as your system improves do you hear more and more flaws in recordings?

[MylesBAstor]

I don't think the FIM Yamamoto Trio - What a Wonderful Trio is too bad. That was done with all the latest digital "doo-dads". I've heard several other recordings done on Sonoma's and such that I'd be perfectly fine with. And yes, I have a safety copy of "Way Out West" given to me by Roy DuNann.

Here's an interesting thread on GS talking about the topic.

Speakers too revealing

Bruce: I actually find it amazing how many great jazz recordings (musically and sonically) were done in the dawn of the stereo era (of course it certainly didn't hurt that RVG had his hand in a majority of them). The Audiophile, Prestige, Riverside, Moodsville, Fantasy, Pablo, BN, Impulse and Verve catalogs are filled with amazing recordings. Tonight was listening to Freddie Hubbard hub tones AP/BN 45 rpm and was blown away by the sound! Hub tones was a great album too to test two cartridges am currently listening to as welll as the Wave Kinetics footers.

 

[Ethan Winer]

we will put it up for a vote with a panel of experts.

Okay, so who gets to choose the experts?

You cannot make conclusive judgements on matters of art and taste. So the whole notion of asking people to name a recording as good as [whatever] is flawed.

Obviously the gear used to record Way Out West was very good.

Obviously the gear professional recording engineers use today is very good too. You naively proclaimed that old recordings sound good because of the gear, even though you since admitted you have no direct experience with any recording gear of any type or vintage.

I think it is just your way of slamming the gear that was used to make the recording as you certainly don't want to give it any credit for the outstanding results that were achieved by using it.

Say what? Why would I slam gear? You'll do better to address the points rather than try to psychoanalyze me.

Again, all recordings - not just old ones - sound good because the musicians are good, the room is good, the gear is good, and the engineers are good. Good sound does not require analog tape or tubes, and to believe otherwise is just silly.

--Ethan

 

[RBFC]

Might it be worthwhile to state that there is a certain "magic" that happens when all factors involved coalesce to produce one of the legendary recordings? Certainly if there were one specific combination of gear, engineer, studio, and musicians, we would see consistently awesome recordings from those forces.....

Lee

 

[Ethan Winer]

i have no illusions that you would percieve things the same as me listening to the same music side by side. and there is nothing wrong with that. it might even be the nature of art.

Exactly. I happen to think Mozart wrote competent bubblegum music that appeals to the masses. Others think he's the greatest composer of all time. Who's right?

offer specific recordings which you consider superior to these (or other) vintage gems. be very specific as far as to the particular media and number. be specific as to the gear and general room environment your perceptions are based on.

I already did that across several threads. I've described my room and my gear in the past, and the other day I listed a bunch of concert DVDs I think sound excellent.

then anyone can investigate for themselves whether they agree or disagree with whoever's opinion.

I find such comparisons uninteresting because there can be no conclusive resolution. I don't care who likes what music or what recordings, other than my friends who are my friends because we have common likes and dislikes. However, I care very much what people looking for purchasing advice are told about the science of audio.

the hardest thing for me in this environment is to pin down objectivisits on their actual listening reference as they rarely describe their perspective in those terms.

I can do that all day long. What do you want to know?

i would gladly offer my room for anyone to compare any of the reference vintage or modern recordings.

You profile lists no address. I forget if you told me where you live. I'm willing to drive maybe two hours from my home in Western Connecticut.

--Ethan

 

[JackD201]

Hey Ethan,

Here's a thought. Why not get the same panel that dubbed you an expert? You are one right? It's in your signature after all.

 

[FrantzM]

Hi

While I would not qualify Mozart music as "Bubblegum".. There is a school of thought, that is almost close to a consensus that find his music ,"light" for the lack of a better word... While experts the world over would admit that his skills as a composer are prodigious and his music does have a flow that is difficult to match, several do think and have discussed it as a music lacking substance... Many would not put him in the same place as Bach or Beethoven.. With Mozart in Classical circles there is always a "but" as his music is indeed excellent but lack that transcendence that is attributed to Bach or Beethoven ( I would add rightly so ) ... There is no equivalent of Beethoven Fifth opening for example or Bach's Toccata and Fugue in in Mozart music ... Those few notes that say it all before the piece has even begun .. That bring a drama , a pathos that seems to be entirely absent in Mozartian music ... Those four notes of the Beethoven 5 are that ... They say it all .. That is staggeringly good, that is heavy, that is substance ...

Sorry for the OT

 

[Gregadd]

The quality of the product is more often than not determined by competent execution of the methodology chosen rather than the particular methodology or gear selected.

