I have the following CD pressings: original, Remasters and Japan. to my ear (maybe in my head and from reading), but play the Japan pressings the most, if not exclusively when I am not spinning the vinyl.
here is a nice discussion on the Original VS Remastered and Here, based on some of those posts, the remasters are flawed with channel swaps, tape hiss etc.
Those are fascinating links. I had forgotten that Jimmy Page was supposed in charge of the "remastering," but you knows what that really means. I doubt that he spent the time on the remasters he spent on the original vinyl versions. Apparently, the thinking was that the original CDs, not the original vinyl, would benefit from remastering. I assume there is no argument that the original vinyl versions were the best??!!
Is there something about the Japan CDs that distinguish them from the American CDs other than overall manufacturing quality? Did they have different masters?
Fascinating stuff! I have not paid all that much attention to remasters versus original. The Beatles remasters seem worthy to me. You could here a lot going on before, now you can hear more things distinctly, or at least I can. The bass work is much clearer, and convinces me, where I was not convinced previously so much, that Paul is (or was) one heck of a bass player. The Stones remasters did not catch my attention much one way or the other. Exile sounded better to me--the original mix seemed outright muddy--but did not seem all that much different. I'm a big Stones fan, but Exile is far from my favorite Stones album. For the Motown remasters, at least you can now hear James Jamerson, which is a very worthy result. Very fun stuff!