I've been buying some re-masters lately since I just upgraded my entire system (Yam RXV-1000, CDC 775, Klipsch RP-3's). Anyways, it seems to me that buying a re-mastered CD is pretty much a no-brainer, especially since they are similar in price to the original releases. Are there any exceptions to this? These are the remasters that I recently purchased: Dire Straits - Brothers in Arms Van Halen - Van Halen Bob Seger - Stranger in Town (Just released) The Dire Straits CD is the best sounding of the 3. Is there ever an instance when you would NOT want to get a remaster cd?
Shawn, Do you have the original Brothers in Arms because that was a damn fine CD already. If the re-master is better than the original I can't imagine how good it sounds. Patrick ------------------ My DVD Collection
"Is there ever an instance when you would NOT want to get a remaster cd?" yes...when they take the original and add all kind of sampled sounds or processed sounds that were NOT on the original. a perfect example is ZZ TOP, i think it's the "tres hombres" album that has "la grange" and "jesus just left chicago" on it. they took all that great bluesy type production and added "power drums" and "arena rock" sounding guitars that totally took away from the original production sounds. it's ok to remaster and clean up the production, but don't add processing and effects that WASN'T on the original master!!
I don't have the original "Brothers in Arms" CD, but a friend of mine did. We played mine and his in his new stereo setup. (Odyssey Amps, Rogue Audio Pre-Amp, Legacy Audio FOCUS speakers, AMC CD Player) Overall, the remaster sounds alot 'cripser' and brighter. It was also a little louder. That guiatar on "Money for Nothing" is just awesome.
