acdc back in black reissue (1 Viewer)

[Carlo_M]

George Marino - that name sounds very familiar, and I mean in a good way. Isn't he one of the better people at remastering discs? Since I was about to pick this album up on regular CD a while back (gasp! this will be my first time to own it!) I will definitely pick up the new version.

 

[Brian E]

Here is the thread Keith mentioned from Steve Hoffman's forum.
http://www.stevehoffman.tv/forums/sh...threadid=11706

 

[Jantzen]

Thanks for the link to Hoffman's site... After reading that and some other threads there it got me to do some more comparisons. I decided to take probably the most popular album, Back in Black, and compare the title track and You Shook Me All Night Long on all 3 versions of the CD's that I have - the original Atlantic release, the ATCO remaster and the EPIC remaster...

I compared this on a very non-hi-fi system, but this is AC/DC not Tchaikovsky (sorry, bad AC/DC joke - see Let There Be Rock for reference). I listened using a Pioneer Elite 45A fed out the 5.1 connections to an Outlaw ICBM to the 5.1 inputs of a Sony STR-DA333ES receiver. This goes to a pair of Energy E:XL 16 bookshelf speakers and an SVS 20-39PC (with upgraded driver). I use a mixture of Monster, Acoustic Research and Better Cables in this setup.

Anyway, first thing is that everything I said previously about the new EPIC remasters in regard to the previous ATCO remasters holds true. The newer remasters are "better" to my ears than the previous remasters. Now with that said I still hadn't compared these to the original Atlantic CD releases. Actually since I got the ATCO remasters 4 or 5 years ago the original CD releases have been collecting dust. Mainly because I assumed (yeah I know) that remasters are always better and also I was listening mainly in factory car systems and boom boxes when I first replaced the originals with the ATCO remasters.

Thanks to the link to Steve Hoffman's site it made me dig out the original CD for comparison on my main stereo system. Well I thought for sure that either remastered version would blow the original release away... but here's what I found...

The original release has a very balanced sound to it - i.e., no exaggerated highs (cymbals) or lows (bass). It is a very, I would say, well-proportioned mix. Now it didn't sound as "clean" as the newer remasters but the overall sound quality was much warmer and comfortable to listen too. The ATCO remasters had way to much high end - it is really fatiguing to listen to for long periods... The latest EPIC remasters aren't as bad - still boosted in the high and low end but not as fatiguing as the ATCO remasters... The newest EPIC remaster seem to be a compromise of the original CD and the ATCO remaster. Slightly boosted highs and lows but still listen-able for long periods...

Now which one would I take out of the three, you know, if I was on a desert island? Well I guess it depends on what equipment I had to listen to it on... If I have a "boom box" then I'd take the newest remaster from EPIC. If I had at least a mid-fi system to listen it on, I'd take the original Atlantic CD...

You mileage may vary and no, I don't use Cool Edit or any analyzers like some on the Steve Hoffman site (no offense). I just use my ears and my tastes to figure out what I like. I realize others have different tastes and equipment so take this info for what you want. Hope this helps someone out there.

Finally, don't count out the new packaging and ConnecteD content... I really like the included booklets and was smiling from ear to ear watching an almost 10 minute live version of Baby Please Don't Go circa 1976 using the ConnecteD feature of Dirty Deeds (DDC)... Great stuff to have if you are an AC/DC nut (like me)...

Oi!

 

[Jantzen]

Ok, after reading more over at Steve Hoffman's forum I attempted to do waveforms of Back in Black (the song) from all 3 CD releases... ( Damn you audiophiles ) I don't know if I did this right but it looked like other screenshots I saw over there... Sorry to the dial-up users.

[c]Back in Black (title track)[/c]

Original Atlantic CD Release:




ATCO Remaster:




EPIC Remaster:

 

[Jagan Seshadri]

They just made it louder. Hell, I can "remaster" all the albums I have right now. Just run them through Cool Edit Pro's "Hard limiter" at a gain setting of 6dB (to get the EPIC) or higher (to get the ATCO).

Why can't remasters be done like the Led Zeppelin box sets? Those were done fantastically well.

-JNS

 

[Greg_Y]

.

