Skip to main content
Topic: Iron Maiden Remasters (Read 16684 times) previous topic - next topic
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Iron Maiden Remasters

(slightly off-topic)

@rohangc - I am an Iron Maiden fan too. In the late 90s they withdrew all their original albums and released new remastered enhanced cds. The remastered versions are terrible, heavyly compressed, way too loud, dead fidelity, etc.

There might be exceptions. I have only compared the following remastered with the original versions:

Number of the Beast.
Powerslave
Piece of Mind
Somewhere in Time
Seventh Son of a Seventh Son
Ed Hunter Box Set (compared some of the tracks with the albums they were taken from)

So if you are a real fan, you should discard the remasters and go hunt for the original versions.

Iron Maiden Remasters

Reply #1
Quote
(slightly off-topic)

@rohangc - I am an Iron Maiden fan too. In the late 90s they withdrew all their original albums and released new remastered enhanced cds. The remastered versions are terrible, heavyly compressed, way too loud, dead fidelity, etc.

Are you sure the albums have been compressed? I know thw volume has been increased, but that could be the result of normalising, and limiting.
Sure there's a bit clipping, but there's neceserely not been done any compressing.

I have some of those rereleased albums, unfortunately I can't compare to the old releases, to hear if there has been altering of the original music, other than increasing the volume.

Iron Maiden Remasters

Reply #2
Limiting and added clipping is essentially compression
"You can fight without ever winning, but never win without a fight."  Neil Peart  'Resist'

Iron Maiden Remasters

Reply #3
Quote
Limiting and added clipping is essentially compression

Well, yeah, but I don't think these albums is limited that much.

I have other albums also, where the volume has been raised, so there occurs even alot of clipping, t.e. GTA vice-city albums. If I take these albums and lower them to 89dB with wavegain, and then do the same with the releases from the 80s, I can't hear a difference. Besides 'some' distortion from the clipping, but I guess they are over such a short period so I can't hear it.
This tells me they haven't compressed the music, just raised the volume linear. If the music was compressed I would hear a differece, right? That the volume is at a very constant level, at all frequencies.

Iron Maiden Remasters

Reply #4
Quote
(slightly off-topic)

@rohangc - I am an Iron Maiden fan too. In the late 90s they withdrew all their original albums and released new remastered enhanced cds. The remastered versions are terrible, heavyly compressed, way too loud, dead fidelity, etc.

Well, I am quite aware of this problem. The first few albums were remastered and released again. Albums starting with "The X-Factor" are not remastered. Unfortunately, I have only the remasters (except "Iron Maiden") and I too am quite unhappy with the compression. They might also be copy protected although it doesn't say so on the covers. The problem is, I did not know that the old versions were available (are they?). If I knew, I wouldn't have bought these in the first place. Although it is too late now and I cannot afford to replace my entire Iron Maiden collection all over again.
Iron Maiden remasters are tolerable, but the Judas Priest remasters by Jon Astley are terrible !! I had to go through a lot of pain and spend an exorbitant amount of money to buy the old version Judas Priest CDs. I am proud to tell you that except "Sin After Sin", all my Judas Priest CDs are non-remastered.
I guess we cannot do much about this but complain to the record labels-but they always turn a deaf ear to both musicians and customers. When will they ever change?

Iron Maiden Remasters

Reply #5
AFAIK-  There are 3 versions of Iron Maiden albums

1) The Origianl Releases
2) The Castle Records Re-Releases
3) The Sony Remasters

I only have a representative from the first two: Number of the beast original release and Fear Of The Dark from Castle (I have heard others from the castle releases, a friend of mine has them all). 

I must say that I kinda like the sound of the Castle releases, I think they were remastered, they are at least a little "hotter".  Plus they had a bunch of cool bonus tracks.  From what I've heard, I definitely recommend these releases if they can be found.
"You can fight without ever winning, but never win without a fight."  Neil Peart  'Resist'

Iron Maiden Remasters

Reply #6
I Europe there are:

EMI original releases
EMI remasters

I've got representatives from both and the remasters suck.

I've also got a Sony remaster from USA - sucks too.

Iron Maiden Remasters

Reply #7
Hey:
It seems I've joined quite late to the discussion, anyway, I'll write my comments.
I have No Prayer For The Dying remastered, and I have to say it sounds great, and it was an excellent buying. It comes with 2 video clips, and additional stuff.
I've seen other remastered albums, and they are also great and come with even 4 clips.
I'm not sure but I think my copy was remastered by EMI or released by EMI.
In conclusion, I think they were great remastered and added a lot of extra great stuff.

