ilovefuzz.com

Well that's like...a total remix though. And I prefer that remix, the 1997 one -- I like its heinousness. I'd put pretty much the entire Times New Viking catalog in the "unlistenably loud" category before the Raw Power remix. YMMV.

There are plenty of first generation CDs that have fucking terrrrrible masters -- Beggars Banquet by the Stones springs directly into my cortex. There was a lot of jazz stuff where they abused the new-at-the-time digital noise reduction technology, thus deadening the record entirely, only to smash the high end and compression when remastered in the oughts.

Nothing is good ever, is what I'm saying. Except for that 1997 Raw Power CD.

I wouldn't be able to tell the difference between the original and 2012 remaster of Loveless.

Inconuucl wrote:I wouldn't be able to tell the difference between the original and 2012 remaster of Loveless.

Is that the one that has an extremely obvious digital blip/error, or is that Isn't Anything?

The MBV remasters are alright -- mostly seemed like goosing low mids.

I believe that's on Isn't Anything, although I've never listened to the remasters myself. Whichever one came out first. I always thought that was pretty hilarious, though: audiophiles waiting decades for the album and all.

That's because Kevin Shields isn't as good a producer/mixer/audio worker as people making him out to be. Just because you make something amazing by abusing your tools doesn't mean that you can use them normally. A bigger example of this is Devin Townsend's mix of As the Palaces Burn by Lamb of God. There were hardware errors there too, but man. Luckily he got a lot better, although his heavier mixes lack bottom end sometimes.

Not that I'm against one abusing their tools, mind you.

StopReferencing wrote:

Inconuucl wrote:I wouldn't be able to tell the difference between the original and 2012 remaster of Loveless.

Is that the one that has an extremely obvious digital blip/error, or is that Isn't Anything?

No, that's on Loveless. Specifically the 2nd disc of the remaster that's taken from 1/2" tapes used during the tracking of the album has an artifact from a botched transfer job a few minutes into What You Want. This has been present ever since the remaster was leaked in 2008 and wasn't fixed by the time it finally shipped.

The 1st disc of that package is taken from the original DAT master and it sounds just find.

The trick with mastering is that it's only supposed to be a coat of audio polish. If the original mix sucks, the mastering job can't save it.

There are people who don't like the '97 raw power CD?