That’s true, but since they control the process pretty tightly, you can assume that a reasonable quality source was used.
We are not likely to agree on that point. But the earth continues to rotate despite that. No problem. 
1 Like
Most hi quality remasters are not available on the streaming sites.
1 Like
I guess that would depend on who did the re-mastering. I’ve heard some remastered recording that sound crap, but then I’ve heard others (like the Steven Wilson remixes) that sound great.
Are remixes the same as remasters (in practice), or am I mixing terms?
2 Likes
Remixes are a different thing.
1 Like
A remix is to rebuild the mix with the original multitrack. This costs a lot of time and money and often has great results.
A remaster is often mainly more compression and turning on the bass a bit. And back on sale for more money.
Fortunately, there are also some good remasters.
Edit:
Not quite chic what I’m doing here. Those who perform these remasters are also just people doing their best within the assignment they’ve been given.
1 Like
2 Likes
Thanks for the explanation, and now I understand the difference. While I assume a remaster must start with the original master track(s), I imagine that a remix could also start from the master source material as well.
In either case, I appreciate the information and I learned something today which is always a good thing!
1 Like
With a remix you start with raw material that has been recorded. Sometimes hundreds of layers/tracks. Sometimes only a few. But without effects and EQ.
With a Remaster you either start from the original ‘mixdown’. Or a previous Master. A mixdown is what the mixing engineer makes of the many channels and effects and EQ.
A mastering engineer ensures that the entire album sounds the same or has
got the same feel and that it is ready for the final distribution files.
Unfortunately, the Loudnesswar is fought in the mastering process.
1 Like
Steven Wilson remixed many Prog-Rock albums and also remastered some others.
For the remasters and the Hi Res that are produced from them, the nature of the source material is very important.
When high quality remasters are done by the audiophile labels for recordings from the analogue era, the source material are the original master tapes.
3 Likes
2 Likes
Whether he’s right or wrong (and in case you’re wandering, he’s wrong). why is anybody taking Hans seriously – he has demonstrated many times that he simply lacks the technical chops and a complete understanding?
1 Like
Hans explains it in laymen terms and usually gets it pretty much ok. There are many YouTube reviewers that claim they have technical chops, but they really lack deep understanding.
I’m quoting Hans because his explanation is approachable for most users.
But it’s wrong. See my post above with the link to Troll Audio.
1 Like
There are few assumptions in the article, that are indeed assumptions. Even if the time domain resolution is 1000 times better than the one calculated based on the sampling frequency alone, it’s still several orders of magnitude higher than the time resolution that healthy human auditory system can perceive.
This topic was automatically closed 375 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.