On the other hand, there are digitally remastered albums where great care was taken to get the best transfer off a high quality, high resolution master tape or digital master, dynamic range is maintained, and care is taken through the manufacturing process to not lose or distort the sound that was originally recorded.
I completely agree with you that there are exceptions, perhaps I painted with too broad a brush. I believe identifying the high quality ones would likely be simplified for consumers if we were somehow aware, prior to purchase, that a digitally remastered album or hi-res file was exceptionally well done and of high quality. I'm thinking of professional reviews of newly released digitally remastered albums, the company having an excellent track record, actually listening to it at a friend's, a physical store or at least a sampling of some tracks on the company's website. Otherwise, it's a bit of a crapshoot.
I think your mention, of capturing and maintaining the intrinsically large dynamic range of music played and heard live, is especially pertinent for several reasons. If the master tapes being used as a source in the digital remastering process happen to be the typical final mix master tape versions created for CD use, then these master tapes have already had their dynamic ranges significantly attenuated due to the 'loudness wars'. Digital remastering, meaning just the transfer of recorded music from a lower resolution format to a higher resolution format, is incapable of restoring the naturally high dynamics to the music on the new recording. The dynamics have been lost for good due to the original master's provenance.
Another reason I think dynamic range is relevant, is that recording music directly to digital is the superior format at accurately capturing the often large dynamic ranges of musical instruments and voices. This is definitely my subjective perception and opinion, but I believe it's also verified by the rated dynamic range specs of the various master recording formats.