I personally just don’t like how he does things. I frequently hear distortion in loud parts, muddy bass, and really hard panning that sounds uncomfortable in headphones. Doesn’t matter if it’s CD or vinyl or streaming.
I know people will immediately come for me for my setup, but please, I know this isn’t the case because nothing else I listen to has these kinds of issues. I am a professional musician and I have worked in recording studios. I have sensitive hearing and perfect pitch that runs in my family. I have a nice setup that I love and enjoy thoroughly with other recordings. I have actually invested quite a bit of time and money into trying to figure out if it is my setup or not, and I know it’s not. The flaws are more noticeable in headphones (I’ve tried about a half dozen different ones to confirm), and I wonder if he doesn’t check to make sure his masters work well on headphones before signing off on them.
I know that he is often revered and I almost never hear anything bad about him. And I’ll admit that not everything he does is bad. But in general I actually get kind of frustrated listening to his remasters and the way they sound. And I’m curious if anyone else has heard what I’ve heard.
I rarely fault any sound engineer on how crappy remasters sound.
With remasters, the sound engineer is being paid to make the music sound closer to what the average consumer might buy on impulse.
It’s like asking an artist that can paint like the old masters to recreate Three Young Musicians by Antoine Le Nain by using crayons because the target audience are 5 and 6 year olds.
Sure, but when you see the mastering engineer’s name on a hype sticker, you have certain expectations that it will be somehow better than an anonymous engineer. When the guy is listed as a feature of the recording, I think it’s fair to assume that you’re buying a more audiophile-oriented master. Perhaps this isn’t always the case.
That said, I tend to think a lot of remasters are pointless exercises in loudness or simply a marketing gimmick to get people to buy the recording again. I especially don’t understand remastering recordings after the advent of the loudness war, unless you’re going to provide more dynamics.
Do you tend to like original masters better?
I like the original masters if the original master is well done.
Don’t get me wrong, this engineer is one talented guy, but literally thousands of albums were cut since the dawn of using Vinyl as a medium to stamp records.
Not all engineers are as talented as this one.
It’s a curious question you ask. But for some artists, I do prefer the originals, for the rest, I’m far less picky if it’s an original or not as long as it’s enjoyable to listen to.
Have you thought about getting monitor headphones? It would give you clarity on what a sound engineer hears when they were remastering the song.
I was a professional musician before switching to academia. Lots of experience in the studio and very familiar with the production and mastering processes. It certainly does make a difference - you’re right.
My question about original masters was partly about sounds quality, but it’s also about the perception of “authenticity.” I’ve seen a lot of vinyl collectors spend bundles for original pressings based on the idea that they’re getting a more authentic experience (relative to the time of the recording), but this says very little about objective quality (to the extent that it’s quantifiable). Seems like there are cases where it crosses the threshold into fetishism.
Not making any judgments about you, personally. Just making some conversation.
Truthfully, there’s just some rock bands and artists I’d care about getting original albums, unless it was classical or Jazz. There’s not a big market for remastered classic or jazz unless more channels were added for surround sound
Otherwise, most of what I collect are modern artists and bands that would be classified as indi music in the USA.
But right now I’ve been exploring European indi music.