Why do I keep torturing myself with remasters?

In most all cases, the original, in the original format, from country of origin, is best sounding!

Which Bowie?

For LPs, got to discogs.com or wikipedia, find the original record company, get an original copy of the LP from the country of the original record company.  Look for the lowest matrix number in the deadwax, i.e. 1A.  If you find a stamp or writing of the original mastering facility in the deadwax, that is even better.  For example, Sterling, Masterdisk, TML (The Mastering Lab), Kendun, Precision, GP (George Piros), Van Gelder, RL (Robert Ludwig).  Forget reissues including the dreadful half-speeds.

I gave up on reissues years ago.

Ive mentioned a similar outcome several times on AA-accentuated bass(compared to a period press) that just sounds LESS realistic IMO.

I think the marketing-"original tape" "whoever"mastering is simply another way into your wallet.
The only good thing about a reissue is getting something essentially impossible to find in the used bins in decent condition for cheap.

This phoenomena affects ALL R&R. Yes,Jeff Beck,Robin Trower,Pink Floyd and others a waste of my money.I am partial to the Beatles mono releases, only because an original is essentially unobtanium$$

Im more satisfied with a few stitches listening to a period release.
Jazz reissues from the 80's(not all) is a genre I've had good luck with.

Since my tastes lean toward pre 80's R&R, I avoid albums with a barcode. An easy way to ensure you're not getting a 2nd, 3rd....
press of something. Even "greatest hits" are lousy-avoid if possible!

I love the Beatles stereo re-masters.  And although I grew up with the original mixes I wish they had re-mixed the ones where the original multi-track tapes survived.  The re-mixed Yellow Submarine is amazing--the music really comes alive.  Maybe in another ten years they'll finally re-mix and try to squeeze a few more bucks out of us.