Furthermore we judge the result not so much against an absolute but by what the maker was trying to achieve.

To take all analog recordings and compare them to all digital recordings is not only absurd but pointless. At least in digitals current state of quality. Digital dominates becasue the recording industry wants it that way.

Why argue? Because the survival of vinyl depends on its superiority. Other factors do contribute.

 

[microstrip]

One particular aspect of vinyl reproduction is the subjective effect of noise during LP playback. Although it does not show in classical measurements, in high quality analog systems the noise and artifacts of vinyl seem to "separate" from the musical stage and performance and do not affect the sound of instruments so closely. The typical question of occasional listeners is just - how do you keep your records so noiseless? But the electrical noise is there!
Sometimes just changing the platter mat enhances or kills this effect.

 

[MylesBAstor]

In fact, I think the recording process is the weakest link in our hobby by far these days. Nearly every recording should be great nowadays, but they sure miss the mark!

Tom

Tom:

I think we've talked about the reasons for this -- and many are totally unrelated to the equipment used in the recording process. Many of the great sounding halls and studios are gone. There's no time to get the sound right first because of union costs. As a result, it's fix the recording after the fact. The quality of the producers/engineers is not the same. I also think that there was more excitement about the sound at the dawn of the stereo era than in 1980.

 

[RBFC]

Great post, Myles. I agree.

Lee

 

[jazdoc]

I think we've talked about the reasons for this -- and many are totally unrelated to the equipment used in the recording process. Many of the great sounding halls and studios are gone. There's no time to get the sound right first because of union costs. As a result, it's fix the recording after the fact. The quality of the producers/engineers is not the same.

As an example from Carpe Diem:

"The guys who push the piano onto the stage at Carnegie Hall make more than the guy who plays it. Dennis O’Connell, who oversees props at the legendary concert hall, made $530,044 in the fiscal year that ended in June. A concert pianist making $20,000 a night would have to give 27 performances to beat him.

The four other members of the full-time stage crew — two carpenters and two electricians — had an average income of $430,543 during the same period, according to Carnegie Hall’s tax return (see a portion above). Only theater director Clive Gillinson earns more with his $946,581 in salary and benefits.

The stagehands have a powerful union: Local One of the International Alliance of Theatrical Stage Employees shut down 26 Broadway shows for nearly three weeks in November 2007. Its strike cost the city $40 million, the city comptroller said at the time. Stagehands and producers agreed on a five-year contract that both sides called a compromise.


Labor historian Joshua Freeman said the union’s power to shut down a vital part of the city’s entertainment industry gives it leverage."

 

[silviajulieta]

Let's look at this from another angle. I am going to name two LPs that will knock your socks off assuming you have a decent system: Sonny Rollins "Way Out West" and the 45 RPM version of Herbie Hancock "Maiden Voyage." Way out West was recorded in 1957 and Maiden Voyage was recorded in 1965. Does anyone think that with the level of consumer gear available in both 1957 and 1965 that anyone heard close to what we are hearing today on both of these remarkable albums? I'm sure there were a select few who were pulling off some pretty good sound in those days, specially by 1965. However, I dare say that the amount of info we are pulling off these recordings today would shock those who bought them back in the day. And what a testimony to the recording engineers, analog tape, and vacuum tubes. Most modern day engineers should be ashamed of themselves after listening to the quality of sound that was laid down in 1957. Specially those engineers who are involved in the loudness wars where they record everything at 0dB so there is zero dynamic range.

Dear Mep: SR " Way Out West ", I don't know what do you mean in specific ( which factors or recording quality performance parameters are you reffering to. ) when you say that this recording is a " remarkable album " and " to the quality sound " of the recording. I don't know either which cartridge you own or used to evaluate your LPs sound quality levels.

Anyway, I love SR and I have almost any single SR recording ( both: the original one and re-issues. I have the 33 and 45 rpm re-issues and the original one in this SR recording. ). I own it not because " its remarkable quality sound " but because SR skills/feelings with the Tenor instrument.

Way out West IMHO is a so so recording not a remarkable one ( from the quality sound point of view. ) and nothing to remember on quality recording level other than the recorded bass and in some tracks the drumer's cymbals. The recording was/does not take the real " color /timbre " of the SR instrument, a tenor sax in a live event at a jazz club with out microphone could blow you away with the first notes you heard. In that SR recording that tenor has no real/true " sound ".

You can compare the Coltrane tenor sound in So What where at least the instrument has the life to put the drama in that track. You can take the Pepper Adams baritone sax on Alone Together CHET recording and at the very first note you heard and feel the instrument life ( like in the Coltrane one. ) that the SR recording just had/has not.

