Is remastered mainly just less jitter?

George, your reading comprehension is lagging a bit.

It looks like the older the recording the higher the dynamic range

Just inferring this is what I said in my first post, and gave the DR website for everyone to check.

Cheers George

georgehifi
2,430 posts
04-23-2017 7:11pm
It looks like the older the recording the higher the dynamic range

Just inferring this is what I said in my first post, and gave the DR website for everyone to check.

Correction to your original post: it’s not that they’re recorded at a higher volume, it’s that they’re re-mastered at a higher volume (and lower dynamic range). That’s why many original LPs and CDs have relatively high dynamic range whereas their *reissues* have relatively lower dynamic range, in fact lower and lower as time goes on. But it’s still the same recording, often with high dynamic range originally. The loudness wars apparently didn’t have much impact on audio cassettes, they were probably being phased out about the time loudness became ubiquitous. I always look for and admire the cassettes labeled HiDR, I.e., high dynamic range.

So I misused a word, instead of recorded I should have said re-mastered, it's all the same, older especially originals, usually have better dynamic range and to my ear sound better.
Because of it I don't know, maybe I just don't like re-masters even if they're the same level, as the originals, but then there's the dynamic range which I prefer to point the finger at, because the DR website let me see this, and it gels with what I'm hearing.

Cheers George

I prefer a diamond scraping a spiral groove on a rotating plastic disk! It's all about the groovy vibrations!