Led Zepplin Mothership vs. hi-res vs. newest

I think it's how people react to compression.....I'll be the first to admit you can be seduced by volume and my take is that even a moderately expensive system if you are not atuned to compression it really probably only affects you subconsciously....or you might get irked when you can't find a happy listening level-it's too quiet then it's too loud.

I'd argue if your system isn't reasonably high end then compression might not bother you that much.

However if you have potent amp/speaker matching or a big system it can be unbearable-it really sticks out.

Mothership has a DR rating of about 6/7 and the new remasters 9/10 which mean more dynamic range and less compression.

Well, I think it's worth considering that dynamic range is certainly not the only audiophile parameter of interest. Dynamic range is not the only game in town. There is also frequency response, bass performance, clarity and resolution, transparency, and so forth. In fact some of the most notable recordings in terms of wide dynamic range such as Brothers in Arms and Bop til you Drop and Peter Gabriel's Security are off the charts dynamic range wise but virtually unlistenable due to ye olde distortion and digital glare.

Yes there may be other aspects on other discs but we are talking about Mothership specifically.

That disc is heavily compressed.

From what I've read on ofher forums, Mothership was remastered from existing files that were already compressed, thus the poor dynamic range that's very noticeable in the lack of bass slam. LZ was a band well known for their heavy rhythm section which Mothership lacks.

In the LZ 1, 2, 3 remasters, the heavy compression doesn't exist. There is air around each musician.