M. ROAD - Dreams Of Eschaton v/s Mark of the Beast?

Angelheart · Post by **Angelheart** » Tue May 11, 2010 7:40 pm

I think this topic has gone too far! hehe
Our friend here ,simply says that the copied tape is more original sounding that the remastered MOTB.And that's true. It's another thing if the tape has a bad sound.
The only missing now piece of Manilla is the first part of that radio that was released in the After midnight live.

ION BRITTON · Post by **ION BRITTON** » Tue May 11, 2010 8:18 pm

Angelheart wrote: Our friend here ,simply says that the copied tape is more original sounding that the remastered MOTB

What do you mean by 'original sounding'? Closer to original recordings?

As far as I know, on many cases a remastered recording sounds a bit different than the original recording, why someone would remaster an album if it was to sound exactly the same as it sounded 30 years ago?

The demo in question had a bad sound and they made it sound a bit better. What were they supposed to do? Make it even worse?

Things are simple: Monster records took the master tapes and remastered them. The result is what you hear on MOTB. Now, if the copied tapes that were circulating back then have a similar or worse sound than the master tapes or the rerelease, Monster rec don't have anything to do with it.

edit: double posted my reply, Dan split the thread while I was writing..

Angelheart · Post by **Angelheart** » Tue May 11, 2010 8:28 pm

ION BRITTON wrote:
Angelheart wrote: Our friend here ,simply says that the copied tape is more original sounding that the remastered MOTB
What do you mean by 'original sounding'? Closer to original recordings?

As far as I know, on many cases a remastered recording sounds a bit different than the original recording, why someone would remaster an album if it was to sound exactly the same as it sounded 30 years ago?

The demo in question had a bad sound and they made it sound a bit better. What were they supposed to do? Make it even worse?

Things are simple: Monster records took the master tapes and remastered them. The result is what you hear on MOTB. Now, if the copied tapes that were circulating back then have a similar or worse sound than the master tapes or the rerelease, Monster rec don't have anything to do with it.

edit: double posted my reply, Dan split the thread while I was writing..

Yes Gianni
A copied tape is closer to the original sound that a remastered one.
But i said that doesn't mean that is better than the remastered.
Sometimes the remastered/remixed albums sound much better than the original ones (for example the first Twisted Tower Dire is 1000 better in the new remastered edition) and sometimes it's worse (i can't remember any example now).
Who said anything about Monster records?The remaster procession is made of course to make the sound better or more clean.Some persons though want to hear the raw sound of the original copy.
It's a matter of taste i guess.

Warepire · Post by **Warepire** » Tue May 11, 2010 8:37 pm

Angelheart wrote:(i can't remember any example now).

Blind Guardian - Follow The Blind.

ION BRITTON · Post by **ION BRITTON** » Tue May 11, 2010 8:39 pm

Angelheart wrote: A copied tape is closer to the original sound that a remastered one.

It depends. A 1st generation copy, yes probably sounds very close to the original recording and I agree that sometimes it sounds way more charming than a remastered/remixed version. But a 50th generation tape copied through dozens of decks, shitty ones and good ones too and with different speed each time, probably does not sound close to the original recording. In fact, it most probably sounds like shit. If some people prefer to call the latter a 'raw' recording and also prefer it to the remastered versions, it's their problem, not mine.

With all this shit I forgot what the initial question was. What was it really?

Angelheart · Post by **Angelheart** » Tue May 11, 2010 8:40 pm

Warepire wrote:
Angelheart wrote:(i can't remember any example now).
Blind Guardian - Follow The Blind.

Maybe .I have the lp but i haven't compared to it to the cd.

Angelheart · Post by **Angelheart** » Tue May 11, 2010 8:41 pm

ION BRITTON wrote:
Angelheart wrote: A copied tape is closer to the original sound that a remastered one.
It depends. A 1st generation copy, yes probably sounds very close to the original recording and I agree that sometimes it sounds way more charming than a remastered/remixed version. But a 50th generation tape copied through dozens of decks, shitty ones and good ones too and with different speed each time, probably does not sound close to the original recording. In fact, it most probably sounds like shit. If some people prefer to call the latter a 'raw' recording and also prefer it to the remastered versions, it's their problem, not mine.

With all this shit I forgot what the initial question was. Was it really?

We agree finally!
You've gone too far and that's why u forgot the initial topic.
I guess it's time to close it.hhehe

ION BRITTON · Post by **ION BRITTON** » Tue May 11, 2010 8:48 pm

The whole thread sucks and it needs to be deleted

Forget about MR and the remixes, the Bronson flick is downloaded and I found greek subs as well, I'm paying you a visit in the weekend

Angelheart · Post by **Angelheart** » Tue May 11, 2010 8:50 pm

ION BRITTON wrote:The whole thread sucks and it needs to be deleted

Forget about MR and the remixes, the Bronson flick is downloaded and I found greek subs as well, I'm paying you a visit in the weekend

cool .I wait u for a spaghetti night!hehe

Black Axe · Post by **Black Axe** » Tue May 11, 2010 9:58 pm

I'd delete it and record Metal.

doomedplanet · Post by **doomedplanet** » Thu May 13, 2010 8:07 pm

the picture of the tape in this thread was taken by me from the tape in my collection. If you want to hearthe rip it should be easy since they are spread around the net and I can post my link if you want it. You should listen to my rip of this tape and listen to the Monster cd in comparison, I think you will be very pleased at the sound of this tape rip. The unfortunate fact is that there are a lot of annoying 'noise reduction' type artifacts that are on the Monster cd version. If you have never heard my tape rip you might not care, but listen to them side by side and I think you will appreciate the difference.

ION BRITTON · Post by **ION BRITTON** » Thu May 13, 2010 8:19 pm

Personally, I don't have any great issues with the sound on Monster's release, but I wouldn't mind listening to that rip of yours to see what's the difference.

Warepire · Post by **Warepire** » Thu May 13, 2010 11:56 pm

doomedplanet wrote:the picture of the tape in this thread was taken by me from the tape in my collection. If you want to hearthe rip it should be easy since they are spread around the net and I can post my link if you want it. You should listen to my rip of this tape and listen to the Monster cd in comparison, I think you will be very pleased at the sound of this tape rip. The unfortunate fact is that there are a lot of annoying 'noise reduction' type artifacts that are on the Monster cd version. If you have never heard my tape rip you might not care, but listen to them side by side and I think you will appreciate the difference.

Bummer... I am seeking that tape. At least now I knows who own it. (Took your tape-rip from Thrashmageddon 1-2 years ago)

Why yes Plato · Post by **Why yes Plato** » Mon May 24, 2010 7:41 pm

Warpire, did you look at the wave tables side by side? Might provide some insight

Warepire · Post by **Warepire** » Mon May 24, 2010 10:30 pm

Why yes Plato wrote:Warpire, did you look at the wave tables side by side? Might provide some insight

I haven't actually done that... I shall do so when I have access to my files again.

Computer died on me....