chewy-chew-chew-bean-benitez Posted July 8, 2006 Report Posted July 8, 2006 while the stereo bn masters have been remasted an on cd forever etc etc the mono masters are rotting, are they not? why dont they do, say DIPPIN', and have a cd w/ the mono AND stereo versions. what about the earlier stuff that can surely fit on one cd? has this ever been considered? Quote
The Magnificent Goldberg Posted July 8, 2006 Report Posted July 8, 2006 You're right Chewy. I keep seeing people posting about some flaws on one or two tracks of such and such. I wonder if people would prefer a perfect mono master to be substituted for a stereo master with something wrong with it. Or, if not substituted, let both versions be put on the CD, as you've suggested. I suppose it depends on how bad the flaw is. I have a strong feeling that I, for one, couldn't hear the differences some people think are horrendous. MG Quote
Claude Posted July 8, 2006 Report Posted July 8, 2006 (edited) This has occasionally been done, for example on the "John Coltrane with Johnny Hartman" SACD reissue or on a John Lewis Orchestra USA CD on one of those spanish labels. On the Coltrane/Hartman disc the mono tracks come first, because Rudy Van Gelder considers them as the "master mix". Given that the session is only 33 minutes long, it was possible to accomodate both recordings on a CD. Because in the early 60's most people were listening in mono, some engineers took more care in the mono mix than in the stereo mix. Therfore some sessions sound better in the mono version. That also justifies releasing the mono mix even when there are no flaws on the stereo tapes. Edited July 8, 2006 by Claude Quote
The Magnificent Goldberg Posted July 8, 2006 Report Posted July 8, 2006 (edited) Thanks Claude. I wonder if that's why I could always hear Bobby Hutcherson better on my mono copy of "Let 'em roll" than on my mate's stereo copy. I deliberately bought the mono version because of that. MG Perhaps it's just me, though. Edited July 8, 2006 by The Magnificent Goldberg Quote
Parkertown Posted July 8, 2006 Report Posted July 8, 2006 If this were to happen, I would do cartwheels for a solid hour!!! Chewy, you're brilliant! Quote
DrJ Posted July 9, 2006 Report Posted July 9, 2006 (edited) This is a nice idea but this would only be useful, IMHO, for certain BN titles - particularly earlier (pre-1958) ones. On the Steve Hoffman forums, there have been several discussions about Rudy's recordings and production of stereo and mono versions of the BN sessions after 1958. Some of the mono records from that point on, according to people who are in the know, were merely fold-downs from the stereo master tapes. No point having added mono versions that are just fold-downs from stereo - heck, you could make those yourself! Others were from a true mono master tape, though, and those would be GREAT to have included along with their stereo counterparts on a single disc! Edited July 9, 2006 by DrJ Quote
Chuck Nessa Posted July 9, 2006 Report Posted July 9, 2006 (edited) This is a nice idea but this would only be useful, IMHO, for certain BN titles - particularly earlier (pre-1958) ones. On the Steve Hoffman forums, there have been several discussions about Rudy's recordings and production of stereo and mono versions of the BN sessions after 1958. Some of the mono records from that point on, according to people who are in the know, were merely fold-downs from the stereo master tapes. No point having added mono versions that are just fold-downs from stereo - heck, you could make those yourself! Others were from a true mono master tape, though, and those would be GREAT to have included along with their stereo counterparts on a single disc! The flaw in your (and the Hoffman crew's) thinking relates to possible deterioration of the stereo tapes while the "fold downs" are intact. Never leave the decisions in the hands of the engineers. Edited July 9, 2006 by Chuck Nessa Quote
Chuck Nessa Posted July 9, 2006 Report Posted July 9, 2006 FWIW, "fold downs" are rarely just a simple blending of right and left. If the producer has any "smarts" at all there is a ton of re-balancing going on. Stereo mix repros for "production" are also rarely just "left and right". Much thought and work goes into this. Quote
Parkertown Posted July 10, 2006 Report Posted July 10, 2006 This is a nice idea but this would only be useful, IMHO, for certain BN titles - particularly earlier (pre-1958) ones. On the Steve Hoffman forums, there have been several discussions about Rudy's recordings and production of stereo and mono versions of the BN sessions after 1958. Some of the mono records from that point on, according to people who are in the know, were merely fold-downs from the stereo master tapes. No point having added mono versions that are just fold-downs from stereo - heck, you could make those yourself! Others were from a true mono master tape, though, and those would be GREAT to have included along with their stereo counterparts on a single disc! Hi Tony, Yep, I know what you're talking about. But as I've learned more and listened to some of these records it seems as though the technique can produce decent results. The post "Moanin'" albums that I've heard mono versions of have usually sounded just great. Same with the 200gm monos done by Bernie Grundman for Classic Records. It seems Rudy did this to have "more" control with setting balances when doing the mono mix by recording to 2-track stereo. Bernie Grundman uses Rudy's technique of folding in the channels 50/50 per Rudy's instructions (I'm getting this from the ads; you've seen 'em, I'm sure). And I do recall how SH had said something like it's really not the best way to go about doing a mono recording, and I'm sure that's probably true, but I'll be darned if I don't go ahead and enjoy 'em quite a lot. I guess I just take these things on a case by case basis. Just my two cents... Quote
Clunky Posted July 10, 2006 Report Posted July 10, 2006 "the Genuis of Coleman Hawkins" CD issue ( Verve, digipack) has full stereo masters and about half the tracks in mono too. Not sure which sounds better but they do sound different. Quote
chewy-chew-chew-bean-benitez Posted July 10, 2006 Author Report Posted July 10, 2006 hi everybody! chewy-chew-chew-post originator back here: jazz has never sounded good in stereo. i hate the cymbals tink-tink-tinking away in one corner and the sax playing in the other. the one i know to embrase stereo effectivly was Esqueviel, who was a genius. Quote
The Magnificent Goldberg Posted July 10, 2006 Report Posted July 10, 2006 jazz has never sounded good in stereo. i hate the cymbals tink-tink-tinking away in one corner and the sax playing in the other. But that's what you get when you go to a gig, Chewy. MG Quote
chewy-chew-chew-bean-benitez Posted July 10, 2006 Author Report Posted July 10, 2006 so whats the best Blue Note Stereo mixes? what albums? yea yea and didnt one of those tech posts say that when they remaster to lp they go straight from analog no digital conversion? well i was listning to db at the half note on tape and all those tapes are digitally remastered....so they dont go straight to analog w/ the tapes Quote
_forumlogo.png.a607ef20a6e0c299ab2aa6443aa1f32e.png)
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.