ベスト・オブ・レッド・ツェッペリン~リマスターズ
仕様 | 価格 | 新品 | 中古品 |
CD, CD, インポート, 1990/6/30
"もう一度試してください。" | 通常盤 | ¥2,164 | ¥549 |
CD, 2000/4/19
"もう一度試してください。" | 通常盤 |
—
| ¥10,210 | ¥361 |
CD, インポート, 1997/11/18
"もう一度試してください。" | インポート |
—
| ¥15,000 | ¥470 |
CD, 限定版, 2006/3/8
"もう一度試してください。" | 限定版 |
—
| — | ¥1,060 |
この商品をチェックした人はこんな商品もチェックしています
ページ 1 以下のうち 1 最初から観るページ 1 以下のうち 1
曲目リスト
ディスク: 1
1 | コミュニケーション・ブレイクダウン |
2 | ゴナ・リーブ・ユー |
3 | グッド・タイムス・バッド・タイムス |
4 | 幻惑されて |
5 | 胸いっぱいの愛を |
6 | ハートブレイカー |
7 | ランブル・オン |
8 | 移民の歌 |
9 | 祭典の日 |
10 | 貴方を愛しつづけて |
11 | ブラック・ドッグ |
12 | ロックン・ロール |
13 | 限りなき戦い |
14 | ミスティ・マウンテン・ホップ |
15 | 天国への階段 |
ディスク: 2
1 | 永遠の詩 |
2 | レイン・ソング |
3 | デイジャ・メイク・ハー |
4 | ノー・クウォーター |
5 | 聖なる館 |
6 | カシミール |
7 | トランプルド・アンダー・フィット |
8 | 俺の罪 |
9 | アキレス最後の戦い |
10 | オール・マイ・ラブ |
11 | イン・ジ・イブニング |
登録情報
- メーカーにより製造中止になりました : いいえ
- 梱包サイズ : 14.09 x 12.63 x 1.37 cm; 80.32 g
- メーカー : イーストウエスト・ジャパン
- EAN : 4988029406545
- レーベル : イーストウエスト・ジャパン
- ASIN : B00005HEH7
- ディスク枚数 : 2
- Amazon 売れ筋ランキング: - 69,424位ミュージック (ミュージックの売れ筋ランキングを見る)
- - 2,767位ハードロック・ヘヴィーメタル
- - 11,936位ロック (ミュージック)
- カスタマーレビュー:
-
トップレビュー
上位レビュー、対象国: 日本
レビューのフィルタリング中に問題が発生しました。後でもう一度試してください。
2022年3月18日に日本でレビュー済み
Amazonで購入
中古でも結構綺麗で満足です。値段も手頃かな
2021年4月7日に日本でレビュー済み
Amazonで購入
レッドツェッペリンのベストとしては、リマスター版で最高のアルバムだと思う。
売り上げ総数、3億枚と言われるのが、納得できる。
売り上げ総数、3億枚と言われるのが、納得できる。
2021年3月10日に日本でレビュー済み
Amazonで購入
ベストアルバムは、他にもあるようですが、このアルバムは選曲がいいし、並び方もベスト。
2024年3月31日に日本でレビュー済み
Amazonで購入
歌手カードも綺麗な状態でした。
CDも問題なく聞けてよかったです。
IMMIGRANT SONG を聴けて感激🤩
CDも問題なく聞けてよかったです。
IMMIGRANT SONG を聴けて感激🤩
2021年2月4日に日本でレビュー済み
Amazonで購入
レッドツェッペリンのアルバムを自分なりに購入をして聴いて来ましたが、この様な音源は聴いた事が有りません。リマスター音源のせいでしょうか。とても新鮮で王者レッドツェッペリンの音楽と感じられます。オリジナルメンバーでのライブは不可能になりましたが、いつの時代も色あせないアルバムだと思われます。
2017年11月12日に日本でレビュー済み
Amazonで購入
ロバートプラントが ツェッペリンは ヘビメタバンドではないと 言ってたが、改めて聴くと 確かに 違うね。ツェッペリンは ツェッペリンと言うジァンルです。
2018年11月18日に日本でレビュー済み
Amazonで購入
聴いてみるとブリティッシュな感じとヘビメタの融合😄ローリング・ストーンズとかヴァン・ヘイレンとか合体したような感じでこのバンド😄じゃなきゃ出来ないと思った😅つたえかたへたくそでごめんなちゃい とにかく最高😃⤴⤴
他の国からのトップレビュー
Richard W. Fodchuk
5つ星のうち5.0
Awesome CD
2024年2月8日にカナダでレビュー済みAmazonで購入
VERY WELL DONE, GREAT GREAT BAND
MARIO PAULINO LUNA GARDUÑO
5つ星のうち5.0
Excelente disco
2023年4月6日にメキシコでレビュー済みAmazonで購入
Muy buen disco, ninguna queja.