Btw, this CHET recording IMHO is one of the best vintage sound quality recordings of all times and IMHO too way better that that SR recording you love so much.

Today?, well we have " tons " of recordings that are IMHO not only way better than that SR LP but that made that the SR one be on the " mediocrity " on sound quality. You can take Bennie Wallace moodsville recording ( Groove Note. ) and compare the same tenor instrument sound quality , the John Klemmer : Touch recording is another example of better sound quality, Soular Energy by Ray Brown Trio another one ( several of this Concord Records are great recordings. ), Pete Fountain and friends ( Capitol. ) is something that you need to hear to understand what means " sound quality ", you can take the Bob James/Earl Klugh collaborations where the recording quality is really high, almost all Reference Recording LPs are great recordings: you need to listen Dafos to understand what I mean with sound quality on these RR LPs ( with very difficult sounding instruments. ), Esther LP by ATR recordings: wow!, please listen to those Proprious recordings like Jazz at the Pawnshop and other ones: just amazing, do you heard Mary Stallings on Fine and Mellow track ( Clarity Recording. )? no? well you need to hear it for discern on sound quality levels, Michael Ruff on Sheffieldlab ( no D2D. ), Eva Cassidy on Fields of Gold and Autumn Leaves tracks: just outstanding, Jheena Lodwick ( all my loving. ): great quality recording where the SR recorders can't even dream, He Xun Tian Paramita LP ( wind music. ) or Anne Bisson ( Blue Mind ) IMHO due to all the vintage limitations recording factors the old engineers can't even imagine the very high level of quality sound in both recordings.
I can name you a lot lot more LPs with a great quality sound that no one vintage recording could and can't approach other than that great St. James Infirmary track on that vintage "Satchmo Plays King Oliver " recording.

Mep, take any ECM label recording and you could enjoy its high sound quality: K. Jarret or P. metheny, three examples on Audioquest label are: Doug Macleod ( come to find. ) trio / Sam McClain or Terry Evans ( Puttin it down. ), in the Chesky label this jazz trio recording is first rate: Fred hersch Trio ( Dancing in the Dark. ), of course Three-Way Mirror ( trio ) on RR label, from Vital label you can choose: Todd Cochran or ToolBox, Donald Fagen: Morph the Cat, R.L.Jones: it's like this , P. Barber Café Blue Nardis track 33rpm version, KC & the Sunshine Band: all in a nigth's work, Al Hudson: One Way, Kool&The Gang: Emergency, Alphonse Mouson: Poussez! ( Vanguard records. ), Fun Fun: Color my Love 45rpm version, D. Bowie: Cat People 45rpm version, Ray Parker Jr.: Ghostbusters 45rpm version, Michael Jackson: Billie Jean: can you ask for more after you hear this track? and I can go on and on.

The vintage classical recordings are no better either: almost all RCA Living Presence and Mercury's recordings were recorded with amplifiers that almost always shows its klipping level. IMHO any today RR classical recording is way better.

A great vintage recording IMHO is the RCA: Presenting Montserrat Caballé, what so fine recording skills to " capture " the wide and deep " flavor " of the great Caballé almost celestial voice, just outstanding!.

Even those few vintage recordings with great quality sound IMHO There is no contest between vintage recordings ( that IMHO are only a myth, a false myth. ) and " today " ones at sound quality level.


Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.

 

[microstrip]

Tom:

I think we've talked about the reasons for this -- and many are totally unrelated to the equipment used in the recording process. Many of the great sounding halls and studios are gone. There's no time to get the sound right first because of union costs. As a result, it's fix the recording after the fact. The quality of the producers/engineers is not the same. I also think that there was more excitement about the sound at the dawn of the stereo era than in 1980.

Tom,

I hope someone more qualified than me in these matters disagrees with your so negative views...

I agree we should not mix the quality of the producers/engineers with the quality of the equipment. The labor conditions changed a lot and may be some of the excitement is gone. But even in these conditions we have excellent quality recordings. Many current Deutsche Gramophone and Decca recordings have excellent quality. Recordings from many small labels have a fantastic recording quality.

Having recently read on the subject of digital recording in this forum and some others I feel that a generation of engineers and producers are still adapting themselves to a technique that is still in a fast evolution. Contrary to the popular believe that digital is perfect, we see that it is still being perfected and only now quality digital mixing systems are becoming available. I am sure that once they have mastered all these issues, many recordings will show great technical quality again.

Let us hope that 2011 will bring us well recorded enjoyable music - it is what matters most!

 

[Phelonious Ponk]

Raul,

Thanks for that post. I was wondering if I had a really bad copy of Way Out West, as there are many recordings from that era which I think are much better. I'd name a few, but it would be a very long list, beginning with Sonny Rollins' own "Saxophone Colossus."

Tim

 

[FrantzM]

Raul,

Thanks for that post. I was wondering if I had a really bad copy of Way Out West, as there are many recordings from that era which I think are much better. I'd name a few, but it would be a very long list, beginning with Sonny Rollins' own "Saxophone Colossus."

Tim

I would also thank Raul for his illuminating post . I, have two CDs of this album as well as the LP (not 45 RRPM) lkely the original it's been there for as long as I remember and it never struck me as a great recording. I went back and re-listened to the CDs both of them and it was a decent but not superlative recording .. Music is very good but I prefer the "Saxophone Colossus" album both in sound and in music ... YMMV .... mine did vary

 

[silviajulieta]

Raul,

Thanks for that post. I was wondering if I had a really bad copy of Way Out West, as there are many recordings from that era which I think are much better. I'd name a few, but it would be a very long list, beginning with Sonny Rollins' own "Saxophone Colossus."

Tim

Dear Phelonious Ponk: I think that that SR recording shows its " primitive " recording venue and yes I agree there are several better vintage recordings like the one you named. I have to say that with all those vintage hardware limitations those engineers made a good job, I can't imagine all those great classical and jazz performances if the same recording " group " could comes today and record the same performance but with today " limitations ": this could and should be amazing to hear!!!.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.

 

[Gregadd]

You all make a good point. Be careful as many great albums have different pressings. Cat Stevens Tea for the Tillerman for example. My copy is awful.

 

[Phelonious Ponk]

You all make a good point. Be careful as many great albums have different pressings. Cat Stevens Tea for the Tillerman for example. My copy is awful.

Well, I'm listening to a rip of the cd, of course, but it could be the master (has this one been re-mastered) or the analog tapes used to create the cd, or the transfer. Lots of possible culprits. Though in much wandering about internet jazz circles, I've heard many 50s/60s jazz albums mentioned as great recordings of that era and this is the first time I recall WOW making it into the discussion. YMMV.

Tim

 

[Phelonious Ponk]

Dear Phelonious Ponk: I think that that SR recording shows its " primitive " recording venue and yes I agree there are several better vintage recordings like the one you named. I have to say that with all those vintage hardware limitations those engineers made a good job, I can't imagine all those great classical and jazz performances if the same recording " group " could comes today and record the same performance but with today " limitations ": this could and should be amazing to hear!!!.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.

It happens, Raul. The problem with contemporary popular recordings is technique, style, not the equipment and often not even the abilities of the engineers (I think many know better but do not have control). Record something simply, in a great-sounding room with great mics and great mic placement, and it will meet or exceed the quality of the great jazz records of the 50s/60s. For an analog example, try Shelby Lynn's "Just a Little Lovin'." For digital (I think) Herbie Hancock "Gershwin's World." The latter, I'd guess, wasn't even recorded simply in a great-sounding room. I suspect it was recorded in several rooms, in isolation booths, in different cities. And it still sounds incredible. For huge, orchestral, with startling dynamic range, listen to Joni Mitchell's "Travelogue." Again, I know it is modern. I don't know if it was recorded digitally. I don't care either .

Tim

 

[silviajulieta]

It happens, Raul. The problem with contemporary popular recordings is technique, style, not the equipment and often not even the abilities of the engineers (I think many know better but do not have control). Record something simply, in a great-sounding room with great mics and great mic placement, and it will meet or exceed the quality of the great jazz records of the 50s/60s. For an analog example, try Shelby Lynn's "Just a Little Lovin'." For digital (I think) Herbie Hancock "Gershwin's World." The latter, I'd guess, wasn't even recorded simply in a great-sounding room. I suspect it was recorded in several rooms, in isolation booths, in different cities. And it still sounds incredible. For huge, orchestral, with startling dynamic range, listen to Joni Mitchell's "Travelogue." Again, I know it is modern. I don't know if it was recorded digitally. I don't care either .

Tim

Dear Tim: I own that great " Just a little loving " LP and the Joni Mitchell one and understand what you mean.

++++ " I don't know if it was recorded digitally. I don't care either " ++++, me either too.

Top quality sound on recordings depend on many factors as you stated, I'm not a recording enginner and I can't say which of all those recording factors/parameters are the ones with critical influence and the ones that define the quality level and I really don't care.
What I care is to have and enjoy those top quality sound recordings where you hear and feel no other thing that MUSIC that transport your mind at other conscience level where touch all your senses. This is a main target for me.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.