 

[Jantzen]

[c]Highway to Hell (title track)[/c]


Original Atlantic Release:




ATCO Remaster:




EPIC Remaster:

 

[Jantzen]

[c]Live - Whole Lotta Rosie[/c]

Original Release:




EPIC Remaster:

 

[KrisM]

Does anybody know if all of the previous re-masters were just mixed louder than the the original cds? My entire AC/DC collection consists of the original releases, except for Back In Black and the American High Voltage.
I haven't compared them since I picked-up Back In Black years ago, and at the time I found a small difference. I have a better system now but I can't compare as I gave away my original Back In Black years ago.
It sounds like I may have been wise to save my original discs and not spend the bucks on the re-masters.

Regards
KrisM


Otto : Can you spell AC/DC?
Lisa Simpson : A-C-D-C
Otto : Wrong! You forgot the lightning bolt.

 

[Dan Stone]

Jantzen,

Thanks for all your work in posting these. They are very helpful, and I'm now very glad that I've kept all my original release copies. Perhaps some future high resolution releases may get the sound quality/lack of compression right, but looking at the waveforms doesn't make it look too promising going forward.

 

[Rich Malloy]

Ok, I suspected this. George Marino + Hard Rock = Crappy Compressed and Maximized Sound Fit Only for Boomboxes and Cheap-Ass, Bass-Heavy Car Stereos

It sucks, but there you go. Hard rock gets no respect in the mastering process. Unfortunately, every now and again, there's a hard rock release I'm interested in buying. And it seems that everytime it ends up like this.

Sheesh. At least it's reported as being better balanced, that is, not as ear-bleedingly bright as the previous remaster. Still... not good enough for my hard-earned money.

But I have one final hope - if this is to be released on SACD, could it be saved? That is, can we hope for a flat ("flatter") mastering in DSD? And maybe someone besides George Marino working the pots?

 

[Rich Malloy]

BTW, I just came across a link in another discussion that shows the "history" of this practice with some good examples. Worth checking out: http://rvcc2.raritanval.edu/ktek9053/cdpage/

BTW, I understand that there's a CoolEdit tool that allows you to do "clip restoration" after you've ripped one of these highly compressed/maximized discs. Some have reported acceptable results from doing so.

 

[KeithH]

Jantzen, thanks so much for posting those waveforms. Very informative. I am in no rush to buy the new remasters. Now I have a good excuse beyond my issues with digipaks.

Your thoughts on your original Atlantic CD of Back in Black are interesting. I find my first US CD pressing to sound relatively smooth, but I have nothing else to compare it to.

 

[Dan Stone]

But I have one final hope - if this is to be released on SACD, could it be saved?

Sure, it *could* be. Just like the CD's *could* have been.

*Will* they get it right is a different matter and, sadly, my guess is that they will not based on seeing the trend over the past several years towards all these ultra compressed/maximized remastering jobs, regardless of format.

 

[Rich Malloy]

Dan, I asked because some have suggested that the recently released "MY GENERATION" SACD, while no great shakes, resolves many of the issues that plagued the concurrent CD-only remaster.

There's a thread on the subject here: http://www.stevehoffman.tv/forums/sh...light=who+SACD

With some conjecture along the lines of the following:

I think the main difference is that they did not overcook the DSD with digital tools like they did the PCM. It was probably a straight (eq'd) transfer of the Talmy mixes from the analog tapes without getting brutalized in pro tools via digital limiting and whatever tortures they had at their disposal. If there was any compression in the mastering stage, it was probably analog. That's what it sounds like, anyway.

EDIT: as regards this theory -- and I believe Lee Scoggins might be able to shed some light here -- I'm given to understand that much of this "digital brutalization" is not yet possible in the DSD realm.

 

[Carlo_M]

Ok, so for someone who is looking to buy Back In Black for the first time, should I seek out some older version? Or will the new (albeit compressed) version be sufficient? I realize it's not as good as it could have been, but does it sound bad? Would you all recommend I try to hunt down an older version of the album on CD?

TIA

 

[Rich Malloy]

Carlo, it seems that the first CD issue is the preferred version, but this latest remaster is slightly better than the previous remaster. I know, confusing...

 

[John Torrez]

Ahh, screw it. I'm sticking with all the previous remasters. I'm sick and tired of all this re-release bullcrap.