Why are so many albums poorly remastered onto cd

Don't tell me I'm in the minority in thinking that most remastered CDs I listen to are actually done pretty well, often better than ever before.

Mapman,
For me it is a mixed bag. Some are great, others mediocre.

Mapman,

I generally find classical reissues to have good sound, often better than the original vinyl issue (e.g., DG recordings from the 1970s). A lot of jazz reissues sound good too. For me, much of the pop/rock catalogue sounds quite bad in recent reissues. I think it is a deliberate--trying to match the loudness of current recordings via heavy use of compression.

"I think it is a deliberate--trying to match the loudness of current recordings via heavy use of compression"

No doubt many more recent remasters seem to do this compared to earlier CD versions.

I do not have a problem with increased loudness categorically. It all depends on the details of how it is achieved. Many early CDs did not make use of full dynamic range available in CD format well. Many newer remasters do. Its when waveforms are clipped in the recording that worse sound is inherent. Increased loudness does not always mean clipped waveforms, though it is most common in pop music these days similar to how popular music on 45s back in the day were never a popular format in regards to sound quality.

A lot of times the artist has a say in just how 'loud' he wants it to sound and that can impart a negative. He/she wants it to grab your attention in this sea of competing artists.

Also, a lot of the times the wrong 'master' tapes are used. I've read somewhere that a lot of audio recordings have several master labeled tapes and simply the wrong ones are used.

All the best,
Nonoise