Mosaic Dial set coming soon

[JSngry]

No software, yet waveforms are seen and processed? What are we talking here, an oscilloscope and the long-delayed realization of the unfulfilled promise of Uri Geller?

Sincerely,

Confused In Texas

[clifford_thornton]

Haha

My ears aren't the most astute here by far, but I heard sound samples on the site that gave me pause - big time.

[David Ayers]

Any word from the private sources on the uh sources?

[ejp626]

No software, yet waveforms are seen and processed? What are we talking here, an oscilloscope and the long-delayed realization of the unfulfilled promise of Uri Geller?

Sincerely,

Confused In Texas

I agree -- that statement about no software makes absolutely no sense.

I decided a while ago to pass and nothing I've heard since makes me reconsider that decision. I need to save up for the Beehive set(s) anyway.

[jazzbo]

I think what was meant was no noise reduction software as Allen would define it was used. I've not been given permission to elaborate, and I said that much withouit permission, sorry I did. I did not get any information on the sources.

Personally I think this is going to sound amazing.

Edited December 11, 2014 by jazzbo

[Ed S]

I have to say that this discussion has been compelling. I can't wait for the sets to start arriving so that some opinions based on listening to the set can be rendered. The hypothetical positions have been fascinating. Looking forward to the opinions based on the aural experience - which I'm thinking might be as wide ranging as the hypothetical. Either way, I'm still picking this up at some point as this type of set is right up my alley.

[David Ayers]

I have to say that this discussion has been compelling. I can't wait for the sets to start arriving so that some opinions based on listening to the set can be rendered. The hypothetical positions have been fascinating. Looking forward to the opinions based on the aural experience - which I'm thinking might be as wide ranging as the hypothetical. Either way, I'm still picking this up at some point as this type of set is right up my alley.

It is up everyone's alley. It basically *is* the alley. That is why we are all so curious....

[Big Beat Steve]

It is my alley too but MY alley really is already built up by about 90% so I am not going along.

But I am curious too, of course ... Mosaic has set high standards so this (and the fact that the EXACT nature of the source material used seems to remain "in a mist" ) may explain some hesitations voiced here.

[Brad]

I'm sure, as with most things or recordings, some will like and some will not.

[jazzbo]

Number 740 has landed here in Westlake, Ohio.

I am listenig to disc 2 with session B and C.

There are many who are going to go "WTF" when they hear this. There IS a very discernable sound that sounds to me mainly like very poorly recorded hi-hats and cymbals and brushes echo combined with groove noise. Not sure WHAT it actually is but it does NOT to ME sound like "noise reduction" by-products. It really does sound more to ME like hearing deep into the noise floor of the recording and anamolies or poorly recorded sonics revealed.

That out of the way the rest of the sound is bright (not absurdly so). These recordings have always seemed that way to me. There is a clarity to the sound that gives a fullness to the horns I've not heard before. And I have been moving to the music, pace and rhythm are well-presented.

Mono sound is very centered, these were transferred as mono recordings properly as far as I can tell. The discs are not victims of the loudness war.

I can't listen much longer, I have siblings of my father's at his house I need to return to and my siblings have left all their entertainment and nourishment up to me. Gotta go. More input when I can give it.

[ghost of miles]

There is a clarity to the sound that gives a fullness to the horns I've not heard before.

For me as well.

[AllenLowe]

I'll leave this dead horse alone in a minute; but if I restored a painting and made the foreground colors brighter while the background was fuzzy and distorted, I would know there was a problem.

[David Ayers]

Usually from Mosaic we get a discussion of the sources used and their limitations. We seem not to have had that on this occasion.

[jazzbo]

Send them a message to find out! It seems clear their sources came from Spotlite.

Allen, I knew you were not going to like what I said and I can only encourage you to find a way to hear it for yourself. I've listened to disc 2 again and overall the improvements are outweighing any deficiencies.

[Big Beat Steve]

Like said earlier, I won't be playing because I have about 90% of those Dials in what certainly is listenable enough fidelity for me (yes, I know this won't convince ANY of the "upgrading fraternity" around here ), but yet this is an interesting project.

