Subject: Epic Remastering Failures Thu Jun 23, 2011 2:11 pm
We were having discussion on the Black Sabbath - Born Again thread about remastering. What are some albums that the "new remastering" or "newly remixing" or even "partially re-recorded" ruined the record?
I can think of a few.
Ozzy Osbourne - Blizzard of Ozz (horrific re-recording of the drums & bass) Ozzy Osbourne - Dairy of a Madman (same as above)
Megadeth - So Far, So Good, So What (man, those keyboard horns at the beginning of the record really ruin my perception of that heavy album.)
Dirty Looks - In Your Face (FnA Records) (What the heck? I have a vinyl transfer that sounds better than this "remastered version". The mastering is horrible and makes the recording so harsh, it's nearly unlistenable.)
_________________ ULTIMATUM - TOO METAL FOR WIKIPEDIA!
Those Ozzy albums were a disgrace and I wish Randy Rhoads estate had sued them for butchering the recordings, thankfully they came to their senses and reinstated the original recordings.
I did not buy the Megadeth reissues because I already owned them but after reading everybody's comments on this board, I am glad I did not bother.
All the Megadeth remasters are terrible - Dave even re-recorded guitars on that and what's the deal with all the pointless intros tacked on to a bunch of the songs? Ugh.
The Ozzy fiasco was clearly a terrible decision.
Armored Saint - Symbol of Salvation - the 3 disc version. I liked the bonus material but I think the un-remastered disc actually has more punch and sounds better. I don't know what they did to it for the remastering.
I'm not sure I understand why it was such a horrific decision to re-record the guitars and bass unless they actually sound worse. The songwriters should still be getting royalties, everyone else was a hired gun for the recording.
I'm not sure I understand why it was such a horrific decision to re-record the guitars and bass unless they actually sound worse. The songwriters should still be getting royalties, everyone else was a hired gun for the recording.
Maybe it wasn't "horrific" but it was certainly a douche move on the part of the Osbourne organization. "Oh, so the guys who played on the record think they're not getting enough $$? Screw them, we'll wipe their tracks off and have the current guys re-record their parts."
_________________ "I am reluctant to get too deep into politics, and I don’t expect politicians to get too deep into music." - Paul Stanley
HEY KIDS! Check out my way-cool CD and movie reviews and other geeky nonsense on the HubPages Network: http://hubpages.com/@fatfreddyscat
I'm not sure I understand why it was such a horrific decision to re-record the guitars and bass unless they actually sound worse. The songwriters should still be getting royalties, everyone else was a hired gun for the recording.
You've got to be kidding with this. I don't want to hear someone else play on an album other than the original artists. Couple that with the fact that no one mentioned these were re-recorded and the attribution was very weird and misleading in the liner notes. They screwed the fans intentionally to avoid paying Kerslake and Daisley which as it turns out was pointless because the statute of limitations had already run long before those two filed their suit against Ozzy.
I actually like the Megadeth remasters, some of the songs actually sound better(I.E. Sweating Bullets) Plus the remasters have some nice bonus tracks like "Crown Of Worms"
I'm not sure I understand why it was such a horrific decision to re-record the guitars and bass unless they actually sound worse. The songwriters should still be getting royalties, everyone else was a hired gun for the recording.
Bob Daisly and Lee Kerslake did get songwriting credits!!!!!!!!!!!!
I'm not sure I understand why it was such a horrific decision to re-record the guitars and bass unless they actually sound worse. The songwriters should still be getting royalties, everyone else was a hired gun for the recording.
Since you feel that way can I remaster one of your old Temple of Blood disc and re-record your guitar parts and vocals, not because your performances are horrid but just because.
I'm not sure I understand why it was such a horrific decision to re-record the guitars and bass unless they actually sound worse. The songwriters should still be getting royalties, everyone else was a hired gun for the recording.
That's not true at all.
The songs were re-recorded out of spite because Sharron didn't want to pay the royalties to those players who were on the album AND responsible for the songwriting. Bob Daisley penned much of that stuff and was in the middle of a court battle over royalties.
As well, they were not hired guns, any more than Randy was a hired gun. If you know the story at all, the band was originally to be called Blizzard of Ozz. All those guys were from respectable bands (like Uriah Heep), with the exception of Randy who was the unknown. Don Arden, Ozzy's management at the time, thought that Ozzy's name would sell more records, so he had the artwork changed to say Ozzy Ozbourne and the Blizzard of Ozz on the first European pressings of the debut. Later pressings downplayed the Bizzard of Ozz name even more. The band members, including Randy, were shocked when they saw the record for the first time to discover they were now musicians in Ozzy's solo band, especially knowing that Ozzy had little to do with writing most of the songs on those first two albums. Daisley has been quoted as saying they were all mortified when they saw the album cover for the first time. From the books I have read, Ozzy spent most of his time passed out on the couch during the writing sessions. "Suicide Solution" was in fact penned by Bob Daisley about how Ozzy was slowly killing himself with alcohol, despite Ozzy's claims that the song was about Bon Scott. This has all been verified over time and has been printed in several books on the history of the band.
