[mb-users] Remastered Reissues with same/different content

[Frederic Da Vitoria]

2007/7/7, Edward Branham <ebb at usa.net>:
>
> We may being a bit sidetracked by semantics here.   First, lets agree on a
> definition.
> Remastering is, at its core, the process of creating a new master (the
> recording which is duplicated for production or transferred to other
> formats) for an album, movie, or any other creation. It tends to nowadays
> specifically refer to the process of porting a creation from one medium to
> another, but this is not always the case. For example, a vinyl LP
> originally
> pressed from a worn-out copy tape many tape generations removed from the
> "original" master recording could be remastered and re-pressed from a
> better
> condition tape.
>
> Here buzz-speak and practical application collide. In actuality, all CDs
> created from analogue sources are technically digitally remastered. The
> process of creating a digital transfer of an analogue tape re-masters the
> material in the digital domain, even if nothing "special"--no
> equalization,
> compression, or other processing--is done to the material.
>
> Given that basis ...
>
> IMHO - If the material has simply been ported from one type distribution
> media to another (from Vinyl to CD for instance), and either left
> completely
> as original, or if sound enhancing has been applied (compression, rumble
> reduction, etc), the resulting product is not a new release.  It is that
> same old release in a different format.
>
> HOWEVER - If tracks of the original master are altered in any other way,
> by
> remix, addition or deletion of material, by addition or deletion of new
> tracks, this IS a new release as it has been substantially altered from
> the
> previous version.  This situation deserves to be treated as a new release.
>
> FOR the two cases below:
>
> "hat" has tracks with added material and should be treated as a new
> release
>
> "Boil That Dust Speck" has sonic differences, but no substantial changes
> in
> the original material.  This is a true re-issue and should be reflected in
> the existing release record.
>

I agree with your definition (although the fact that the word "remastered"
appears often falsely on releases is bound to mislead MB editors). This
leaves us with the problem I raised: the re-issue of "Boil That Dust Speck"
was engineered by Mike Keneally. How and where do I enter an AR to say so
(admitting I wanted to do so, which is recommended by MB guides AFAIK)?

-- 
Frederic Da Vitoria
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.musicbrainz.org/pipermail/musicbrainz-users/attachments/20070707/4decf0a5/attachment.htm