If Permanent sounds great, then why didn't Warners do the same for the Remasters?

I listened to Permanent on iTunes and compared the sound quality of that to Substance (JD), Closer, and Unknown Pleasures. If Permanent was issued by Warners (actually, Qwest--a branch of Warners), why didn't they use the same acoustic techniques on the Remasters as they did on Permanent? Permanent is so far the best sounding JD CD, in my opinion. What did the record producers do to improve the sound while making Permanent?

The problem is, Permanent (1995) doesn't suffer from the so called 'loudness wars' that several remaster-CD's does in the new millenium. Somewhere between 1992 and 2001 the remasters sound great, but after that it seems that loudness wins over acoustics and dynamics in sounds (instruments + vocals).

However, the Heart & Soul boxset (1997) does sound the best of all in my ears, No loudness ... pretty much the same as Permanent soundwise ... only it contains more (nearly all of the studio) tracks.

I disagree - bought "Permanent" UK CD on week of release in 1995 and this was one of the first CDs I got where I was disappointed by the sound quality. Some tracks were clearly inferior, compared to their Factory originals. Others are OK, however. Perhaps the iTunes version is from different sources?

indiearchivist wrote: I disagree - bought "Permanent" UK CD on week of release in 1995 and this was one of the first CDs I got where I was disappointed by the sound quality. Some tracks were clearly inferior, compared to their Factory originals. Others are OK, however. Perhaps the iTunes version is from different sources?

I bought the CDs from an indie record store, not iTunes. And I also do not own the Heart and Soul boxset.

I listened to Remains (also bought from the record store) and heard hisses and pops on the Warsaw recordings. I see what you guys mean on sound quality and noise reduction. I wonder if Warsaw would be remastered?

[magenta]cozmonite61[/magenta] wrote: I listened to Remains

that's a bootleg is it not?

not surprised it sounds shite.

Burt Reynolds wrote:

[magenta]cozmonite61[/magenta] wrote: I listened to Remains

that's a bootleg is it not?

not surprised it sounds shite.

Definite bootleg... :)

indiearchivist wrote: I disagree - bought "Permanent" UK CD on week of release in 1995 and this was one of the first CDs I got where I was disappointed by the sound quality. Some tracks were clearly inferior, compared to their Factory originals. Others are OK, however. Perhaps the iTunes version is from different sources?

Agree with this. While Permanent doesn't sound quite as crap as the old JD cds, it's not a patch on the excellent (and DYNAMICALLY BALANCED) sound found on the Heart & Soul box. In fact, if the Loudness Wars have carried over to JD's discography, I shudder to think of what the new remasters must sound like.

I guess there was more money to spare when Permanent was released in '95. The record companies are a bit f**ked at the moment, so the New Order remasters were done on the cheap. Sadly (or not) this means Warners are holding the hammer that's nailing their own coffin.

Permanent sounds great because Joy Division always sound great! New order is fagdisco, except 'Working Overtime' which totally rocks!!!!!