02-22-2011, 09:51 AM | #1 |
Ron Paul 4 EVA
Posts: 152,467
|
Queen Remasters
Reuters reported last year that Queen has signed to Universal and would re-release their catalogue in 2011. The first five records are set to drop in March with bonus materials. Hopefully, they're not delayed.
“There are two novels that can change a bookish fourteen-year old’s life: The Lord of the Rings and Atlas Shrugged. One is a childish fantasy that often engenders a lifelong obsession with its unbelievable heroes, leading to an emotionally stunted, socially crippled adulthood, unable to deal with the real world. The other, of course, involves orcs.” --John Rogers |
02-22-2011, 10:17 AM | #2 |
Jamiroquai Bodega
Posts: 18,627
|
Fuck yes
|
02-22-2011, 02:30 PM | #3 |
The Satanic Mechanic
Posts: 52,521
|
Sweet.
|
02-23-2011, 10:23 PM | #4 |
The Iconoclast
Posts: 2,897
|
Hell yeah, Queen is the one of the greatest bands ever. Can't wait for this.
|
02-23-2011, 10:30 PM | #5 |
You're a Fucken Samsquach
Posts: 21,739
|
Isn't that kinda hard to do when the lead singer has been dead for (months away from...)20 years?
Reuters should be saying that Brian May needs some cash. Queens isn't Queen without Freddie...It's just not possible. This is nothing but a money grab. |
02-23-2011, 10:34 PM | #6 |
You're a Fucken Samsquach
Posts: 21,739
|
Holy shit.
It's almost been 20 years... I actually remember when Freddie died. It wasn't just some musician dying...it put a magnifying glass on Aids...and crushed pretty much every belief about the disease for its time. |
02-23-2011, 10:35 PM | #7 |
Hey
Posts: 15,662
|
What? It's not new Queen it's their catalogue remastered, bonus stuff is probably previously unheard/unreleased tracks, outtakes, alternates
|
02-23-2011, 10:55 PM | #8 | |
You're a Fucken Samsquach
Posts: 21,739
|
Quote:
Think 2pac or the Beatles. Same shit...these "remastered" albums are the ideas of suits making 6 figures a year....or more. |
|
02-23-2011, 10:56 PM | #9 |
You're a Fucken Samsquach
Posts: 21,739
|
or Star Wars....cept Lucas aint dead
|
02-23-2011, 11:12 PM | #10 |
Hey
Posts: 15,662
|
Remasters are great if done well. Sabbath had some excellent remastering done on their albums and you can hear the difference.
|
02-23-2011, 11:16 PM | #11 |
You're a Fucken Samsquach
Posts: 21,739
|
At least with Sabbath, Osborne and Iommi were around to approve of it....or disapprove while collecting decent cheques.
|
02-23-2011, 11:17 PM | #12 |
You're a Fucken Samsquach
Posts: 21,739
|
Another thing....I'd rather listen to 2pac on cassette and The Beatles on vinyl then any of the re-released shit.
|
02-23-2011, 11:21 PM | #13 |
Hey
Posts: 15,662
|
Vinyl I hear you (with the right speaker system Vinyl is still the best authentic reproduction of sound, fuck cassettes though terrible format)
And I mean it is what's left of Queen working with Universal. Not like a Beatles situation where none of them own the rights, |
02-23-2011, 11:41 PM | #14 |
You're a Fucken Samsquach
Posts: 21,739
|
Sound quality...thats a different debate in itself.
I remember taking a coat hanger, soldering 2 1.5mm male ended jack to each end, and hooking that up to 3 different speaker systems(basic, mid, and hi range..I dont remember the actual speakers...) Then comparing it to gold plated high end "audiophile" cables. For the basic and mid ranged speakers....couldn't tell the difference. There was a definite difference in the high end speaker system, but compare the costs, it wasnt worth dropping close to $100 bucks on the high end cables. Re-mastered or not...music is only going to sound as good as the hardware is capable of...and for most of us, we don't have top of the line stuff where we're actually going to notice the difference.. |
02-23-2011, 11:52 PM | #15 | |
Ron Paul 4 EVA
Posts: 152,467
|
Quote:
Then again, I forgot that Freddie Mercury did the mastering on the original albums, so what do I know? |
|
02-23-2011, 11:55 PM | #16 | |
Hey
Posts: 15,662
|
Quote:
|
|
02-23-2011, 11:59 PM | #17 | |
Ron Paul 4 EVA
Posts: 152,467
|
Quote:
That's highly conditional, and you should know better than to make that kind of erroneous claim. For example, if you cannot hear the difference in masters on Who albums, you're completely deaf and have no business complaining that you can't tell the difference on audio recordings. It's not just the end equipment. |
|
02-24-2011, 12:01 AM | #18 | |
You're a Fucken Samsquach
Posts: 21,739
|
Quote:
I said music is only going to sound as good as its hardware... you said you have epic headphones.... so I challenge you...next time you're at the dollar store, buy a set of headphone, listen to re-mastered music compared to original and let me know how obvious the difference is. |
|
02-24-2011, 12:03 AM | #19 | |
You're a Fucken Samsquach
Posts: 21,739
|
Quote:
|
|
02-24-2011, 12:10 AM | #20 | |
Hey
Posts: 15,662
|
Quote:
My Sabbath sound test was with normal headphones and normal speakers. I was just saying I have epic headphones which enhances it even more. |
|
02-24-2011, 12:20 AM | #21 |
You're a Fucken Samsquach
Posts: 21,739
|
I'll take your word on it Lara, based on the fact that 10 years ago you were mixing wrestling themes and music(Few Sabbath songs too...) and doing a pretty damn good job of it...
But for the sake of an argument...that makes you an audiophile. Your expectations are higher, and you're paying more attention. For the average consumer, the hardware is a lot more important than the software. It's like watching Avatar on a TV from 1972 |
02-24-2011, 02:02 AM | #22 |
the low Art Gloominati
Posts: 5,466
|
I have some nice 75 dollar mixing/DJ headphones. Love them.
|
02-24-2011, 05:13 PM | #23 | |
Ron Paul 4 EVA
Posts: 152,467
|
Quote:
Oh, wait. A huge part of it is that mastering was done a lot differently in the 60s, 70s and 80s. There's even a huge difference between mastering for vinyl and mastering for audio CDs. We're not talking computer editing, at least not in the sense of editing something to be what it once wasn't. Computer aided mastering can provide a significantly cleaner sound with superior fidelity that shows through. It also allows a fuller sound and potentially better volume without the need for any computer tricks (Protools can be used to up the sound of the source tape beyond what could normally done, but this is a legit mechanical use. It's not like pitch correction being used to actually alter a voice). In short, you could use software to change a truck into a tea cup, but that's not relevant here. As, it seems, are most of your complaints. Queen's going to benefit from the remaster job, especially since the Hollywood remasters sound compressed. |
|
03-17-2011, 11:06 AM | #24 |
Ron Paul 4 EVA
Posts: 152,467
|
Comparing lossless files of the new records (Well, Queen and Queen 2) to my CDs of the Hollywood releases, you can hear a pretty big difference.
Even on my 20 dollar speakers. I haven't had the opportunity to listen on something better yet, but my PC speakers tend to make things sound somewhat compressed even when they're not. Speaking of remasters, I'm listening to Help! and the 2009 remaster has so much more depth to the mix it's not funny. The bass is even nice and warm, something I doubt dedicated audiophiles would actually concede, but it is. Amazing. A-maaaaaaaaa-zing....[/Mickey Cantor] |