Why do I keep torturing myself with remasters?

ghost- you can listen to the James Gang on 8 track player and it’s all good. Those albums with Joe W. were great- I play them as often as I play anything. They rock.

Norman- have you heard the old Horzu Die Beatles -2? It is a hoot, very spare, hard panned left and right, no additional effects. 
I don't have original Parlophones to compare, but I thought the mono box on vinyl was good. 

Which Bowie?

Ole- it is this one: https://www.discogs.com/David-Bowie-The-Man-Who-Sold-The-World/release/5806133

I have not compared all the notable pressings, but this one punches, is not murky or strident. It is crank-able. I don’t think the one listed for $60 US is badly priced, since it is probably worth more if it had the OBI.

oleschool- i found an early japanese pressing that sounds good. The early UK one is big money, and the US one - my understanding is, it's more about the cover. I can check my deadwax on the pressing I like if you want. It wasn't that costly compared to the early UK. 

I tend toward original pressings --whatever that means re country, place of mastering, pressing, etc, at least as a reference point. But, some of these are extremely pricey, 4 figures sometimes. A good remaster serves a purpose. If you listen to pop, sometimes these can actually improve on the "original." RLJ's Pirates was an early digital recording on vinyl- it is an ear bleeder. The MoFi makes it tolerable. A friend asked me about an ORG Blood Sweat and Tears- I compared with an original US Columbia 2 eye and the ORG was richer and less strident. Some records, like the original Vertigos, or more obscure prog- the reissues generally suck, but the originals are nutty money. So, you either bite that bullet or go searching. And a lot of these records are hard to find in a really high quality state of play. I get lucky or break even on quality v condition most of the time, but there is a place for remasters. The issue then becomes which one. And sometimes the original record is just not a great recording. That's where I'll have a lot of copies- each has strengths and weaknesses--and typically, these are older pressings made at different times, not always current remasters. 

dgarretson: I think you'll be hard-pressed to make any meaningful distinctions without very specific information about the particular copies involved. A "reissue" could mean a remaster, but leaving that aside, it also includes different lacquers, pressing plants, vinyl formulations, apart from different source material -tape copies- depending on the country of origin and the country of pressing. And country of origin- band or mastering? I have records with precisely the same information in the deadwax that I know are earlier and sound better than later copies (within the same year) but that is not always the case. At the extreme, this takes you down the path of copy to copy variations, but without going that far into the weeds, is a certain lacquer number better than another even though cut at the same time- which leads to pressing plant variations. I know of no holistic way to do this on a general rule basis. There are "known" good cuts for specific rock records that are pretty easy to find with a search where there is some consensus on the sound. Otherwise, you are left with doing it yourself or relying on reviews. One last example in this vein- the early Sabbath on UK Vertigo is not only entirely different than the US pressings, but even when the same metal parts were used for later pressings when Sabbath changed labels from Vertigo to WWA, the WWAs- while bargains and "good" don't have the same immediacy as the Vertigos. On the other hand, my Neil Young "After the Gold Rush" is an RE-1. As I understand it, that's a re-cut, but it is a very early copy and usually the one I prefer. I could go on, but you get the point.....

hdm- yep, the RE-1 is an Artisan, the RE-2 looks like a Winchester. The labels are a bit different too--no Warner in a bubble on the inner rim of the label circumference writing of the RE-1, which also has the words 'STEREO' in block print at 6 o' clock on the label. (I have several different records from Reprise from this era with the STEREO marking as described that all sound really good, never checked to see if that is because they are all Artisans- i think that style label was only used briefly). The RE-1 is punchier sounding than the RE-2. 

ole- I feel bad, reading what happened to you, what a nightmare. Here's a thought, and don't take this the wrong way. I don't know how old you are, but trying to replace these things at this point may just be a bitter process- used record buying is all over the lot and you are carrying some baggage. I don't know what your system is--sorry, I didn't check your profile here if you have one-- but if that were to happen to me- god forbid, I'm not sure I'd try and replace it at this point in my life. I'd get up on some good digital front end/computer based audio, and just sit back and pull (legal) streams and downloads- yeah, I'm sure they have mastering issues too, but I suspect that a lot of improvement has gone into digital, not only on the playback side, but on the production side. I say this as somebody with rooms fill with records and no digital player in my main system, but this is eventually where it is headed, except for us luddites, diehards and hair shirt audio geeks. I guess my point is not to carry this cross, because it isn't going to make you happier. And the key, to me, is to enjoy this stuff. Otherwise, why bother? I've gone through periods where I put everything on ice- had no time or energy to deal w/ it. Cut yourself a break. And good luck. 

