So-called "remastering" - big problem.

[Neil Wilkes]

Can it possibly be made a rule that any "remastered" sources *must* contain the original sources?
The number of bad "remastered" feeds is getting sillier all the time these days as a copy of Ozone does not a mastering engineer make. Serious monitoring is an absolute must - not headphones, not HiFi speakers & certainly not "make it louder" plugins, as it is my experience that more records have been ruined by bad mastering than have ever been improved by good mastering.
Making it louder is not improving things

[rspencer]

This rule is in our Seeding Policy. If something manages to slip by us, please use the Report button to let us know about it. Thanks.

13. Remasters are NOT allowed as of June 1, 2011.
While we understand that remastering a recording may improve the listening experience for the user, we also understand that every user has a different set of ears and a different set up for listening to their shows and thus there is no one-size-fits-all remastering that can be done to a recording to improve it for everyone. This rule is not set up to bar a taper from the little tweeks they apply prior to releasing their show, it is set up to bar Joe Blow from coming along and taking a master recording (or even a who-knows-where-it's-from recording) and applying who-knows-what to it because it then sounds better on *their* system to *their* ears and they want to share it. (There may be a couple of exceptions to this rule, but that will be on a case-by-case basis with prior approval from one of our ABT moderators.)

[metalhead]

Serious monitoring is an absolute must - not headphones, not HiFi speakers ....

What, then?

[rspencer]

He's stating that he believes best results would be possible with studio-quality monitors.