I once read a review of a Stones album (forget which one now) that had been remastered by Virgin Records. Remastering is always supposed to be wonderful, right? Well this reviewer said, "This is not the same album that sold millions back in 19__" He meant he preferred the original "version" of the album to the remastered one.

To anyone who has listened to the various versions of some/all such albums, which are better to your ear? (Just one album's comparison would be helpful.) Or maybe there is a thread on this site already with that info you could direct me to. Thanks!

Quote
Title5Take1
I once read a review of a Stones album (forget which one now) that had been remastered by Virgin Records. Remastering is always supposed to be wonderful, right? Well this reviewer said, "This is not the same album that sold millions back in 19__" He meant he preferred the original "version" of the album to the remastered one.

To anyone who has listened to the various versions of some/all such albums, which are better to your ear? (Just one album's comparison would be helpful.) Or maybe there is a thread on this site already with that info you could direct me to. Thanks!

Many threads (do a search)...I think the general consensus about the Universal reissues is that they didn't sound better, they only sounded "louder". I wouldn't know, as I refused to buy all these albums again with no extra tracks or any other goodies to entice me (save Exile, of course) to purchase the exact same music for what would have been a fourth time. Personally I think the Virgin remasters sound pretty good. The original vinyl sounds better.

agree with tele. no marketable improvement of the UMG over the Virgin masters. there was a significant improvement from the CBS to the Virgins....and, when in doubt, spin yer vinyl....