Do you prefer the 90s remaster of the Zeppelin albums or the original CDs

[gperkins151]

Discussion is already taking place here.

[gperkins151]

Discussion is already taking place here.

I'm still on the fence, since I have only heard one original HOTH, but so far the original is winning.

[Z88]

Normally when a song is remastered (if it is well remastered) the quality of the song improves, especially when the songs are old like the LZ ones.

But sometimes the original "quality" of the song is lost.

So, it depends .

[ally]

Normally when a song is remastered (if it is well remastered) the quality of the song improves, especially when the songs are old like the LZ ones.

But sometimes the original "quality" of the song is lost.

So, it depends .

The earliest transfers to cd were a lottery at best for most albums from the 60's and 70's. I have to say the remastered Zeppelin sounds better but a good quality piece of vinyl still sounds the best

[joe (Liverpool)]

Original CD???????? Surely you mean original vinyl which preceded Cds by about 15 years

[Glyn]

The origional cd's, well mine at least, have quite a few songs missing parts (the end of In My Time of Dying and about three fourths of Hat's Off), so...90's remaster by default since it's the most complete.

[cheesehead1204]

Just realized that Going To California on the remastered fourth album fades out about 3 seconds quicker than on the original CD. Does anyone know of any other early fade outs on the remastered CDs?

[Strider]

The original cd issues were a travesty, with Physical Graffiti, Led Zep IV, Presence and Led Zep II being particularly egregious. To even ask the question is somewhat silly.

There was a total disregard on the part of Atlantic with the first cd releases of Led Zeppelin's catalogue. Disrespect towards the music and to the artwork and packaging.

The answer is simple: the remastered cds.

[fanbilly]

Prefer the original VINYL !