What baffles me in this debate, though, is how everybody was full of praise for those newly remastered Armstrong Hot FIve reissues that according to the general judgment of the results brought out nuances and details never heard before, and apparently without any detriment to speak of in other areas, whereas these Dial masters (which are 20-25 years younger after all) really seem to be very much of a mixed blessing. So how "rotten" (comparatively speaking) IS the source material after all?

The way Jazzbo describes the foreground benefits and the background drawbacks as well as one outweighing the other (but just outweighing it in the sense of a tradeoff between those parts that are better than before outweighing those that are worse than before but not as a matter of whatever change there is being ALL for the better) this really sounds like not such a clear-cut sky-high improvement after all.

Could this

a) be a case of modern-day remastering techniques still reaching their limits if in your attempt of improving what you can improve you also bring out undesirable substandard portions of the recorded sound that you cannot separate from what you intend to improve and make audible? and

b) is this why (in laymen's terms) older remasterings often ended in muffled sounds because in the remastering process of the day they cut off the unwanted sections, losing wanted (but unseparable) sections at the same time and thus narrowing down the range? Now you bring out the wanted parts but cannot suppress the unwanted parts - 2 steps forward, 1 step back ...

c) Could it be that Mosaic by all means wanted to do this but now finds the going was far rougher than anticipated and now needs to come forward with whatever explanations they can, realizing that by their overall fidelity and restoration standards this may not be a top-tier result?

Edited December 13, 2014 by Big Beat Steve

[paul secor]

Send them a message to find out! It seems clear their sources came from Spotlite.

Allen, I knew you were not going to like what I said and I can only encourage you to find a way to hear it for yourself. I've listened to disc 2 again and overall the improvements are outweighing any deficiencies.

According to this, the sources are from Tony Williams and Spotlite

Dial has had a checkered existence in terms of ownership and the original lacquers have been missing for 60 years. What is remarkable about our set is the work of Steve Marlowe and Jonathan Horwich. Using the best available transfers of the label's current owner, Tony Williams' Spotlite Records, they have done an amazing job of restoring and remastering these masters.

[David Ayers]

Send them a message to find out! It seems clear their sources came from Spotlite.

Allen, I knew you were not going to like what I said and I can only encourage you to find a way to hear it for yourself. I've listened to disc 2 again and overall the improvements are outweighing any deficiencies.

According to this, the sources are from Tony Williams and Spotlite

Dial has had a checkered existence in terms of ownership and the original lacquers have been missing for 60 years. What is remarkable about our set is the work of Steve Marlowe and Jonathan Horwich. Using the best available transfers of the label's current owner, Tony Williams' Spotlite Records, they have done an amazing job of restoring and remastering these masters.

Thanks for posting. It seems we are where we are - or already were.

[jazzbo]

And it's quite possible that what we are hearing is a fuller exposure of the deficiencies of earlier transfers. What I hear does not sound like new noise reduction artifacts to me, I've done a lot of collecting of early jazz and know what that sounds like.

[AllenLowe]

well, as I said, the kind of weird wooshing I have heard - just on the samples on their site - is not the kind of thing that is masked by other noise or revealed by restoration. Hopefully at some point I will be able to listen to what they've done.

[Brad]

With the rep that Mosaic has, I don't think they would give us a less than full explanation.

[jazzbo]

Listening to Disc 1 today. This music has never sounded better to me on any ohter releases I've heard.

[gmonahan]

Listening to Disc 1 today. This music has never sounded better to me on any ohter releases I've heard.

I'm also listening to the first disc, and it does sound very good to these ears.

gregmo

[erwbol]

I would like to believe this is true, but no amount of casual praise in this thread is going to make me place an order. I'll have to hear FLAC rips of the discs first.

[Brad]

I received the set today but will give it to my wife to give to me at Christmas

[jazzbo]

Don't take my comment on the sound of the first disc as casual praise. It's formally dressed praise that even has a tie too tight!

Seriously, it sounds great, as does disc 2 with the exception of those odd sounds that seem to have everyone questioning the viability of the set. Third time through disc 2 they didn't bother me, was just grooving to Diz, Milt, Bird, Lucky et al in terrific clarity.