bill hart

I agree that the vinyl itself on Japanese pressings is usually far better than records made in most other countries. Quiet, typically well made. (That old JVC compound used by the 'old' MoFi was one of the best!)  I'm not as sanguine about the sonics though- I think you have to compare pressing to pressing. I'm willing to put up with a slightly less quiet surface (not ticks, pops or groove chew, but a little more life in some of the old UK, US or German or Italian pressings along with a higher noise floor). Some of the Japanese pressings are outstanding though, on both fronts (good vinyl quality and good sonics). I got turned on to a 3d press of LZ1 from Japan- not a great recording to begin with, and it is now one of my favorites, along with the US Monarch Piros remaster done in 1974. This, based on a comparison of US and UK firsts, including both Presswell and Monarch, Classic 33 and 45, among many others. Someone here (can't remember if this thread or another) mentioned a particular Japanese pressing of Carole King's Tapestry, a great record that is sonically compromised. I found the specific copy mentioned, and played it last night- to my ears, it  was better than the ORG 45, but was surprised to find that an older 33 Classic sounded better than either. None are truly audiophile quality, but the music is so great, it is worth searching for a good sounding copy. I have been buying certain old Japanese pressings of obscure prog rock albums  b/c the original pressings are  now nutty money. For many of those, I have not had access to the original to make a comparison, but at least the Japanese pressings are high quality, are not from questionable sources and give me the music without spending a banker's ransom on one record. Again, I think it is pretty much record by record, and not a blanket -these are best- proposition. But, I have no issue with your statement, shadorne, re vinyl and pressing quality of the japanese records. 

ehtoo- That has been my experience re the EQ of Japanese pressings of rock music generally, but sometimes it is either not the case, or the EQ works in combination with the nature of the recording so the end result is not bad, e.g. LZ1 japanese pressing I mentioned. Pretty much every copy is murky, many have no bass, the Piros cut pressed at Monarch is probably one of the best I’ve heard, but that Japanese cut is really strong too. For the odd ball prog stuff, the King records and Seven Seas imprint have been good as well, but in almost all cases, the original pressings are so expensive, I have not compared them. (e.g.. Museo Rosenbach -Zarathustra).

Ole- for some of those uber collectible records, that’s where a good remaster would pay off. One of the reasons why some of these records fetch big money now is that the record at the time of release wasn’t popular and few copies were pressed. (Or there could be a host of other reasons, contractual dispute with label, failure to promote at the time, etc. but the result, whatever the reason, is there are few extant copies). Once a record like that has been identified by collectors or listeners as something special, the price skyrockets. However, they remain niche products that wouldn’t justify the investment in tracking down the tapes (assuming they exist), licensing the master and artwork, hiring a good mastering engineer and bearing the costs of manufacture and distribution. Selling even a thousand copies might be a struggle.
With some exceptions, the better reissue houses tend to stick with less risky reissues and you are left with the original at crazy prices (and even at that, sometimes hard to find without problems) or shoddy re-do’s from questionable sources. Sometimes, you can get lucky- you will hear of "barn finds" (really a vintage car term but same deal with records) of a 3 or 4 or 5 figure record that someone found in a bin for almost nothing, but in my experience, that’s not really very common....
I didn’t get into UK Vertigo Swirls until a few years ago and by then, they were already nutty money (and not just the Black Sabbaths which are some of the most common Swirls, b/c those actually sold the most). Ditto, some of the more obscure Italian or German prog stuff. Just wasn’t on my radar in the mid-’70s.

I got Di Terra recently, original Italian pressing, for reasonable money. (It came from overseas) Ditto, a Le Orme, from a shop in Manchester. Ken Golden hipped me to a decent remaster of Comus, First Utterance and the shop also had a few Le Orme, so I grabbed one to make the shipping cost cover more than one record. There are typically more copies available in EU/UK, but you pay the additional tariff for shipping. I also found an alleged mint- copy of one of the RCA Neons (Indian Summer) which should arrive soon, but Spring, which I have bid on several times and lost, is not easy to find on the cheap. If you are after some of these, you are definitely forced to look abroad--I have occasionally found a few in record shops specializing in "psych" in the States, but not easy. 

