Forums dot lukpac.org

Spent the afternoon comparing the redbook layer of the new batch of Can reissues (I don't have an SACD player and don't care to get one, so don't ask me about the SACD layer) to the older CD editions. ( ... when I should've been working instead.)

A bit of background first. I always thought that the original CDs sounded just fine. I grew up with these titles on German UA vinyl, and found these CDs to be faithful flat transfers. In fact, I know that they are. I talked to Holger Czukay about this in 1997. He said that he simply ran the 2 track masters through a D/A converter, made sure they matched correctly, and that was that. He also said he didn't see how the CDs could sound any better, as they were sonically a clone of the masters.

So it was with some surprise when I heard him discussing new remasters. So now the first 4 albums are here, so what's the verdict?

The remasters are LOUDER. Not maximized or compressed, but noticeably boosted in volume. To compare, I first ripped AIFF files of all tracks from both versions of these 4 albums. Then I placed the files in Peak, brought down the gain on the remasters to match the older CDs. I noticed that, on average, the remasters are about 6 dB louder than their elder counterparts. Now that the volume level matched, the listening tests ...

Jesus, I can safely say that these remasters SUCK. NR - thankfully absent from the first edition discs - is excessively used all over these remasters. Obvious watery artifacts are audible throughout the 4 albums. Mind, these records - Monster Movie, Soundtracks, Tago Mago, and Ege Bamyasi - were all simply (some might say "primitively") recorded, usually direct to two-track. Given Holger's many edits (that's how all of the songs were shaped - via Holger's razorblade), yeah, the tapes are occasionally noisy. Unfortunately, the remasters attempt to "fix" this, with the inevitable and predictable result.

Ick. The sound has been "punched up" - someone trying to make these sound more like a modern recording. The wonderfully warm and unique atmosphere of Ege Bamyasi - present in the vinyl and the first CD - is utterly destroyed. It now sounds thin and harsh, particularly Damo's vocals. My favorite Can album now a sonic disaster. Very sad.

I'd say the other three remasters are also poor, but less dramatically so. For comparison, listen to the timber of the vocals throughout all of the records. The remasters are just awful, terrible. Take a listen to "She Brings the Rain" on Soundtracks, particularly the opening bass figure. The old version breathes, has resonance. The remastered version is pinched and stilted. Then the pinched vocal comes in. Ugh!

I could go on and on citing various gruesome examples, but to cut to the chase:

Don't bother with these remasters. They bite and then some. The old Spoon discs are the ones to have, hands down. I have zero interest in the next batch of Can remasters, that's for certain.

Who did the work on these? And while I know you can't answer this, I'd be curious if the SACD layer is NR free.

nt

Ah shit, that sucks. At least I have all their albums already. I feel bad for the people who don't have their work yet, they're going to miss out on the vibe unless they buy used.

I'd already ordered the Tago Mago one a few weeks ago. Oh well. If you cite a particular egregious artifact tof remastering on Tago Mago (louder is OK; watery NR is not) , I'll checkt the SACD layer and see if it's there too.

How many time shave htese been remastered, anyway? I bought one on the Spoon label some years back; IIRC it too was a remaster.

Hi everyone, first post in here.

Do you guys know if the old CDs are still available via Amazon Canada? It's my preferred way of ordering, since I'm in Argentina myself and that stuff just doesn't get here.

I pulled a quick search (on Amazon) and got two or three results for both Tago Mago and Ege Bamyasi, but couldn't really tell which of them would've been the 'good' ones (the newest ones, though, must've been the SACDs for sure).

nt

As luck would have it, there's a review of the remasters in today's Washignton Post. And not surprisingly , the journalist writes 'Few will complain about the sound quality of the first four Can records, re-released as the first slate of the latest Can catalog rollout"

Is it me or do mainstream journalists *always* seem to uncritically praise the sound of anything 'remastered'?
It's almost as predictable as SHTv folks dissing a remaster (unless SH did it).

nt

Something I'd like to establish: is there only one mastering of these titles before 2004?

I ask because I know the titles have been mini-reissued a few times. And, apparently, there's at least one batch of Retro/Enigma releases before they jumped to Spoon.

COLA, could you post a few WAV snippets of the new issues?

"Remastered from the original master tapes and were overseen and attended by Holger, Irmin and Jono Podmore."

I think it's safe to say that this Jono Podmore is the one responsible, and Holger and Irmin simply gave their stamp of approval. (Contrast that with the original CDs, which were done solely by Holger.)

BTW, although the earlier CDs have been released by numerous labels over the years, according to Holger, they are all the same mastering. So these new ones mark the first time they've been redone.

Is it me or do mainstream journalists *always* seem to uncritically praise the sound of anything 'remastered'? It's almost as predictable as SHTv folks dissing a remaster (unless SH did it).

1. Journalists are prone to regurgitate the press release that was included along with their freebies; most are hardly capable of doing much else.

2. As you know, uncritical/ignorant listeners will invaribaly choose the louder sound sample as the "best sounding one" -- which is precisely why so many are praising these new remasters as such an "improvement". (These remasters are indeed louder, though not detrimentally so, but of course it is necessary to have comparable volume levels in order to make a proper comparison.)

I've read online many people praising the new "clarity" of these remasters: "The murk has been stripped away from Ege Bamyasi!" Never mind that said "murk" is what always characterized the unique sonic atmosphere of that album (vinyl and first CD). I suppose those who don't know better/don't care may prefer the new version, as it sounds more "modern". I say it's much worse, but, oh well....

COLA, could you post a few WAV snippets of the new issues?

I can do that, yes, but please give me a few days to set that up on my iDisk. Watch this space. I'll let you know when they're up.

I just found a guy with a few MP3s on Soulseek.

I see what you mean, COLA. I can't tell whether this is the encode or the actual sound of the material, but everything has an oddly "metallic" sheen. Hiss seems to pump with Damo's voice. "One More Night" is particularly egregious, as Jaki's hi-hat work is suddenly very loud, very trebly, and very up-front.

Bah. Why in 2004? What the hell happened?

My "dream remasters" from Can would be issues that utilized the entire dynamic range available on CD (which the earlier ones resolutely did not), but otherwise sounded largely the same. One exception: if Holger has the "original" tapes lying around, I'd love for him to reassembly the albums digitally. It'd probably send sound quality flying up a few notches, eh?

I would hesitate to judge by an mp3, Xen, unless I knew the way it was encoded -- especially if you're hearing 'metallic' artifacts.

To utilize the entire dynamic range of CD without actually changing anything else, simply normalize the tracks of the old CDs to full scale. (With the caveat that with tapes this noisy, you can't ever really exploit the DR of digital to its full extent.)

krabapple wrote:To utilize the entire dynamic range of CD without actually changing anything else, simply normalize the tracks of the old CDs to full scale.

Does that actually uncompress/add dynamic range? I thought that just raised the volume of everything by an equal amount.