Thanks

Iron Maiden Remasters

Reply #8
Hey:
It seems I've joined quite late to the discussion, anyway, I'll write my comments.
I have No Prayer For The Dying remastered, and I have to say it sounds great, and it was an excellent buying. It comes with 2 video clips, and additional stuff.
I've seen other remastered albums, and they are also great and come with even 4 clips.
I'm not sure but I think my copy was remastered by EMI or released by EMI.
In conclusion, I think they were great remastered and added a lot of extra great stuff.

Thanks


They are hotter for sure some have a -3db  cut off and some clip. it's hard to tell if these remasters are less dynamic without an original track to compair with. Still if you zoom out it can be mistaken for a brick all of noise I guess. The evidence I've seen says the originals are best.

Iron Maiden Remasters

Reply #9
They are hotter for sure some have a -3db  cut off and some clip. it's hard to tell if these remasters are less dynamic without an original track to compair with. Still if you zoom out it can be mistaken for a brick all of noise I guess. The evidence I've seen says the originals are best.


The problem is that the originals are so hard to come by these days. With great difficulty, I found myself a brand new copy of the Castle release of "Seventh Son Of a Seventh Son". I like this better than the remaster...Probably a placebo effect.

Iron Maiden Remasters

Reply #10
Quote
(slightly off-topic)
I have only the remasters (except "Iron Maiden") and I too am quite unhappy with the compression.


Yeah maybe you're right I prefer the original respect the digittaly remaster, but now are a little difficult to find. However compression or not compression Iron Maiden rock!
The Reasoner at Takusama.com

Emitremmus - the Wise

Iron Maiden Remasters

Reply #11
Yeah maybe you're right I prefer the original respect the digittaly remaster, but now are a little difficult to find. However compression or not compression Iron Maiden rock!


Off topic:

Yeah! I second that. Up the Irons! Saw them recently in their first ever Indian concert. Had an amzing time!

Iron Maiden Remasters

Reply #12
AFAIK-  There are 3 versions of Iron Maiden albums

1) The Origianl Releases
2) The Castle Records Re-Releases
3) The Sony Remasters

I only have a representative from the first two: Number of the beast original release and Fear Of The Dark from Castle (I have heard others from the castle releases, a friend of mine has them all). 

I must say that I kinda like the sound of the Castle releases, I think they were remastered, they are at least a little "hotter".  Plus they had a bunch of cool bonus tracks.  From what I've heard, I definitely recommend these releases if they can be found.



I Europe there are:

EMI original releases
EMI remasters

I've got representatives from both and the remasters suck.

I've also got a Sony remaster from USA - sucks too.


I have almost their entire studio discography on the EMI Canada remasters. I also have the EMI original masters of Powerslave, Somewhere In Time, and Seventh Son of a Seventh Son. On mp3, they sound exactly the same to me except the remasters are a bit louder. I haven't had my friend rip his vinyl copies into FLAC files to compare with the remastered FLAC files yet so for now, I can't say they are the best remasters, but I also can't say they are the worst.

Iron Maiden Remasters

Reply #13
Hello d_headshot.

I have only one album from the original EMI masters - "Iron Maiden", and I have only one castle release - "Seventh Son Of A Seventh Son". The remaining albums are all the remastered ones. I don't have the remastered versions of these two to compare with, so I can't tell you whether they sound the same (except for the volume, that is). I'll try and borrow the remastered versions from friends and will try to compare the two.

Oh, one more thing - please compare lossless copies of the CDs and tell us if you notice any difference, not the .mp3 ones.

I don't think they screwed up the Iron Maiden remasters very badly. However, if you want to look at a classic example of how a remastered version sounds infinitely worse than than the original release, try Judas Priest's "Defenders of The Faith". The remastered version would want to make you smash that CD to bits!

Iron Maiden Remasters

Reply #14
I had listened non-stop to Iron Maiden on old tapes in the 80s. I finally got around to buying CDs about a decade ago, and I guess I got the 1998 era remasters (in Canada).

The only thing that really stands out to me is they in my opinion they really messed up the mix in Phantom Of The Opera. There are bits and pieces that were prominent in the original mix missing or near missing in the new one, and it is not a change for the better. It actually drives me batty when I listen to it. No real idea about anything else, it is hard to compare old worn tapes I didn't listen to in a decade with the new CDs.

 
SimplePortal 1.0.0 RC1 © 2008-2019