Classic rock: best remasters

"Mapman, nobody is saying dynamic range is the only audio parameter worth mentionng, but if it ain't dynamic I ain't interested."

To each their own. Many probably feel that way.

The problem is that a single dynamic range metric per track or album really only tells part of the story about even the dynamics, ie the overall range.

I find the dynamic range measure useful but not sufficient to tell me what recordings I will find enjoyable or not. It is definitely deficient as an acid test.

That's like saying the only mountains worth climbing are the tallest. They may offer certain thrills not found elsewhere, especially to a professional mountain climber, but there is much more to it than just that in many cases for most folks to enjoy.

Mapman, I can agree with you in this way...
The DR Database on some of these new remasters may measure lower DR (or increased compression if you prefer) than their older counterparts.
BUT the new release has been remixed and "opened up" with more air in the recording. There is less noise, better imaging and the advantage of using inline compression to tighten up the drums, for example. Then a new master is made using today's digital specs.

So these disks sound much better overall and dynamic to me. The DR scale is not telling the whole story on a remaster. Of course this only applies when remastering is being done to improve the sound quality, and not when a disk is compressed louder for your Sony earbuds.

Mapman, see what happens when you don't do your homework? The official dynamic range data base provides three (3) dynamic range numbers per album (which are relative numbers for purposes of the data base) - lowest number, average number and highest number. Besides that information it's the overall undeniable conclusion one scan easily see in the data - that the life has been slowly squeezed out of the music going back to at least twenty years ago. Hel-loo!

it's the overall undeniable conclusion one scan easily see in the data - that the life has been slowly squeezed out of the music going back to at least twenty years ago.

Yes, all recordings today are using more compression when mastering, but there are two subsets of the remasters being released. All of the Pop/Rock/Hip-Hop are going to be measured way into the Red (bad) area of the DR Scale. That's the result of the Loudness Wars.

The 2nd Group of remasters is what the OP asked about; are there better quality CDs/vinyl than the original releases?
The originals will most likely measure in the Green area (Good); but do they sound good? They might have more dynamic range, but original CD SQ sucked (since we are talking about Rock music).

It's only in recent years, the remaster SQ has increased, partly due to new vinyl, also due to the premium Artists knowing they have the tools to release a better product to their fans.
These recordings will also have more compression than the early releases, but they will still not measure as Bad.

As I stated earlier, the studio remix can open up the sound and make it sound dynamic. These albums are in the minority, and great care is taken during the mastering process. Notice that the Mastering Engineer's name is now prominently written into the credits.

On Zep releases early...agree they sound very good...I feel the debut is the most improved...and IV...shall see with upcoming P.Graffiti release...my vinyl copy always impresses me...makes me happy happy! Zep rules!