The remasters... why bother?

**hellohawk** · 08.02.00, 02:00 PM

I just took the VHlinks poll an answered "No", but just about everyone else put "Yes" or "Maybe".

I'm just wondering why?

I like hearing the music in it's original state. To me, those recordings are the reason I got into VH in the first place. Besides, I'm not a fan of Dolby or other noise reduction systems.

**Brett** · 08.02.00, 02:05 PM

Recording has improved so much in the last 25 years, I don't see why the Van Halen records shouldn't be cleaned up. Unless I am wrong, analog tapes tend to lose their quality after a long period of time, so the master tapes are being switched to a digital format anway, so why not remaster them, and beef up the bass and clean it up. It's not like they are being remixed, all remastering is able to do is change the EQ's of the recording, not change the mix. Why not have a clearer sounding "Fair Warning," I don't understand why that would take away anything from what the album is?

------------------
Webmaster
VHLinks.com - Your Van Halen Internet Resource Guide
http://www.vhlinks.com

[This message has been edited by Brett (edited August 02, 2000 at 01:06 PM).]

**VanEdge** · 08.02.00, 02:08 PM

hawk, it's not about noise reduction..
it's about enhancing the resolution.

i don't want to get all techie on ya, but it's pretty much like watching the tv with dust on the screen and then removing the dust.

digital remastering can bring out a lot of the frequencies that were left out of the original pressing.

unfortunately, when cds first came out, record companies just pressed them and many were made from copies of the original tapes.

by going back to the original tapes, an engineer can bring out a great deal of what was MEANT to be heard by the audience in the first place. that's another reason why VH had their own engineer do the remastering.

i'm all for the reissues. i think the original recordings sound like crap compared to how VH sounds live.

[This message has been edited by VanEdge (edited August 02, 2000 at 01:09 PM).]

**Spanish Doctor** · 08.02.00, 02:08 PM

I think the album who needs the most remastering is OU812. Who knows, it just might be worth buying. ( I have it on MP3 on my hard drive)

------------------
Eat Us And Smile!!!

"I may not be the best lookin' baby,
But I'm the right tool for the job." - DLR 1998

**Glenn** · 08.02.00, 02:10 PM

I felt the same way when Bon Jovi, Motley Crue etc were remastering their albums. But Van Halen is my favorite band, and I am very excited about hearing these albums remastered. The two that I'm most looking forward to hearing are Diver Down and WACF. I just hope that the price of them is fairly reasonable.

**VanEdge** · 08.02.00, 02:10 PM

OU812 sounds like tin foil.
absolutely terrible.
there's no bass on anything besides When It's Love and Mine All Mine.

**hellohawk** · 08.02.00, 02:11 PM

I guess that's just it Brett, I prefer analog recording over digital.

To me, the production on "Diver Down" and "1984" is far better that "FUCK" or "3".

**Brett** · 08.02.00, 02:13 PM

Hawk, I am an analog person too, but Van Halen records ARE STILL recorded on analog equipment, just the vocals are done digitally (at least VH3 was). You're not going to be losing the warmth of analog, if anything, the clarity will be better.

"1984" is just a well produced album, really has nothing to do with anything else. "VH3" is a terribly poorly produced record, no matter what.

------------------
Webmaster
VHLinks.com - Your Van Halen Internet Resource Guide
http://www.vhlinks.com

[This message has been edited by Brett (edited August 02, 2000 at 01:15 PM).]

**hellohawk** · 08.02.00, 02:14 PM

OU812 was pretty thin, but I guess I would look forward to a "5150" remaster. I hated the final mix on that, VERY THIN.

Plus, my current copy is pretty dinged up.

**VanEdge** · 08.02.00, 02:16 PM

hawk, what you are talking about is the recording process, and your argument is valid.

digital signals distort completely differently than analog, and digital recording is only coming into its own in recent times.

however, that doesn't hold true when comparing media on the consumer level. the best bet by far is the cd. it's resolution blows away cassettes and LPs.

a properly mastered recording is best preserved digitally. with a high enough sample and bit rate, you can't beat digital media. you can do so much more with it, and it isn't subject to the wear and tear of analog counterparts.

**hellohawk** · 08.02.00, 02:16 PM

I hope you are right Brett, but I don't think it won't motivate me to buy it.

**Rumours** · 08.02.00, 02:17 PM

Are these out now? Can I run up my credit card on CDNOW now?

------------------
"If you need to lift something heavy, put on a Van Halen record." DLR

**Brett** · 08.02.00, 02:19 PM

I mean if VH went to digitally recording their albums like on ADAT or something, then I would have a major problem with that. But Eddie knows he can't get his tone or a great drum sound on digital, that will never change. Remastering what was already recorded on analog equipment is a definite plus though!

------------------
Webmaster
VHLinks.com - Your Van Halen Internet Resource Guide
http://www.vhlinks.com

**Brett** · 08.02.00, 02:20 PM

No they're not available yet (September 17th I think), but Amazon.com has "Remaster" next to all of the first 6 VH albums. Go to our VHL Store and check out the Album links, you'll see what I mean. They might be pre-selling them.

------------------
Webmaster
VHLinks.com - Your Van Halen Internet Resource Guide
http://www.vhlinks.com