And ironically' having spent 4 or 5 hours recording and then aural cleaning up my vinyl version thinking this would never get released, I discover its pending release in the USA:

^^^ for an ignoramus like me, it does beg a question:

where albums have been already re-released as 'remastered', then rereleased again as digitally enhanced etc...are they really of superior quality, or is it just a cynical marketing ploy?

fandango wrote: ^^^ for an ignoramus like me, it does beg a question: where albums have been already re-released as 'remastered', then rereleased again as digitally enhanced etc...are they really of superior quality, or is it just a cynical marketing ploy?

I wonder too - such jargon is used in various ways, no always meaning there are any appreciable changes . So for instance, if 24 bit remastering is quoted - does this mean more about the disc's ability to play with fewer errors, e.g. because of surface damage, rather a better aural experience? Then there are those albums that have gone through several generations of remastering - I've heard comments about 2nd or 3rd generation remastering of both King Crimson and Mahavishnu Orchestra albums, where folks claim they can't tell the difference - or worse reckon the sound quality has deteriorated in the later version.

The best remastering wrt to improved aural quality, seems when the multi-track recording is reassembled digitally in reduction to stereo two track, removing the previous loss of quality due to tape on to tape on to tape etc.  - best examples I've heard being Deep Purple's In Rock (compare with one of the early LP pressings of the Harvest Record's release, and you can't fail to hear significant improvements), and Caravan's If I could Do It......

Then there are the remasters which have also undergone electronic clean up to remove tape hiss, and if the recording is old enough to remove crackles and pops sitting on the master. For example Sony's Roots & Blues label, have often used CEDAR for their 20's and 30's blues reissues, while a pioneer Robert Armstrong of Australian Broadcast Co, developed his own system of electronic clean up and even created false stereo for recordings originally made at that time.  However, some masters of 78s have long vanished, and there is reliance on finding the best pressing available and using this as source for CD release - but alas I've yet to hear a so-called digital, cleaned up recording of Blind Lemon Jefferson, that sound aurally sharp. One story goes that a large number of 78 masters were found in the roof space of La Scala opera house, Milan, recordings of major opera stars in performance, (usually dress rehearsals) of operas only held in older people's memories.  About 15 years ago, for these recordings,  Nimbus Records built a special 78 record player based on  modern electronic's technology, but still placed a microphone in the horn of the record player to  record digitally - I'm told the quality of the CD version (and performances contained) is remarkable.

Then remastering may include remixing. The recent reissue of Hellborg/Shrieve/Buckethead Octave Of the Holy Innocents, has been deliberately  remixed from the multi-track recordings, similarly when King Crimson went for the NYC disco scene in the 80's they issued a number of 12" remixes. And then there are some examples of the  original record company mislaying both the stereo mixed down master tapes and the mix down notes (i.e. detailing how the multi-track recording should to be converted to stereo 2 track), and therefore the reissuing record company are forced to remix. A couple of examples: T2 It 'll All Work Out In Boomland had to be remastered for CD - but the World Record's reissue sounds different and possible worse than the Decca LP original - and to prove the point, T2's  White Horses sampled on Decca's 2002 compilation Legend Of  A Mind is yet another mix down (aka remaster). Renaissance Records seem to have suffered this in reissuing Touch's eponymous titled 1969  album, in CD form in 1992 (for instance, the peculiar ending to '75' not heard on the LP) - I'm not sure if the Eclectic reissue has been remastered again?

And finally there are the so called DVD CD's which have been electronic recorded to give the surround sound, that the best home cinema sound system can provide. Jimmy Page has done this for various Zeppelin film recordings, originally captured in stereo.  Such software is available quite cheaply so you can do it for yourself.

^^^  thanks Dick, that is a really thorough and helpful answer, though with the side effect that it proves how bewildering the whole thing is for numskulls like me...

a couple of observations: the new EMI 'Eloy' remasters are exceptionally good and well worth having, especially as they can be picked up at about £5.50 each on Amazon; infinitely better than the previous incarnation; shame the booklets are all in German!!

On the other hand, the 2003 'Yes' remasters have excellent booklets, but their sound doesn't appear to be greatly enhanced from the previous Remastered set; not sufficiently to fork out again, that's for sure. 

All they've done is add on copius amounts of additional material, in the shape of demos, instrumentals, radio edits etc, most of which only hardened Yes fanatics would be interested in hearing, and then perhaps only once or twice.  Fair enough, they have been issued at mid price too, but how many more reissues will the Yes fan be subjected to?

I'd be very interested in following this thread....