses of the Holy - Led Zeppelin (remastered version)

Recommended Posts

I recently bought Led Zeppelin's "Houses of Holy".

However, the copy I bought is apparently "digitally remastered". When I listened to the album, I was very disapointed. The album sounded like it had been recreated fully. I have heard original versions of the songs on the album, and I quite enjoyed the raw, and un-edited sounds. I knew that remastering was supposed to make it sound different, and sometimes better, but this album sounds like it was recreated fully.

I am at the risk of sounding stupid here, but:

1- Is there a difference between "remastered" and "digitally remastered" in terms of sound?

2- Does a remastered copy IMPROVE an album, or does it take away from the original song(s)?

3- Is it possible to get a copy of an album on a CD, that ISNT remastered? Or all CD's remastered?

Sorry for the long, drawn out info, but I am just wondering. And hoping to find someone who might be able to answer my question.

Thanks. :confused:

Edited by Guest
clarifying query

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is what I found on Wikipedia regarding the term "remastering" and including the term "digital remastering."

remastering

And as far as whether all CDs are remastered, I don't know for certain, but I'd think they have to be in order to be burned to a CD. You can't turn on a turntable, hit the "burn" on the CD burner, and record a song like you could on cassette tapes. It's got to be stored digitally in order to burn to a CD. That's my thinkin' anyway. :crazy:

P.S. - Rose, I love your signature :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you very much. You're the only person who has helped me so far!

And thanks for the compliments on my signature. xP I always thought that was particularily funny. :D

I still can't figure out why my copy of "Houses of Holy" sounds so different then. :confused: Maybe I am just crazy! =:P LOL.

Thanks again.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I bought "Thick as a brick" yesterday (Jethro Tull) and I was looking at the cd to look for the word "remastered"... it´s a copy of the original and it seems it sounds more or less the same.

Just like Shawna said, every cd has to be digitalized if it comes from an LP, as it will be copied ina digital way. Now, the problem with "Houses of the Holly" is probably that it has been remastered and remixed: to create a new master, they added some effect here, changed the sound there, etc. They mixed the tracks again. I hate it when that happens, I love the original sound...

What I find amazing is your avatar...

:)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's a coincidence, because my copy of Houses of the Holy is also digitally remastered, and it sounded a bit different, but not too far from the original. "The Crunge" & "Dancing Days" were two tracks I especially noticed this on.

1- Is there a difference between "remastered" and "digitally remastered" in terms of sound?

The effects are transparent, I have noticed little difference in comparison, it mostly just improves the bass/treble features & overall playback.

2- Does a remastered copy IMPROVE an album, or does it take away from the original song(s)?

IMO, both. You get sound enhancement with noise suppression & the distorted echo is reduced, yet it lacks the original feel that came on vinyl.

3- Is it possible to get a copy of an album on a CD, that ISNT remastered? Or all CD's remastered?

Remastered CD's are usually from albums that were released prior to 1985, before CD's were invented. The audio is taken from the original record and then transferred over to disc for essential playback, this is remastering.

Edited by Guest
Rechecked Lz-HotH cover for any info

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wow, thanks guys for all of your help! I guess I'm just going to have to put up with it. That, or find the LP somewhere. I'm very fussy with my music xP

And edna, thanks, I find it fascinating too! *stares at avatar for the next 20 mins*

I bet you guys wont even see this post! :o

Oh well. Thanks,

Peace.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Rose, if you have a good cassette tape player, the original tape should have the quality studio sound that was dubbed directly from the vinyl copy. Most of Zeppelin's CD's are remastered copies & have added sound equalizing tendered into the encrypted disc data. Hope this is of some help.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just so long as you don't buy the remastered versions of the first 2 Ozzy albums with added musicians (why did he do that?)

I have / had a copy of "Blizzard of Ozz" digitally remastered, according to the inside cover label credits, it was done by Sony SBM (Super Bit Mapping Processor) with 22 bit analog to digital conversion yielding an ultra high resolution "Super CD" by Brian Lee & Bob Ludwig.

I'm assuming this is was the record label's decision & not Ozzy's, the albums sounds different, like they tried to cover up Randy Rhodes' work with some other guitarist with less talent. It must've been done when he sold-out to that other record label.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Heres my take on the whole remastering thing.

It can actually be a good thing. No, really. Here's the deal.

One reason why they do it is because as vintage music gets older, so does the tapes and they start to age. Magnetic tape starts to go funny after many years and it needs to be upgraded in order to preserve it.

Secondly, remastering is done because CD mastering is very different to vinyl or tape mastering. CDs have a wider frequency response range and the sound doesn't need to be compressed like it did for vinyl. Some of the original CD issues of vintage CDs (such as the original of "Harvest" by Neil Young and especially "Pearl" by Janis Joplin) were dreadful in sound quality because they were digitally mastered (you need a digital master of some form to print a CD) but existing vinyl master tapes were used to make the digital master. In some cases (especially the Australian ones like I have) they have been taken from 5th or 6th generation master copies. These copies sound considerably worse than the 1st generation copy (which is usually the master made from the multi-track recording tape from the studio), with heaps more tape hiss and other impurities, and thus they turn up on the CD, with a considerably reduced output volume.

What proper digital remastering is is when an engineer takes the orignal mixdown master tapes, copy them to a digital format like DAT or ProTools on computer and cleans them up, i.e. removes tape hiss and improves the EQ and sonic output levels for the new medium (the output of a CD is around 90dB per channel while vinyl is around 50dB, so can imagine why those old CDs sound crap).

Usually the music is not remixed or has any added reverb or effects on it. In some cases (and yes the 1996 Who reissues have it) have been remixed for CD. Why? I'm not really sure. But the remixed version of "Who's Next" (the 1996 issue) sounds fine to me. There have been some mistakes though, such as on the recent Deluxe edition of the "My Generation" LP, where they have remixed the title track and forgotten that there are backing vocals in the explosive outro (they're completely missing).

Which remastered version of "Houses" do you have? I didn't know there was a new remaster of the album. Jimmy Page did the first digital remaster of the Zep catalog in 1990 and it still sounds awesome, even when played back to back with the vinyl copy.

However, with those Ozzy albums, adding extra guitar parts and stuff is just tampering with History and is not on. It was OK for the Beatles to remix "Let It Be" because Phil Spector ruined that album with his typically heavy handed production (they should remix "All Things Must Pass" and remove the excess overdubs that Phil put on that too).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It was OK for the Beatles to remix "Let It Be" because Phil Spector ruined that album with his typically heavy handed production (they should remix "All Things Must Pass" and remove the excess overdubs that Phil put on that too).

:bow: agreed :bow:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...