Lit.Org - a community for readers and writers Advanced Search
 




Average Rating
7.5

(2 votes)


RatingRated by
7Unknown
8Dfortyseven

You must login to vote

Has anyone noticed how there has been a rush by many music labels to re-release back catalogues of famous artists, with the excuse of 'remastering' and 'now with previously unavailable bonus tracks'? It's been a huge trend in heavy rock, I can tell you right now. Let me list all the hard rock artists of which I know have been re-released: Black Sabbath (twice); Blue Oyster Cult (in progress); Judas Priest; Ozzy Osbourne (now for the second time); Robin Trower (by two different labels); Iron Maiden (even independently of the current trend, fully five or six times now); KI$$ (since that damn tour, I always spell it that way); The Ramones; Ted Nugent; Jimi Hendrix (several times now, including after his family got control of his catalogue); Venom (but it was about time for them); Nazareth; Badlands; Thin Lizzy; many, many more.
For one, I am sick of Iron Maiden for their mistreatment of American fans in the first place; I'm sure as hell not going to buy yet another edition of their entire damn catalogue. It's getting to seem like they're doing this every year, as they've as much as said onstage that they expect their fans, particularly Americans, to buy each edition. This is preposterous. I'm not buying Bruce Dickinson another waterski or snowmobile. Yet, because Iron Maiden managed to mold themselves into the most merchandisable entity in heavy metal or hard rock, they're able to get away with it. Talk about a cash cow. And then you have KI$$...
I personally don't mind the trend in and of itself; I love my BOC remasters because they're giving us some great insights on the development of some of these songs. Judas Priest did the same thing, and gave us some truly rare live tracks that I am enjoying even as I write this. I'd never heard a (good) version of 'Starbreaker' live before. (This is found on the remastered edition of 'Unleashed in the East', which was always the greatest live metal album of all time but is now better, in my opinion.)
The Black Sabbath remasters are plain jane, with no extras except for 'Evil Woman' being included on their first album's re-release and a little cardbox coming on 'Master of Reality' to commemorate the original emblazoned album sleeve with the lyrics on the back. ('MoR' is actually a famous album just for that alone'.) Castle Records, which reissued Sabbath, Maiden and Nazareth (and more I assume), all remastered, even bought the rights to the infamous 'Live at Last' live album with Ozzy Osbourne (from the 1972 'Vol. 4' tour), and released that remastered with the rest of the set. (This is despite the fact that Sabbath have always regarded this live set as a bootleg.) This goes to show that when it's done right, it's good for the fans.
Iron Maiden beats a dead horse like a wife-beating necrophiliac with a ballpeen hammer. The last edition I bought of their CD's, in 1998/99, was remastered with video and other content, out the wazoo. There was even a contest. I collected them all and was very happy. However, just two years before that, I'd collected the entire set (again, and I've had them all on vinyl, cassette and original CD) in double-CD format with the old, hard-to-get imported singles. (Remember Maiden's take on Jethro Tull's 'Cross-Eyed Mary'?). So, how many freakin' times have I bought Iron Maiden's entire catalogue? I don't even wanna talk about it.
I don't even own any of their stuff anymore, because of their rockstar attitude and their anti-American gripe, and I put a personal fortune into those ... wankers ... over the years since I was fifteen years old. At this writing, that's twenty years for me, folks. Screw Iron Maiden; they've just released yet another edition of their entire catalogue and apparently the market is still not saturated. Well, I am.
So, is this a rant or not? It's both. I think it's interesting to point out that the trend of remastering and re-releasing the back catalogues of famous artists is seeing both innovation and abuse. I'm sure there are many, many more examples of both that people listening to other genres and other artists could name beyond what I've listed here.
Let's just chalk it up to another case of 'Caveat Emptor': 'Let the Buyer Beware'.





------
The Alienist
jhfurnish@yahoo.com


Related Items

Comments

The following comments are for "The Trend in Remastered Reissues in Recorded Music"
by The Alienist

easy way to money
Well, rereleasing material is a great way for record labels to make money off unsuspecting fans. Greedy greedy greedy!!!

( Posted by: pengster13 [Member] On: August 8, 2002 )

Good points.
Me, I like hearing re-releases, so long as it's done along with a genuine update of audio and a fine tuning of sound.

This subject kind of (in a roundabout way) ties into my contention that producers should get more recognition for their work and less money.

( Posted by: lucidish [Member] On: August 8, 2002 )

Re-Release
Very well written. I would just like to point out 2 things.

1: You forgot one artist famous for the re-release that doesn't really need them: AC/DC. Part of the charm of the original recordings was that practice hall smoky pub sound. Now many of the them are re-release with smaller pics and annoying "Digitally re-mastered" logos.

2:There was one group that greatly benefited from the r-release. Pink Floyd. The album The Wall had sound effects that were just begging for digital remastering. The album was a masterpiece, but was made even better when it was remastered.

But i digress. Very good work.

( Posted by: E.G. Evans [Member] On: September 3, 2002 )

The Trend...
You know your subject well. Some of the names you mention are, or were, bands I had never heard of. I believed that I knew all the bands. Thank you.

( Posted by: Dfortyseven [Member] On: May 4, 2005 )





Add Your Comment

You Must be a member to post comments and ratings. If you are NOT already a member, signup now it only takes a few seconds!

All Fields are required

Commenting Guidelines:
  • All comments must be about the writing. Non-related comments will be deleted.
  • Flaming, derogatory or messages attacking other members well be deleted.
  • Adult/Sexual comments or messages will be deleted.
  • All subjects MUST be PG. No cursing in subjects.
  • All comments must follow the sites posting guidelines.
The purpose of commenting on Lit.Org is to help writers improve their writing. Please post constructive feedback to help the author improve their work.


Username:
Password:
Subject:
Comment:





Login:
Password: