Come on Yax. The guitar channels were only flipped on one album (Defenders.. to Tipton's disliking).
But these are great remasters, never thought the sound was worse (actually British Steel sounds way stronger, and Unleashed also sounds at least as strong) and they had interesting bonus tracks.
I respectfully disagree. I greatly prefer the original masters of British Steel and Unleashed. I will concede, however, that the remaster may be an improvement over the original mastering of Sin After Sin, which sounded pretty weak and thin, IMO. And, Forostar correctly points out that the remasters (like many other remastered releases) do include some valuable bonus tracks. But Foro makes an even more important point that deserves highlighting -- to some extent, this is a matter of personal taste, and if you hear one of the old 1980s Maiden CDs and strongly prefer the remaster, then go with that and enjoy! Or, if you're perfectly happy with your remastered versions, then keep them and stay happy. You could drive yourself crazy turning over your CD collection to replace them with older or more expensive audiophile releases. I simply wanted to alert folks to the fact that there is indeed a difference, the dynamic range of the original mastering is indisputably greater, and most people (myself included) prefer the earlier versions. At the very least, if you already own the old CDs, definitely don't blindly get rid of them in favor of the remasters on the assumption that remastering=better. Compare them yourself, and draw your own conclusions.
my contribution here is irrelevant
Always good to get an (increasingly less common, unfortunately) Loosey sighting.