http://www.sfxmachine.com/docs/loudnesswar/

About the aim to reproduce the analog master tape as faithfully as possible, the marketing communication with « remastered » catalog is often based on « you will finally hear the Beatles/Stones/Doors as they really sounded at the time » or such messages.
I’ve always thought that remastering with better converters was to approach more the « original » sound, by amending it the least possible, adding minimal audio artifacts.
But maybe I’m wrong and you’re right. But, in my mind « make it sound more modern » would have been remixed them, and not only remaster them.

About the « crunchier sound » on Communique :
I have listen it again followed by album one yesterday, and indeed, your are right, again
I must add some precisions here to explain why I have this impression since many years (even if it’s not the real topic of this article ) :

At first, I must admit I haven’t listen to orginals albums since a long time (apart for writing the gear pages ). When I want to listen DS, I listen to bootlegs . So my « sound memory » of originals studios album is from 20 years or so.

When I discovered DS in 1988 (yes, I was abit late…) it was with first Brothers in arms (especially Walk of life, which I guess was more a big hit than MFN, here in France), and then Alchemy, which I listen to for all the summer. So my first DS sounds were « rock » sounds, « crunchy » « bluesy », with more drive than 78-79 tones.

At the end of august, I purchased album one and Communique. At first listen, I found them less exciting than rocking Alchemy. Don’t blame me, I’ve discovered their subtles qualities shortly after…
And then, my first impression was that songs like Lady writer, Angel of Mercy (I love this song ), SHS, were more « rockin’ », more « agressive » than album one. But, yes, it can also been due to David’s Rhythm part on lady Writer, or FS-1 on SHS.
The intro on News doesn’t sound so « clear » to me, well I mean less clear than e.g. In the gallery, but indeed, it’s not crunchier, it’s just a « rounder » sound (I don’t know if it’s the word, but thta’s what we say in french).

I totally agree about Lions Southbound (that’s why I didn’t quote it ), for Waterline and Southbound I must admit that I didn’t pay attention to it for years, but after reading you, I herad it yesterday ! Music can be re-discovered all the time !
For Sultans and Six blade knife, I prefer his live tone at the same time (Sultans-Chorus was the first boot I heard, so I kept this « sound memory »)

Then, after thinking, I realise that Communique has sounded « crunchier » to me, maybe due to the general compression and a more « rounder » sound, maybe also due to Mark’s playing which I find a little more « driving », maybe due to other parts (David’s rhythm on Lady writer and WDYTYG), and maybe because when I’m thinking about Communique, the first tune that came to my mind is Angel of mercy with has obviously the crunchiest lead tone in a studio song from the 78-79 period !

Sorry for being long, and maybe doesn’t it interest many people, but I can’t stop me writing about that !

However, talking about the possible dynamic range of a medium misses the point here because with pop music normally the dynamic range is **artificially reduced** anyway.

Remastered CDs often don’t have a bigger dynamic range but often a smaller. Modern mastering more and more developped toward making a recording hotter ( = louder) than competitors, which implies a reduced dynamic range (maximum loudness would be to stay just a bit below 0 dB all the time, in other words no dynamics at all !) . If you compare the old Dire Straits CDs to the remastered ones, you will notice that the new ones are louder.

Digital mastering units allow you to compress peaks much more efficient than those old analog compressors which always have an attack time > 0 ms (the time a compressor needs to react to a peak), so they are simply faster, and they produce less audible artefacts.

You are right to say that the converter quality of modern equipment is better than converters from the mid 80ies. But I don’t think the aim was to reproduce the analog master tape as faithfully as possible, but instead to process it to make it sound more modern. They also reduced some treble on the remastered first CD which was said to be very trebly (if this is bad or not is just a matter of taste).

Strange that you say Communique sounds crunchier to you, I always have the impression that there is more (subtle) distortion on album one (e.g. Down to the Waterline, Lions, Southbound lead,..) than on Communique. Especially Once Upon a time, News, WDYTYG, Single Handed Sailor sound totally clean to me.

About Communique, I had always found it indeed sweeter, smoother than album one, and that’s why I’ve always preferred it.

I remember Ingo saying on Mknews some years ago that “sound on album one is clear like water”

Indeed, exactly, but I find that Mark’s guitar sound is “too much” clear on e.g. six blade knife (I prefer a crunchy tone like ine live at the BBC), and I like his tone on Angel of Mercy, SHS, or Lady Writer, more than on Sultans (I prefer his tone on Chorus 78).
Maybe I confuse a little bit between guitar sound and album general sound, but I remember that it was my first impression when I discovered these 2 firsts albums : a little more “gain”, more “crunchy” on Communique, and that was what I liked !

I have all three version, too, and don’t think that the guitar volume on WDYTYG (or anything else) was different.

It might however be that if you e.g. reduce high or low frequencies in the mastering process, some cymbals /hihats or the bass seems lower in volume, and thus the guitars or vocals appear a bit louder.