Fred C.
5つ星のうち5.0
Fine by me
2022年5月23日にアメリカ合衆国でレビュー済みAmazonで購入
5/31/22
Based on comments on various Zepp CD and LP releases, this CD-set might not be the ultimate, but when played through my Topping D10-S, it's plenty good for me, and I hated CDs until about 2016, when affordable CD-playback in general finally started to sound good. The cymbals are as clean as anything I've heard on ANY recording (you can even hear the brassy shimmering), at least where it matters. There is some grunge from the analog master in some loud passages, but it doesn't bother me.
Hopefully, the following information will help some readers to overcome the disinformation which has been spewed about various aspects of digital audio since its inception, just to make money, which has led many to give up on digital audio. I gave up on CDs for over a decade due to the belief that "CD sound" (a subtle but irritating artificiality and sheen) was inherent to CDs, which was based on my experience with CDs, and the fact that some high-end reviewers used the term "CD sound." They should have known better, with their access to cost-no-object DACs and CD-players. But according to undeniable, trustworthy experts, such as Goldman Labs (famous for their $300K turntables) and Dr. Aix (famous for his high-res recordings), CDs themselves have the potential to sound at least as good as any format.
However, early brick-wall anti-aliasing filters on 44.1 kHz non-oversampling decks caused a dry/smeared high end and mediocre spaciousness/imaging (which can be heard very easily in the cymbals on the Herbie Hancock Quartet CD, a jazz standard which is otherwise fantastic) until they were replaced by Apogee's 924 and 944 aftermarket filters, starting in about September of 1985. Eventually, the early digital recordings made with non-oversampling decks with lousy input filters were replaced, if there were analog masters, by recordings made with clean digital recorders, although not necessarily from clean analog masters. Recordings which were recorded directly to digital with lousy input filters, without also recording directly to analog just in case digital turned out to have problems, obviously can't be fixed. So, the "perfect sound forever" mantra took a toll.
Non-oversampling decks with a sampling rate of 48 kHz or higher had good phase linearity even before Apogee filters became available. The 3M system had a 50 kHz sampling rate and replayed its recordings through the DACs used as part of the ADCs, giving it perfect net amplitude-linearity and legendary sound quality. But the recordings had to be recorded and played on the same deck for the best sound quality, which isn't the best approach for long-term archiving, especially since the 3M's reliability left something to be desired.
In about 2006, asynchronous sample-rate converters (ASRCs) were introduced, and it became possible to make 44.1 kHz recordings from 48 kHz recordings, and from very early digital recordings with a variety of sampling-rates, without converting to analog and then back to digital, and without adding significant distortion. There were earlier SRCs which could convert between certain sampling-rates, but clearly they weren't satisfactory in all cases.
16-bit oversampling decks, which use sigma-delta ADCs, a.k.a. "1-bit" ADCs, referring to the pulse-density-modulated (PDM) carrier at the output of the modulator stage, have been available commercially since 1982 (JVC's stereo ADC, the VP-900). Sony's 24-channel oversampling deck, the PCM 3324, was introduced in 1984 and became the industry standard (it would have been introduced in 1981, but was delayed for three years by the industry's need to edit by physically cutting and splicing the tape, which required Sony to devise a complex encoding scheme). A few years later, the PCM 3348, which put 48 tracks on a half-inch tape, was introduced. The main advantages of oversampling converters is that a) their high sampling rate allows them to use simple, low-distortion input filters with a linear phase response in the audio range; b) they're inherently linear to the specified number of bits; and c) they can provide perfect channel-matching, because the channel-characteristics are determined by a digital process, which is identical for each channel. When the PCM is converted back to analog with a sigma-delta DAC, it's first converted back to high-frequency, high-resolution PDM, to avoid the need for brick-wall output filters. The loss incurred by converting between PDM and PCM is insignificant, although it should be kept to a minimum. If you need more detail, there are plenty of online explanations.
So, there have been excellent digital decks suitable for dubbing analog masters (stereo or multi-track) to 16-bit digital since the dawn of the digital era, and there are indications that some groups secretly did so in order to preserve their master recordings, but that they reserve such recordings for release on LPs to retain control over them, since they could be copied perfectly if they were put on CDs. (Software is stored on CDs, and it can't have a single bit-error. Software does have an extra layer of error-correction, but it's rarely needed.) These groups make their CDs from inferior masters, such as old analog masters which have been used a lot, or masters with an inferior mix. As much as I'd like to check out some LPs, I refuse to get back into vinyl, because it's too expensive and inconvenient.
However, it appears that CD-players were deliberately crippled with "CD sound" (a subtle but irritating artificiality and sheen) to keep selling us bogus "solutions" year after year, until the CD's reputation was almost destroyed and CD-sales began to tank. In 1984, Dr. Roger Lagadec identified its cause as pre-ringing, a.k.a. "pre-echo" or "dispersion," related to passband-ripple in the digital interpolation filters (DIFs) on DAC-chips, and provided solutions (for details, see Julian Dunn's online paper on anti-aliasing filters). (High-res FLACs don't require as much interpolation as CDs, perhaps partly explaining their reputation for superior sound quality.)
Yamaha apparently took Dr. Lagadec seriously, and used external digital filters in their 1980s line of "natural sound" CD-players, which included one in the $400 range as I recall, and which I learned decades later had good sound quality. (External digital filters were high-performance DIFs on separate chips, which are rarely used these days even in high-end players, due to advancements in the DIFs on DAC-chips.) However, there was apparently a cover-up to prevent as many people as possible from learning the actual cause of "CD sound," and that the audio-gear industry could have eliminated it if it wanted to do so. This cover-up apparently included audio reviewers and even Yamaha, whose ads attributed "natural sound" to the use of short signal paths, which has always been a common design practice. After reading this ad, I dismissed "natural sound" as an ad slogan and Yamaha as overpriced Japanese junk.
I gave up on CDs from 2004-2016 due to my belief that "CD sound" was inherent to CDs, and then accidentally listened closely to a CD of Beethoven's 9th being played on KUAT, and realized that there was no "CD sound." So, I investigated, and found an article by Robert Harley of the Absolute Sound which mentioned that CD-sound had been eliminated by tweaking the DIFs on DAC-chips, and that it constituted a revolution in CD-playback. So, in 2018, I gambled $100 on a lossless player with Sabre 9018 DAC-chips, which amazed me. A couple of years later, I got an upgraded version with 9028's, and a few months later, a D10-S, which uses 9038's. Although I'm satisfied with the D10-S, the best DACs cost at least $1K.
Now that the problems with CD-playback are history, the only thing holding CDs back is the quality of the analog signal fed into the digital recorder, but that's not a significant issue with the Remasters CDs.
Based on comments on various Zepp CD and LP releases, this CD-set might not be the ultimate, but when played through my Topping D10-S, it's plenty good for me, and I hated CDs until about 2016, when affordable CD-playback in general finally started to sound good. The cymbals are as clean as anything I've heard on ANY recording (you can even hear the brassy shimmering), at least where it matters. There is some grunge from the analog master in some loud passages, but it doesn't bother me.
Hopefully, the following information will help some readers to overcome the disinformation which has been spewed about various aspects of digital audio since its inception, just to make money, which has led many to give up on digital audio. I gave up on CDs for over a decade due to the belief that "CD sound" (a subtle but irritating artificiality and sheen) was inherent to CDs, which was based on my experience with CDs, and the fact that some high-end reviewers used the term "CD sound." They should have known better, with their access to cost-no-object DACs and CD-players. But according to undeniable, trustworthy experts, such as Goldman Labs (famous for their $300K turntables) and Dr. Aix (famous for his high-res recordings), CDs themselves have the potential to sound at least as good as any format.
However, early brick-wall anti-aliasing filters on 44.1 kHz non-oversampling decks caused a dry/smeared high end and mediocre spaciousness/imaging (which can be heard very easily in the cymbals on the Herbie Hancock Quartet CD, a jazz standard which is otherwise fantastic) until they were replaced by Apogee's 924 and 944 aftermarket filters, starting in about September of 1985. Eventually, the early digital recordings made with non-oversampling decks with lousy input filters were replaced, if there were analog masters, by recordings made with clean digital recorders, although not necessarily from clean analog masters. Recordings which were recorded directly to digital with lousy input filters, without also recording directly to analog just in case digital turned out to have problems, obviously can't be fixed. So, the "perfect sound forever" mantra took a toll.
Non-oversampling decks with a sampling rate of 48 kHz or higher had good phase linearity even before Apogee filters became available. The 3M system had a 50 kHz sampling rate and replayed its recordings through the DACs used as part of the ADCs, giving it perfect net amplitude-linearity and legendary sound quality. But the recordings had to be recorded and played on the same deck for the best sound quality, which isn't the best approach for long-term archiving, especially since the 3M's reliability left something to be desired.
