CD sound quality: original pressings vs regular remaster vs MFSL, etc

I suspect what the mastering/remastering issue comes down to is not so much a technical decision as it is a business decision. Like the way Rhino seems to treat the Stevie Nicks catalog, for example. Lots of earlier issues of SN or Fleetwood Mac by them are of quite good sound quality. As well as are their more recent reissues of the same material. But, they know there’s a certain segment of the market that is hounding them for more releases. But, a new remastering of one of the heretofore unreleased titles in that catalog would be just as expensive as one of the original titles they had already released and they could be afraid that the end sales would not justify the expense. I expect that’s because no matter what technology is used, it still takes a guiding engineering "ear" throughout the process in order to come up with a winner of a mastering/remaster. That process simply demands time, knowhow and care, period. And time, certainly in this case, equals money. So, maybe it’s no real surprise that a lot of the more recent SN catalog has all suffered the same sort of audible affliction, that characteristic "Rhino"-type of hardness that on some titles can border on brittleness, for example. As if they were released "down-n-dirty" style just to make a quick buck without risking a loss. It’s a bit like it’s not whether they Can do a good job, but whether they Want to take the time (money) to do a good job versus how much financial gain they can see coming from it. Note that if we’re talking about, say, the Beatles catalog, by way of Apple releases anyway, they are clearly such a perennial favorite and can be thought of in such a financially profitable promotional light, that’s it’s very unlikely that Apple would knowingly take the chance on releasing a dud. With such a potential cash cow as that, they may simply be unwilling to Not do a good job.

Not that any of this is earthshaking news exactly, I just think any technical considerations are thought of within the music industry as simply interchangeable with financial considerations (profit vs loss).

Exactly! Somebody in corporate did a customer survey and found out they were mostly teeny boppers. 👫 Vice Presidents have to eat, too!

The Blue-spec was Wayy open sounding...like way more than most. The vocals sounded ok, but not like the original vinyl back in the day. A sort of nice, if over-hyped, uber-detailed kind of sound overall.

Blu-spec and other Japanese remasters usually have very good dynamics, but an analytical presentation. With some of these remasters it seems like they are trying to achieve the best specs and with so much detail makes them less musical. I have quite a few Blu-specs that I don’t play anymore. Many standard Japanese pressings sound better to me.

IME, the best Japanese remaster technology is XRCD. It is a product of JVC and involves using a 20 bit sampling rate plus using a glass master in which a laser cuts the pits more precisely than standard CD technology. This provides better jitter control.
I only own 2 XRCD’s due to the high cost, but they sound far superior to other CD remasters. I still prefer finding an early release from the first production run.