In anycase, re-recording those parts was a terrible decision and never should have been done. There was no reason for it, other than greed. It also changed the recordings enough that they didn't quite sound the same.
_________________ ULTIMATUM - TOO METAL FOR WIKIPEDIA!
Last edited by ultmetal on Thu Jun 23, 2011 3:18 pm; edited 1 time in total
Those Ozzy abominations came into the music store I was working at in the late 90's. As soon as I heard the double-bass drum parts that were never there before, I pulled the disc out of the player and never listened to them again.
I bought the previous remasters from the early 90's with the original players and have never looked back.
I actually like the Megadeth remasters, some of the songs actually sound better(I.E. Sweating Bullets) Plus the remasters have some nice bonus tracks like "Crown Of Worms"
The bonus tracks are nice. SOME of the remastering sounds better. I thought the Youthanasia remaster sounded good.
I hate the remastering on So Far So Good So What. Especially on "Into the Lungs of Hell". Those keyboard/horns just ruin the overall vibe of the record IMO.
_________________ ULTIMATUM - TOO METAL FOR WIKIPEDIA!
Fake horns should remain buried in the mix. If you want horns on your record, go to a local jazz club and pay the dudes for a couple hours of studio time. They will eat better and the record will sound much better for it.
I think most of the Megadeth remasters are good, but I must admit, I've yet to pick up the So Far, So Good, So What one. For the most part, the Rust one is good; I really enjoy the tighter sounding drums. But the re-recorded vocals on a few tracks is a shame. They're not bad or anything, but they're just a bit too different.
The remaster of Dave's side-project, Md.45's The Craving is abysmal. I have a feeling Dave didn't "lose" Ving's contributions, but rather decided to cut them. Dave's recorded vocals are utterly horrible and the guitar lines replacing the harmonica parts are dull as hell. Honestly, it was never an amazing album but with Lee Ving's voice, it had something unique going for it. The remaster just sounds like a poor version of Cryptic Writings.
I have to agree with you Smindas, the original album was not great but it was cool to see Mustaine work with hard core icon Lee Ving and the changes he made to the album added nothing to the original album.
I would expect that the songwriters for Ozzy would've gotten paid even if their parts were re-recorded. I would've fully expected Daisley to get remunerated for all the writing he did. Why they weren't legally, I don't know. What I don't understand is how re-recording those parts somehow denied them their songwriting royalties. Writing and performing are different functions and pay differently. A lot of artists make money writing songs for other people to perform.
Arden was right that Ozzy's name would sell (and has) more than the name "Blizzard of Ozz". Just like "Seventh Star" sold more under the name BLACK SABBATH than it would have under "Tony Iommi". Fans may not like it, but the casual music fans will gravitate more to the big brands with name recognition. That's why Jerry Cantrell and the rest of the guys are calling themselves "Alice in Chains". They can write the same songs as they could under Jerry's name and probably sell 10x more copies. Sad but true.
Since you feel that way can I remaster one of your old Temple of Blood disc and re-record your guitar parts and vocals, not because your performances are horrid but just because.
That would make it a bunch of cover songs and we would still get paid royalties for our writing, as I understand it. So yes, I fully support that.
I would expect that the songwriters for Ozzy would've gotten paid even if their parts were re-recorded. I would've fully expected Daisley to get remunerated for all the writing he did. Why they weren't legally, I don't know. What I don't understand is how re-recording those parts somehow denied them their songwriting royalties. Writing and performing are different functions and pay differently. A lot of artists make money writing songs for other people to perform.
Arden was right that Ozzy's name would sell (and has) more than the name "Blizzard of Ozz". Just like "Seventh Star" sold more under the name BLACK SABBATH than it would have under "Tony Iommi". Fans may not like it, but the casual music fans will gravitate more to the big brands with name recognition. That's why Jerry Cantrell and the rest of the guys are calling themselves "Alice in Chains". They can write the same songs as they could under Jerry's name and probably sell 10x more copies. Sad but true.
I won't disagree with you on a band's name, Gilmour and Mason sued Roger Waters to right out own the name Pink Floyd, because David Gilmour did a solo tour two years prior to that, called 'About Face' that sold well but only a fraction of what Pink Floyd albums sold. As he put it, he worked twenty years building up the name Pink Floyd not David Gilmour.
That is not the same thing as re-recording parts of an album that at that point had been in the market place for 20 years, and this was done to improve the recordings but out of sheer greed.
It was done to cut out their fair share of the royalities, and when the Hendrix estate did it in the 70's fans cried foul and they were correct, the re-recordings were not original intentions of the artist. In this case Randy Rhoads who a huge part of Ozzy's early career rest on that dead man's legacy. You can't re-write history just to suite your selfish desires, that and the re-recordings added nothing.
Subject: Epic Remastering Failures 
Thu Jun 23, 2011 2:11 pm