Ole, a couple of people have urged me to go to one of the Utrecht shows- likely where a lot of this stuff is going to show up. As to prices, I doubt you'll find any bargains on stuff like Il Balletto di Bronzo. But if you wanted to go wild, that's probably the place. The guy I would reach out to here in the States is Ken Golden, who I think I mentioned upthread- he seems more on top of collectible and obscure prog than anybody I know- he does sell new vinyl,  and represents a number of new bands in the prog, prog/metal and fusion areas, but may also have some suggestions for older prog copies or sources. In some cases, there are good older alternative pressings, e.g. the King Records Seven Seas imprint which I think I mentioned earlier. Ken has several companies- i believe they are all under the umbrella of The Laser's Edge. He just wrote a column about some prog obscurities that I published last week. 

Ole- search Laser's Edge Group- as i said, Ken has a bunch of different companies and labels under that umbrella. If you send him a message, you are welcome to mention my name. He visited recently- brought some interesting records, including an old RCA (Neon) and a Island UK test pressing of the first ELP album with a different (earlier) lacquer number on one side than the first pressing pink label. He may be a good resource for you. 
bill hart

I think it is tough to generalize about original v remaster or country of origin of record- it really comes down to the specific recordings, masterings and pressings. On the Boston record, my listening notes published from about a year ago- comparing a "Wally" mastered copy to one done by Zentz- indicate that I preferred the ballsiness of the Wally even though it was bright. (Both were top flight mastering engineers with long careers of many good sounding records). Although I "generally" search out early pressings over new remasters, I don’t think you can say all remasters suck or they don’t have a place. Yesterday, I listened to a re-do of The Human Beast, Vol 1. This is not a record that I would buy as an "original" pressing for a simple reason- the Decca is now astronomically priced. I was surprised by how decent the re-do (on Sunbeam, itself now out of print) sounded (granted, nothing to compare it with, but I took a wild stab, given that the alternatives on vinyl were "unofficial" or from sources like Akarma or Si-Wan).
I’ve also gradually changed my view about Japanese pressings- which are "generally" of very high quality manufacture, but in the past I often found too bright. Some are, but as I think I mentioned earlier in this thread, the 3d Japanese of Zep 1 is pretty nice sounding, as is a Japanese first of Bowie’s "Man Who Saved the World."
Quality of manufacture today- all over the place. The higher quality reissue houses, like Chad (Analogue Productions), the new MoFi, Speakers Corner all pretty good. Classic- a mixed bag given the QC problems with the switch from 180g to 200g and "flat profile"; others are harder to predict- most people shy away from MOV or GZ pressed records because the source is often a digital file, but the quality of the vinyl itself is pretty good, and for records that began life as digital recordings, can be OK. My experience with some of the limited run stuff pressed for RSD has been all over the lot- -from warps to non-fill. The Bowie 40th Ziggy is a very good sounding record, but there was a defect on the track "Star"- i had multiple copies that simply would not play, a problem that was apparently rectified on a later run. (I still prefer the UK 6E/4E, but finding a quiet unmolested copy isn’t easy or necessarily cheap).
I guess my point is that you’ve got to get down into the weeds to really make the assessments. The anecdotal comments of others (mine included) may be colored to a degree by listening bias and playback system. One reason that I think buyers opt for the remasters--at least from the "better" houses--is having a fresh copy that doesn’t require extensive research or the time, money and effort involved in making comparisons for oneself. (A reason why people rely on reviews too). And sometimes the re-do does better the "original." If you have the 45 rpm set of SRV-Texas Hurricane- and cue up Tin Pan Alley, you know what I mean. Good hunting!

Ole- you might enjoy reading this, both as to pressings and for the interview that is included as a link within this piece. (There is also another link in the piece to an extensive shoot-out I did a year or so ago on a number of different pressings of Aqualung).  [url]http://thevinylpress.com/early-tull-on-vinyl/[/url]


best,
bill hart