Warner Bros. discs and the "RE" designation

[David R. Modny]

Do we know for sure if the RE-1, RE-2, etc...imprint on the old Warner's CD titles indicates an actual remastering...or something completely unrelated? I was at a used shop today on my lunch break and saw a copy of "History: America's Greatest Hits" with an RE-3 designation!

Call me cynical, but I just find it hard to believe that this title may have been re-done three times...lol!:confused:

[jason r. baur]

Whenever ICE magazine wanted to alert its readers to a Warners remaster, they would say to look for the RE-1 imprint. This happened with Hendrix, Rumours, Prince, etc. So I have to believe it does indicate a remaster. But after comments I've read in other threads in this forum, who can be 100% sure anymore?

[Steve Hoffman]

NOT A REMASTER!

Just a "re-do", usually a clone made from the original digital master. So it's gonna sound the same.

On occasion though, Re means Re....:rolleyes:

[jason r. baur]

Originally posted by Steve Hoffman
NOT A REMASTER!

Just a "re-do", usually a clone made from the original digital master. So it's gonna sound the same.

On occasion though, Re means Re....:rolleyes:
HUH? Hendrix and Rumours weren't remasters? No way the RE-1's of Are You Experienced and Rumours sounded the same as the originals!

[Steve Hoffman]

I said "On occasion" yes, they are.

But the "re" doesn't always mean that...

[jason r. baur]

Oh, THAT'S what that last sentence meant!

[David R. Modny]

Originally posted by Steve Hoffman
NOT A REMASTER!

Just a "re-do", usually a clone made from the original digital master. So it's gonna sound the same.

On occasion though, Re means Re....:rolleyes:


That's what we needed to clarify. Thanks!

(Now...of course, someone is going to *have* to come up with a list where on that rare occasion...the "RE" actually *was* an "overhaul").

(...and then, of course, specify whether or not the "overhaul" was actually an "improvement"!).


Fun hobby....eh? :eek:

[Sckott]

When you think of "RE-1" it's really "Revision". If they have to use the same catalog number and if either the existing manufacturing part is replaced for technical, emotional or sonic reasons, a new one is made, and is called "RE-1" so's not to be confused with the original attempt.

A lot of new discs (new product) from many different labels have the RE-1, RE-2 designation. "Revised"....."Revisited".... Re....Re...Re....:p and sometimes the 1st issues have this.

Note: For those who might not know; this applies to vinyl as well as Cds.

[Dave]

I sure am grateful that this never applies to DCC's work.:)

[Craig]

Originally posted by Dave
I sure am grateful that this never applies to DCC's work.:)
This happened on REels Of Fire

[Steve Hoffman]

And on the Re-ombies as well!

Also Toga Re-ock

Not much else on DCC though...

[Michael]

Originally posted by Steve Hoffman
And on the Re-ombies as well!

Also Toga Re-ock

Not much else on DCC though...

Yes, Thank Goodness Only on the Re-ombies & Toga Re-ock! LOL!
Less we have to search for that "Special" extra CD!

[trhunnicutt]

Originally posted by Sckott

Note: For those who might not know; this applies to vinyl as well as Cds.

I've found in direct A-B comparisons that a "re" version of an LP sounds worse than a "non-re" pressing.

Every time. Don't know about CD's. I don't look at stampers on those :)

[Steve Hoffman]

Sure, because (usually) the original LP cutting is from the master tape, and a second or third cutting is from the EQ'd cutting dub made at that first cutting session.

[trhunnicutt]

Originally posted by Steve Hoffman
Sure, because (usually) the original LP cutting is from the master tape, and a second or third cutting is from the EQ'd cutting dub made at that first cutting session.

Thanks Steve. I thought that's what was going on, but didn't know about the EQ'd cutting dub.

You wouldn't believe the difference on a worn Jackson Brown "Running On Empty" 1st pressing, versus a brand new, out of the shrinkwrap, "re" copy from the late 80's. No contest. Not even close.

[RickA]

Originally posted by jason r. baur

HUH? Hendrix and Rumours weren't remasters? No way the RE-1's of Are You Experienced and Rumours sounded the same as the originals!

I remember reading in ICE long ago that U2 were not happy with the EQ of the Joshua Tree and did some touch up. The codes (RE) helped consumers but labels didn't "advertise" such things in fear of returns.

Rick A.