Led Zeppelin Remasters

Hi Russ,

Actually, the first Zep CD I remember was IV, with "Stairway to Heaven", and if memory serves (a big "if"), that was done by Joe Sidore out at Warner in L.A.

When it came time to do the rest of the catalog, I did them when I was at Atlantic but none (again, if I recall correctly) were from original masters. I've talked before about what a difficult time I had trying to convince management to get me original tapes when I was going to master for a CD. I believe the Zeps I mastered were primarily from "flat" copies.

I did my best to get the most out of each tape, using my own cables, brought to the studio daily, to make a short, direct connection between the output of the analog machine and the input of the Sony A-D converter. As always, no compressor or limiter was allowed in the room. ;-}

Barry
www.barrydiamentaudio.com
www.soundkeeperrecordings.com

 

Hi Max F and Andreas,

I would agree that better masters can be made today (and better still in the future ;-} ).

In my experience, a better digital transfer will indeed make for a better 16 bit CD.
When I'm mastering, if I'm going to change *anything*, for example to raise or drop the level of tracks so they flow better (I hate having to turn it up or down in the middle of a record), I'll take the original and save a copy at 32 bit float. I'll do my changes to the 32 bit version and use a high quality dither algorithm as the very last step to get the file down to 16 bit for the CD master.

When you change anything on a digital file, you are lengthening the digital "word". If you don't have the length to expand into, the lowest order bits (and the information they carry) get truncated, i.e. "chopped off". I've always found I got the most satisfying results when working with the maximum word length available.

Still, what I find most important of all are the decisions of what (and what *not*) to do in the mastering session. Here, the human(s) will have a larger effect than any choice of gear.

Barry
www.barrydiamentaudio.com
www.soundkeeperrecordings.com

 

Hey Barry,

Wow!...thanks for that info. Seeing as it was the only one released without credits, I and many others assumed it was you. Mr. Sidore did a damn fine job also IMO. Do you know if he had the same issues with the tapes as you did?

Thanks,
Russ

 

That's clearly the best way if you want to master in the digital domain.

But how do you think about mastering in the analog domain for a CD release? In that case, digital only enters the mastering at the very last step, and the digital files are not altered anymore. Some mastering engineers prefer this approach to this very day.

Did you always master in the analog domain back in the 1980s?

 

Finally someone agrees with me on this site! Thanks for your valuable insight.

Nothing would make me happier than to see new Zep remasters. To me there is no definative digital versions of these albums to date.

 

Make that two. The Zeppelin remasters just aren't that great sounding. When I heard Steve's incredible work on the Bad Company album, the first thing I thought was how I wish they'd let him loose on the Zeppelin studio catalog.

 

Three - can dream. Steve Hoffman mastered Led Zep falls under the category "Too good to be true!"

 

Hi Max, there's actually a lot of here who agree with you. In the meantime I'll take Barry's original masterings over the others.

 

The guy who is agreeing with you *mastered* all the original Zep CDs except IV.

Track down those 80s versions and you're done. Trust me, Diament mastering from flat "safeties" is never going to be touched in the digital domain again.

If those don't work then buy some LZ vinyl.

And btw, Max, since you have referenced the Sabbath CDs on Rhino...

I think the Rhino remasters of the Sabbath catalog are mostly poor to average. You have mentioned the first three albums, but Vol. 4 on Rhino is an absolute digital mess. And the entire Black Box is compressed and overly EQd, IMO. The Castle remasters are better in every case except Technical Ecstasy and I am not satisfied with the Castle remasters either. My work on figuring out the Sabs catalog on CD still in progress: The original WB CDs are mostly a joke. The earlier albums are obviously from tapes EQd for vinyl. Starting at Sabotage, they sound great on WB, but before that, forget it! The WG Vertigos are smiley-faced EQd by Hans Brethouwer... terrible! The original (non-remastered) Castles and Vertigo Japan 1st pressings are proving to be the winners, and I'll start a thread on all of this one day. Back to Zep here...

 

"Houses Of The Holy"

 

Hi Russ,

I believe this was standard back then (Warner and Atlantic both being part of Warner Communications).

Barry
www.barrydiamentaudio.com
www.soundkeeperrecordings.com

 

Hi Andreas,

If I was absolutely sure I wouldn't have to change a thing once the signal was digital (and that means not even 1/10 db level change!) and the end product was CD, I'd go digital at 16/44.1 and be done.

Back in the '80s, I did everything in the analog domain and went digital at the very last minute. Remember though that the digital gear back then was not the same as today's. I remember Sony bringing up their first digital console, which I tried for about 5 minutes before rejecting it for my use. Anything I did on that device hurt the sound, even pressing the EQ IN button with all settings left flat(!).

There were exceptions, of course. One that comes to mind was Enya's "Watermark" where the original master was digital. That would qualify as "digitally" mastered since the signal saw no analog path in my mastering room until it was on the way to the monitoring amplifiers and speakers. Another would be the first two solo albums from Phil Collins... not the original CDs... Atlantic quietly replaced the first ones with versions I'd mastered. (One day in the studio, I'd compared the CD version of "In The Air Tonight"--with the big drum fill-- from the first album mastered by ?, with the original master. I made a new CD master, which we sent to Phil for his approval. He said the difference was "night and day" and my masters went into production.) Of course, those CDs have since been done again and now they're quite loud... :0 ...but that's a story for another day. Unfortunately, only listening would tell you which version you had -- hint, the one with the lower overall level and clearly uncompressed drums was done by yours truly. And listen for the bass drum *between* the big tom-tom slams.

Nowadays, outside of old tapes, the majority of what I see has been recorded digitally. I record digitally myself (24 bit and high sampling rate). I've got quite transparent sounding 80 bit plug-ins (almost never used anyway) and finally, only in the last year, sample rate conversion and dithering algorithms I feel safe with. More importantly and more frequently needed, I can now adjust relative levels between tracks in the digital domain, using long word lengths. In this way, I end up with consistent levels throughout an album (and the listener doesn't have to get up and turn tracks up or down).

Analog and digital both have their plusses and minuses.

Barry
www.barrydiamentaudio.com
www.soundkeeperrecordings.com

 

The re-done one would probably have an RE designation (RE-1, for example) in the inner ring, wouldn't it?

 

Hi lukpac,

I don't recall any different designation on the discs (or packaging).
What you're saying makes sense... I just don't remember seeing anything like that.

I used to carry old and new versions with me when I wanted to show folks the impact mastering can have on a record.

Barry
www.barrydiamentaudio.com
www.soundkeeperrecordings.com

 

I don't know anything about those discs in particular, but it seems as if WEA would (does!) tag "silent" remasters with an RE designation. Or not so silent (for instance, the HDCD remaster of Buffalo Springfield Again uses the same catalog number as the original; HDCD is clearly marked everywhere, but there's an RE-1 on the disc).

It can get confusing, though, as some discs were (apparently) redone before ever being released. IIRC, some discs in the CSN box are RE-3 or RE-4 or something; I don't think they were remastered 3 or 4 times (or even at all!) after the box was issued.

 

I have Zep I and HOH old discs, sigh... not happy about them although they are OK. The old and new HOH sound practically the same to me. Probably give a nod the the old. Zep I remaster is better IMO, but nothing to write home about.

Used to have the albums when i was a kid. Dumped them all a few years back before i knew that vinyl was hifi, lol. Actually, most of my albums were warped from water damage (my old apartment was hit by a tornado). I will not likely go back to vinyl ever. Just too much work and money.

In the meantime, i'll just have to wait for the remasters.

 

Thanks for the info. I think I will try to track down the Vol 4 from Castle. I've had this on vinyl and had the cassette. Every version has sounded like crap to me, lol. I still love the Rhino's versions of the first three albums though. They sound perfect on my system and i crank them to wall shaking levels. Anyway, don't want to change the subject on this thread.

 

Face Value was remastered after you did it Barry? Are you sure? I know the Gold disc came out which sounds great but I didn't know of another secret silver-disc remaster of Face Value. I had the first Japanaese pressing which was horrible.

 

Hi Barry. Seeing you in this thread couldn't have come at a better time.

I just recently came across a 40 Golden Greats Gold CD issue of "Led Zeppelin III". As I did with the other Gold Led Zepp titles, along with listening, I did a wave form comparison of the Gold CD and the original Atlantic issue (this disc being one made in Japan). Since the paper inserts are identical to the original Atlantic CD, which credits you with the mastering, I was some what amazed to see the wave forms being very visibly different. Both wave forms are of the song "Immigrant Song".

Unless my eyes and ears deceive me, the Gold CD is a totally different mastering, but credits you for the mastering. Can you shed some light on this for me? It would be greatly appreciated.

Thank you for your time Barry.

Pictured is the Gold Led Zepp III CD in question. Of the wave form, the top is the original Atlantic CD, and the bottom is the Gold CD. Both wave forms are of the "Immigrant Song".

 

I think the sound you are looking for is remasters that are highly EQd and compressed. That's what Inglot/Hersch did with the Sabbath stuff on Rhino. Many here can't stand that type of sound, but some folks like it. Different strokes....

The good news for you is that the likelihood of the Zep catalog being given that modern treatment someday is high.

 

Vol. 4 on Castle is great. Much better than the old WB CD. And far better than the Rhino, which is just plain ruined, IMO.

The one downside of the Castle is that the channels are reversed.

 

Why do you say that?

 

Ever hear _How The West Was Won_?

You don't think the whole catalog will *eventually* see a modern, digital treatment?

A new Zep remastering would be a cash cow. I suspect the chances are high that it will happen. I just hope that if it does, we see the tapes treated with respect. Based on the demands of many listeners today, however, this would seem unlikely. But as long as those Diaments are out there, I'm good.

 

Hi Scott,

I can't speak for the gold CD that has my name on it. Atlantic made a number of mistakes with credits, putting my name on discs I didn't do and not putting it on some discs I did. I don't recall doing *any* gold CDs of anything. However, that doesn't exclude the possibility of the masters I made being used again for the "gold" version.

In the example you show waveforms for, it appears the channels are reversed (aside from the length difference). That might account for an apparent "difference" in the wave form comparison, even if both were sourced from the same master.

Hope this helps.
Barry
www.barrydiamentaudio.com
www.soundkeeperrecordings.com

 

Haven't heard that disc. Who mastered it?

Sure, we'll probably see remasters at some point. Will they get a "modern, digital treatment"? Maybe, maybe not. Plenty of remasters done today *don't* have problems with compression or overreaching EQ. It depends on the engineer/producer.

Also, I *hope* that in some ways that peak has already been reached. For instance, some of Jon Astley's work in the early 00's had *really* terrible use of NR and compression. While he still uses both (at least of a couple of years ago), it's nowhere near as bad as it used to be.