In about 2006, asynchronous sample-rate converters (ASRCs) were introduced, and it became possible to make 44.1 kHz recordings from 48 kHz recordings, and from very early digital recordings with a variety of sampling-rates, without converting to analog and then back to digital, and without adding significant distortion. There were earlier SRCs which could convert between certain sampling-rates, but clearly they weren't satisfactory in all cases.
16-bit oversampling decks, which use sigma-delta ADCs, a.k.a. "1-bit" ADCs, referring to the pulse-density-modulated (PDM) carrier at the output of the modulator stage, have been available commercially since 1982 (JVC's stereo ADC, the VP-900). Sony's 24-channel oversampling deck, the PCM 3324, was introduced in 1984 and became the industry standard (it would have been introduced in 1981, but was delayed for three years by the industry's need to edit by physically cutting and splicing the tape, which required Sony to devise a complex encoding scheme). A few years later, the PCM 3348, which put 48 tracks on a half-inch tape, was introduced. The main advantages of oversampling converters is that a) their high sampling rate allows them to use simple, low-distortion input filters with a linear phase response in the audio range; b) they're inherently linear to the specified number of bits; and c) they can provide perfect channel-matching, because the channel-characteristics are determined by a digital process, which is identical for each channel. When the PCM is converted back to analog with a sigma-delta DAC, it's first converted back to high-frequency, high-resolution PDM, to avoid the need for brick-wall output filters. The loss incurred by converting between PDM and PCM is insignificant, although it should be kept to a minimum. If you need more detail, there are plenty of online explanations.
So, there have been excellent digital decks suitable for dubbing analog masters (stereo or multi-track) to 16-bit digital since the dawn of the digital era, and there are indications that some groups secretly did so in order to preserve their master recordings, but that they reserve such recordings for release on LPs to retain control over them, since they could be copied perfectly if they were put on CDs. (Software is stored on CDs, and it can't have a single bit-error. Software does have an extra layer of error-correction, but it's rarely needed.) These groups make their CDs from inferior masters, such as old analog masters which have been used a lot, or masters with an inferior mix. As much as I'd like to check out some LPs, I refuse to get back into vinyl, because it's too expensive and inconvenient.
However, it appears that CD-players were deliberately crippled with "CD sound" (a subtle but irritating artificiality and sheen) to keep selling us bogus "solutions" year after year, until the CD's reputation was almost destroyed and CD-sales began to tank. In 1984, Dr. Roger Lagadec identified its cause as pre-ringing, a.k.a. "pre-echo" or "dispersion," related to passband-ripple in the digital interpolation filters (DIFs) on DAC-chips, and provided solutions (for details, see Julian Dunn's online paper on anti-aliasing filters). (High-res FLACs don't require as much interpolation as CDs, perhaps partly explaining their reputation for superior sound quality.)
Yamaha apparently took Dr. Lagadec seriously, and used external digital filters in their 1980s line of "natural sound" CD-players, which included one in the $400 range as I recall, and which I learned decades later had good sound quality. (External digital filters were high-performance DIFs on separate chips, which are rarely used these days even in high-end players, due to advancements in the DIFs on DAC-chips.) However, there was apparently a cover-up to prevent as many people as possible from learning the actual cause of "CD sound," and that the audio-gear industry could have eliminated it if it wanted to do so. This cover-up apparently included audio reviewers and even Yamaha, whose ads attributed "natural sound" to the use of short signal paths, which has always been a common design practice. After reading this ad, I dismissed "natural sound" as an ad slogan and Yamaha as overpriced Japanese junk.
I gave up on CDs from 2004-2016 due to my belief that "CD sound" was inherent to CDs, and then accidentally listened closely to a CD of Beethoven's 9th being played on KUAT, and realized that there was no "CD sound." So, I investigated, and found an article by Robert Harley of the Absolute Sound which mentioned that CD-sound had been eliminated by tweaking the DIFs on DAC-chips, and that it constituted a revolution in CD-playback. So, in 2018, I gambled $100 on a lossless player with Sabre 9018 DAC-chips, which amazed me. A couple of years later, I got an upgraded version with 9028's, and a few months later, a D10-S, which uses 9038's. Although I'm satisfied with the D10-S, the best DACs cost at least $1K.
Now that the problems with CD-playback are history, the only thing holding CDs back is the quality of the analog signal fed into the digital recorder, but that's not a significant issue with the Remasters CDs.
MASSIMO
5つ星のうち5.0
La storia
2024年5月15日にイタリアでレビュー済みAmazonで購入
Sempre attuali...anche perché dopo non credo ci siano stati gruppi al loro livello musicale,nel loro genere
Stewart Stott
5つ星のうち5.0
good product
2024年3月20日に英国でレビュー済みAmazonで購入
great remaster!