Hallo,
as a long time Nirvana fan i just bought the reissue box set for the 20th anniversary of Nevermind.I know i'll open a can of worms BUT i don't care.
The album has been remastered by Bob Ludwig.We all know who mr Ludwig is and how highly he's considered among mastering engineers.

BUT I guess if Mr Ludwig still knows how to do his job!?!
I tought he was following the Chinese democracy loudness trend!

damn the remastered cd is squashed to death till -5 rms level!!

A bunch of intersample peaks also!

The original release and MFSL sound much much better and more natural!!!

The reissue has been killed by improper mastering and marketing foolness.

Let's say i've wasted my money.I feel so much anger for a reissue that totally sucks from a sonic point of view with all the dynamics killed by overcompression.

Don't buy this reissue! Stick with the original release and the mfsl version!

The big question: How did the Butch Vig mixes turn out? Since they were not given a mass release, were they treated as something that didn't need to "compete"? Damn that looks funny when I type it out. This is Nevermind. Not a single second of any version of it needs to compete with anything.

But anyway, was the Butch Vig mix spared, or did I just waste $120?

Well, this is certainly one remaster I won't be buying. Think I'll stick to the vinyl.... booooo.

yes Butch Vig mixes are included in the box-set i've bought as long a beautiful 1991 live recording.
Butch Vig mixes are more polished and with voices more upfront.
It's funny to hear different artistic choices between Wallace and Vig.
Vig mixes sound to me more like a "demo" version of the album.

But were the Vig mixes crushed in mastering?

damn..yeah..as the reissue cd...

That makes no sense. The entire point of including the Butch Vig mixes is to hear Butch Vig's take on the sound. So changing the sound makes the entire inclusion pointless. That's...evil. There isn't even a reason to crush it. It's not like the limited edition box set extras of a 20 year old album have to fight for attention in a noisy club or on the radio. Pointless.

This is why I almost never buy music anymore. It's a $120 gamble. If I pay $120 will I get what I was told I was getting, or will I get crap? I love this album to death so I rolled the dice. And lost $120.

I'll stick with first generation CD. And Vinyl.
Just don't believe Bob done this beautiful album that ugly, too loud way.

Bob talks a good game (anti-loudness war), but he churns out his fair share of smashed.

I'm not knocking anyone who gives the client what they want, but then don't go on endless panels whinging about the loudness wars while laughing all the way to the bank, that's just being a hypocrite. If he's so against it, then don't do it, i'm sure he doesn't need the money that bad.

Is it Bob Ludwig who has the idea of a remastered version? I don't think so.

Why a major would remaster an album if it's not to sale more and more?

Since a long time the remastered versions are a commercial argument, so it has to be... something.

The best way to give a plus to an album? For 99% of customers it's to push it louder and louder.

Remastered (crappy) versions are not for you guys, it's more for fashion (victims) teenagers than for you.

it's not a nonsense to do that, it's a marketing sense, not a musical sense because this fantastic album don't need to be remastered.

Don't buy it and stay with your vinyls, never mind for teenagers and others.

And in a general way, don't buy remastered albums if the originals sounds great, as simple as that.

I hate remasters. Officially, they bring the music 'up to date' with the current expectations. Unofficially, they rob any music of it's historical placement, and usually of anything that made it unique to listen to.
Bye.

Not always. The Beatles took great care with theirs, especially the mono versions.

I guess that's what I was expecting here. Maybe you push the wide release a tiny bit and then respect the limited edition expensive version. I guess not.

No, they don't care. They don't know the difference between 90s RATM and 2011 remastered Nirvana. They can't tell. Also, the sales have nothing to do with 8dB RMS or 12dB RMS albums.

Maybe Dave Grohl had smething to do with the Nirvana remasters. FF albums sound so squashed..

See this thread

distortion!

from last August. The search function really works - incredible...

There are many people who talk the talk but don't walk the walk.
The fear of being found out will cause even the rich and famous engineer
to maim audio.

Client : Why am I paying $500.00 an hour ? I don't really hear a difference between the original and the (re)mastered version.

Engineer: I better make this loud enough so the idiot A&R doesn't think he's wasting his money.

Greed and fear motivate.

Fab

Throwing dynamics in the garbage is *not* progress. It is entirely regressive. ----- Same for throwing away your shoelaces, not using toilet paper, insisting on having guitars with no strings and eating plain bread sandwiches (you know, those ones with a slice of bread in the middle). EDIT : OH YEAH, SCREAMING EVERYTHING AT THE SAME BLARING VOLUME WHEN YOU TALK TO PEOPLE ISNT PROGRESS EITHER, AND NEITHER IS TYPING IN CAPS.

Yeah, I'm sure that was / is the motivation for a massive percentage of the trash mastering out there, but.....
Surely for Nevermind and other landmark albums, a higher quality transfer & some tasteful eq / comp would have been worth the remaster alone? If an A&R guy/girl can't hear an improvement and can't appreciate why the sound quality should be preserved / enhanced, why the **** are they even working in the industry? Aren't they just failed musicians and suits anyway?

Probably should be its own thread but..
how about the new Pink floyd , Dark Side of the Moon Immersion box?

Anybody check that out yet? there's some alternate formats etc - but did it sucuumb to the you-know what wars?

I still have the original CD release, from when CDs were first sold. I don't think it has a peak within -20db of fullscale. You have to crank the volume so loud. probably just wasted bits, but it still sounds fine.

I haven't heard it yet< so I'm going out on a limb by saying that if I had to choose between the ears of a bunch of anonymous posters using who knows what for monitoring, and Bob Ludwig's.....well, nevermind.

I like Nirvana but wouldn't call myself a fan, but once a re master has turned your favourite bands music into toast, it is somewhat difficult to feel their music was well served. I suspect we have all been there.

I was convinced the man had lost his hearing capacity when this CD came out: Rush - The Spirit of Radio: Greatest Hits 1974-1987

IMHO...it sounds HORRIBLE!

He remastered it.

i have the immersion box and checked the rms levels of "GREAT GIG IN THE SKY". -8 db.Quite loud compared to the mfsl cd edition.
You can hear compression even if the waveform and its peaks don't hit 0 so often...The sound however is more refined to all the other version
i have.I'' have a listen to the 96 khz 24 bit version included in the blu ray.
That should be really the definitive stereo version.

But I thought they were using analyzers? I'll bet you a nickle it's just as loud as they say it is.

It is a shame about many recent remasters. The Beatles ones are an exception. The new Stones is much worse than the previous ones though, imo.


DC

Agree 100%
Thank God they didn't distroy the Beatles remasters, and those mono versions are great example of what a real mastering should be like !

I don't see how re-mastering that record will make it sound any better.

Collins, why do you feel the need to talk to me about analyzers? Really are you serious? As fascinating a subject it may be, my knowledge of mastering is only limited to what i absorb reading on forums like this. Take your presumed rivalry against one of my guys elsewhere or please keep it to yourself. You're probably one of the reasons he's avoiding this forum like the plague. Just a wild guess.

Consider me as someone completely independent of all that. I also thought your last snarky pm established that.

I thank you.

I'll pray for you.

My generous cash offer to bring Eddie back still stands. There were some moments that I still look back on and laugh. Good times.

Snarky? Moi?

And you can call me "Dave." Everyone does. Or "DC." Which I'm not in love with, but it's become my 'Nom de Net' I guess........

Hope this helps!

Mr. Collins

Exactly. Nevermind sounded fine to begin with. So yeah, they could crush it from here to there and back again and it wouldn't matter to most since we already own it.

But the extras... There is no existing version of the Vig mixes to fall back on. So their destruction really hurts.

Absolutely. I was just at a talk with Brian Kehew last night, and when you look at everything that went into those recordings, it was positively state-of-the-art stuff. Pushing the sonic envelope at every turn.

It only took 27 previous re-masters to finally nail it, although I have some original ones that sound pretty good. It got brighter, louder, weirder, and then the recent ones were done 'right.'

But the real story of the Beatles is the creativity, not the technology.....

DC

Eddie? You really don't know this guy do you? Not even I calls him that. Anyway, Edward is probably got better things to do than to accept your $50 offer. But I will let him know of your repeated attempts to "touch base" and I am sure he'll communicate with you. Maybe the two of you should hook up someday so he can explain to you why he never gets any problems mastering, the use of analyzers and all that jazz.

Nice chatting "Dave".