Remasters

bluesfool · 11-15-2010, 05:24 PM

I hate it when a record company releases a 'remastered' version of an album with extra tracks. I want to listen to an album as it was attended to be. I don't want the 'extra tracks.' It's the record companies' ways to try to sell to the general public so that they can make a profit, where otherwise ordinary customers would't purchase the album because they already own the original copy.

sidewinder · 11-15-2010, 05:36 PM

I like bonus tracks, though I agree with you. If I download a remastered album, I always split it into 2: the original track list, and a bonus disc titled album name [bonus tracks]. Because yes, I want to hear it how it was originally intended. I find that listening to it with bonus tracks brings down the overall quality and makes it drag (which can bring down my overall impression of the "album" even if all the bonus tracks are solid).

My preference would be for bonus tracks to always be on a 2nd disc (not cost-effective for the labels especially if everything fits on one disc), and otherwise have them clearly labeled as bonus tracks in the track list. Back in the pre-internet days I can't count the number of CDs I purchased not knowing the CD release included bonus tracks. Ones that come to mind are Skinny Puppy's early albums (the first being an EP but sold as an album with twice as many tracks on CD). Now that I know, I split my digital files apart and enjoy them more...because they're shorter and more solid.

Paedantic Basterd · 11-15-2010, 06:38 PM

Just delete the bonus tracks if you rip or download it. Problem solved.

bluesfool · 11-17-2010, 05:33 PM

I, too, delete the 'extra tracks'. However, when I purchase a CD, I look for the original version, often times used.

Dr_Rez · 11-17-2010, 05:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bluesfool

I hate it when a record company releases a 'remastered' version of an album with extra tracks. I want to listen to an album as it was attended to be. I don't want the 'extra tracks.' It's the record companies' ways to try to sell to the general public so that they can make a profit, where otherwise ordinary customers would't purchase the album because they already own the original copy.

Dont forget the band makes money off these as well. And when its all added together it can be the financial difference in making another record or not.

~~someonecompletelyrandom~~ · 11-17-2010, 11:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bluesfool

I hate it when a record company releases a 'remastered' version of an album with extra tracks. I want to listen to an album as it was attended to be. I don't want the 'extra tracks.' It's the record companies' ways to try to sell to the general public so that they can make a profit, where otherwise ordinary customers would't purchase the album because they already own the original copy.

Haha, this is a total peeve of mine too! It's really a problem when they add like 10 extra tracks for some kind of "Anniversary" edition and they screw up the original track listing. If my album is remastered, I just want it to sound like it sounded in 1975, only updated to the modern sonic palette.

The Abracadaver · 11-18-2010, 12:13 AM

Badlittlekitten · 11-19-2010, 10:42 AM

Yeah it's really annoying when the bonus tracks are tacked on the end of the original disc.

The thing I hate most about remasters is that the attempt to update the sound is almost always inferior to the original sound. 'Remaster' seems to mean pump up the bass elements of a record and bury the subtle parts into the mix.

sidewinder · 11-19-2010, 10:50 AM

I don't know, I have mixed feelings. Some remasters sound really great, some don't. There are some albums I wish would get remastered.

~~someonecompletelyrandom~~ · 11-19-2010, 12:23 PM

I've wanted them to remaster the Bad Brains first album for a while. Rock for Light is basically the same album but it's missing Pay to ***. :/

11-15-2010, 05:24 PM	#1 (permalink)
bluesfool Groupie Join Date: Nov 2010 Posts: 43	Remasters I hate it when a record company releases a 'remastered' version of an album with extra tracks. I want to listen to an album as it was attended to be. I don't want the 'extra tracks.' It's the record companies' ways to try to sell to the general public so that they can make a profit, where otherwise ordinary customers would't purchase the album because they already own the original copy.

11-15-2010, 05:36 PM	#2 (permalink)
sidewinder Engorged Member Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: Seattle, WA Posts: 5,536	I like bonus tracks, though I agree with you. If I download a remastered album, I always split it into 2: the original track list, and a bonus disc titled album name [bonus tracks]. Because yes, I want to hear it how it was originally intended. I find that listening to it with bonus tracks brings down the overall quality and makes it drag (which can bring down my overall impression of the "album" even if all the bonus tracks are solid). My preference would be for bonus tracks to always be on a 2nd disc (not cost-effective for the labels especially if everything fits on one disc), and otherwise have them clearly labeled as bonus tracks in the track list. Back in the pre-internet days I can't count the number of CDs I purchased not knowing the CD release included bonus tracks. Ones that come to mind are Skinny Puppy's early albums (the first being an EP but sold as an album with twice as many tracks on CD). Now that I know, I split my digital files apart and enjoy them more...because they're shorter and more solid. __________________ last.fm \| my collection on RYM \| vinyl instagram @allthatyouseeandhear I'd love to see your signature/links too, but the huge and obnoxious ones have caused me to block all signatures.

11-18-2010, 12:13 AM	#7 (permalink)
The Abracadaver Music Addict Join Date: Jan 2010 Location: Indiana Posts: 88	__________________ Just five dollars to see a face explode, To see a man strung up by his throat! Come one! Come all! If you look close enough you'll see death's machinery exposed!

11-19-2010, 10:42 AM	#8 (permalink)
Badlittlekitten And then there was music Join Date: Oct 2010 Location: Near Wild Heaven Posts: 287	Yeah it's really annoying when the bonus tracks are tacked on the end of the original disc. The thing I hate most about remasters is that the attempt to update the sound is almost always inferior to the original sound. 'Remaster' seems to mean pump up the bass elements of a record and bury the subtle parts into the mix. __________________ 'Said do you feel it? Do you feel it when you TOUCH ME?. THERE'S A FIRE! THERE'S A FIRE!' The Stooges. Dirt. https://soundcloud.com/bad-little-kittens My Top 100 LPs My Top 52 Indie Tracks Of The 21st Century (incomplete)

11-19-2010, 10:50 AM	#9 (permalink)
sidewinder Engorged Member Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: Seattle, WA Posts: 5,536	I don't know, I have mixed feelings. Some remasters sound really great, some don't. There are some albums I wish would get remastered. __________________ last.fm \| my collection on RYM \| vinyl instagram @allthatyouseeandhear I'd love to see your signature/links too, but the huge and obnoxious ones have caused me to block all signatures.

11-15-2010, 06:38 PM	#3 (permalink)
Paedantic Basterd Music Addict Join Date: Sep 2010 Posts: 5,184	Just delete the bonus tracks if you rip or download it. Problem solved.

11-17-2010, 05:33 PM	#4 (permalink)
bluesfool Groupie Join Date: Nov 2010 Posts: 43	I, too, delete the 'extra tracks'. However, when I purchase a CD, I look for the original version, often times used.

11-19-2010, 12:23 PM	#10 (permalink)
~~someonecompletelyrandom~~ Account Disabled Join Date: Nov 2008 Posts: 4,538	I've wanted them to remaster the Bad Brains first album for a while. Rock for Light is basically the same album but it's missing Pay to ***. :/