Tidal, Issue with „modern“ remastering

[KT88]

I have a growing problem with Tidal.(maybe it's not better with other streaming services which I don't know). The sound quality is technically good. My annoyance is a very specific one. For example, I'm looking for a song by the Rolling Stones. Let's say I'm looking for "Wild Horses." The fact that there are a lot of different recordings is not the problem but nice. But I search, for example, the first recording from 1971. Then the result is all (and many) remastering for at least 25 years. One worse than the other. It is a torture and a plague. In the meantime I have become patient in searching. Sometimes no original mix is offered. Then I look for the song on old compilations...that what used to be offered cheaply again 10 years after the release of a song. Sometimes I have success only on this way of my search if these compilations are also on Tidal. 
I am not an expert but I have a suspicion. When remastering they listen to every single track. Then they do "full work" on every single track. An acoustic Martin guitar becomes even more silvery. The singer gets more expression. The drums become more impulsive and crisp. The bass becomes drier and deeper. Then they are satisfied with every single track and go to lunch. After that they mix everything together. And that's the problem. Many original records have a magic of togetherness. Most remastered issues have no feeling for the band, it's a dead juxtaposition of individual instruments trying to outdo each other. Maybe I am alone with this impression. But I would go so far as to say that digital is criticized because you often hear the wrong editions. Old original digital record versions are much closer to vinyl.

[Edgar]

I agree wholeheartedly. In addition, I have found that many of the remixes ("remasters" they call them) have no bass whatsoever below about 60 Hz. It's annoying when played over a set of loudspeakers that can reproduce bass down into the twenties.

 

I'm also starting to notice that many of them are heavy in the right channel, as if somebody hung their winter coat in front of the right monitor during the mixing session.

[KT88]

6 hours ago, Edgar said:

I agree wholeheartedly. In addition, I have found that many of the remixes ("remasters" they call them) have no bass whatsoever below about 60 Hz. It's annoying when played over a set of loudspeakers that can reproduce bass down into the twenties.

 

I'm also starting to notice that many of them are heavy in the right channel, as if somebody hung their winter coat in front of the right monitor during the mixing session.

 

Thanks for pointing that out, Edgar. I have corrected it (remastered vs. remix).

[Buddy Shagmore]

Agreed Tidal does not have everything. Perhaps they feel they are offering the "best" versions, vs the old recordings.

Overall, I am very pleased with Tidal, especially the ability to discover new music. Guess it's a like it or lump it situation. 

[KT88]

6 hours ago, Buddy Shagmore said:

Agreed Tidal does not have everything. Perhaps they feel they are offering the "best" versions, vs the old recordings.

Overall, I am very pleased with Tidal, especially the ability to discover new music. Guess it's a like it or lump it situation. 

I really like Tidal for the same reason as you. It would be a good idea to select the masterings and that they offer different orders…from the newest remastering down to the original recording in available or vice verse. Anyway they should appreciate the value of the original masterings a little bit more.

[artto]

While I somewhat agree with your analysis & perception, and most certainly with what usually goes on in the remastering process, it's a bit more complicated than that.

 

First of all, *most* remastering is done, not necessarily to make anything "sound better" in audiophile quality terms. It's more often done to make the recording sound "louder" for air play - radio, car radio/players especially. That's where most people, do most of their listening. It's a well known marketing fact that people tend to stop and listen to the station/channel that sounds the loudest.

 

I agree the number of choices of the same recording in Tidal (or whatever) can become bewildering at times. And the fact that these services search engines really suck make it even worse.

 

If you use ROON, and have a CD (and even LP) collection ripped to a PC or somewhere on your LAN it might make it easier to access & compare the tracks you like best. Beware though, ROON's search capabilities are only marginally better than Tidal. ROON will consolidate all your fav streaming radio stations, local music and streaming services in one place. AND the ROON player sounds better IMO.

[artto]

Here's an example of how messy it can get regarding wondering what version of a particular recording (remastered, remixed, or not) that you are listening to from a streaming service like Tidal or Qobuz.

 

348 versions of The Who ~ Tommy

 

Which one did they use?

 

https://www.discogs.com/master/68455-The-Who-Tommy

 

[Ol_mcdonald]

On 2/17/2023 at 1:01 PM, artto said:

Here's an example of how messy it can get regarding wondering what version of a particular recording (remastered, remixed, or not) that you are listening to from a streaming service like Tidal or Qobuz.

 

348 versions of The Who ~ Tommy

 

Which one did they use?

 

https://www.discogs.com/master/68455-The-Who-Tommy

 

349😂

[KT88]

On 2/17/2023 at 4:24 PM, artto said:

While I somewhat agree with your analysis & perception, and most certainly with what usually goes on in the remastering process, it's a bit more complicated than that.

 

First of all, *most* remastering is done, not necessarily to make anything "sound better" in audiophile quality terms. It's more often done to make the recording sound "louder" for air play - radio, car radio/players especially. That's where most people, do most of their listening. It's a well known marketing fact that people tend to stop and listen to the station/channel that sounds the loudest.

 

I agree the number of choices of the same recording in Tidal (or whatever) can become bewildering at times. And the fact that these services search engines really suck make it even worse.

 

If you use ROON, and have a CD (and even LP) collection ripped to a PC or somewhere on your LAN it might make it easier to access & compare the tracks you like best. Beware though, ROON's search capabilities are only marginally better than Tidal. ROON will consolidate all your fav streaming radio stations, local music and streaming services in one place. AND the ROON player sounds better IMO.

 

Yes, it would be a great help if the search function of e.g. Tidal could filter which version of a recording is not remastered. Some remastered versions sound so bad and superficially aggressive that your explanation that these versions were made for other applications such as radio stations makes sense. BTW a very eloquent post from you, thanks.