Reissues remastering

[Stipsi]

What is your opinion about this?
A reissue must be remastered to be more "conform" to the actual standards of loudness or everything must be exactly when it was released as a historical document (in this case i don't consider adjustment of glitches and imperfections as proper remaster).
I personally enjoy both ways, with a little bit of preference for the conservative way.
But also a loud remastering isn't bad at all.

[FreakAnimalFinland]

If possible, I would think ideal would be that there is master for the purpose.
If you are putting stuff online, I would assume most people feel it would suck to be appear quiet and tinny compared to all the other stuff there.

BUT, for CD, that is listened as stand alone album, not just whatever random internet browsing, it would be great if artists and labels would get back to reasonable levels of sound. I think it has been talked before, but I can only talk of gut feeling that ability to crank a bit volume from amplifier gives speakers better sound. Compared to CD you merely can open volume knob and its already full blast.

So, doing master specially for format, and further more, "CD" and "digital" ain't the same format really. CD is digital, but it ain't used in same ways as the streamed files.

[Zeno Marx]

my favorite quote regarding remastering, remixing, etc.  from elsewhere.  pretty much apply it across the board.  I'm not the least bit interested in any form of revisionism, by the artist or anyone else (least of all by the artist..."we hated how it sounded...this is how it was meant to sound").  there are very rare exceptions, and that's really just theoretical, because I can't think of any off hand.

"I love classic punk music so I really hope Dave Grohl and Southern Lord can rescue all my potential favorite records from sounding how they did when they originally blew everyone's fucking mind."

[Cranial Blast]

What is your opinion about this?
A reissue must be remastered to be more "conform" to the actual standards of loudness or everything must be exactly when it was released as a historical document (in this case i don't consider adjustment of glitches and imperfections as proper remaster).
I personally enjoy both ways, with a little bit of preference for the conservative way.
But also a loud remastering isn't bad at all.

I'm with you 100% on this notion/matter when it comes to re-issues. I'm okay with both ways of it being done as well. Often I'm just happy there is a proper reissue of sorts. More often than not, I'm usually starting towards a re-issue at a chance to re-kindle some lost time in the fact that I've still yet to actually hear the first original recording, or perhaps the original is out of print and so out of reach that this new re-issue will be like my first time of actually hearing the recording for the first time and then my opinions of it can only be based from what I hear now going forward, unless I go back in time to compare it of course, but that's generally not the case for me. Interesting topic though, as everyone comes into different things at different times, so therefore their opinions on the matter could be very mixed in reaction.