In audio and video post-production, remastering usually means performing the mastering again. Most often, this term is used in connection with older audio and video recordings that have been remastered for re-release on audio CD or DVD or Blu-ray Disc (“digitally remastered”).
The remaster process can range from a normal mastering process to a complete restoration of the existing material. Remastering can remove or at least minimize unwanted noise and noise from older monaural or stereophonic sound sources. However, the quality of the useful signal usually suffers as a result. Denoising can create audible artifacts.
Furthermore, when remastering from existing multitrack recordings, a completely new mix can be made; this creates a so-called remix. Thus, even from older sources, versions with contemporary lower dynamics and even Dolby Digital multi-track versions can now be produced. This process is used, for example, for many older films that are newly released on DVD. Even if there are no more multi-track recordings and only a mono or stereo master is available, multi-track surround sound processing is often possible (upmix). One variant, for example, is Ambient Surround Imaging (AMSI).
---
Basically, the same editing options can be used for remastering as for mastering. The term “remastering” is also used for video and footage. Here, this term refers to the scanning of film and video material for DVD or Blu-ray production. Once scanned, the digitized video footage can be post-processed by digitally removing scratches or damage to the film copy or performing color correction. If a film is restored and a new negative is created for it, it is referred to as film restoration in contrast to remastering.
The use of the term “digitally remastered” in advertising is sometimes problematic. Since the technical provision of an older sound source for publication on a digital storage medium is already a re-master in the broader sense, the term does not always guarantee the optimization of the material for today’s hi-fi requirements. Especially in the lower price segment, there are so many new releases of older, mostly copyright-free audio and video material that have been remastered but still have defects.
For very few “remastered” albums, the audio material has to be extensively restored. Sound improvements, which are suggested by the imprint “Digitally Remastered”, are quite possible in new editions, but are rarely due to the improvements in digital technology. While analog-to-digital converters have gotten significantly better in recent decades, digital equalizers and compressors still have to measure up to their analog counterparts. For this reason, analogue devices are often still used, especially in mastering, but are sensibly supplemented by digital devices such as phase-linear equalizers.
Better source material can improve the sound quality of reissues. For many older CD editions of albums made in the analogue age, pre-mastered tapes intended for vinyl editing were reused. These were often third- or fourth-generation bands with correspondingly high noise floor. The bass range was often heavily cropped and summed up to mono. For the best result, the first generation master tape must be found if it is still in good condition. Some labels that specialize in audiophile remastering advertise that they only work with original first-generation tapes.
In any case, the most important factor for the subjective listening impression is the processing by the mastering engineer. His artistic and technical decisions have had such a decisive influence on the sound that all improvements in technology can be safely ignored. That’s why older editions can be aesthetically superior to the remaster. The trend of severely limiting dynamic range or boosting highs to suggest improved separation and clarity certainly plays an important role in this phenomenon.
