Birth of the Cool ... AGAIN

[Rooster_Ties]

Answering my own question about the liners, this review (which is reasonably informative, given that it's Pitchfork), mentions expanded liners, and a bit about the sonic upgrade -- primarily to the studio material.  Sounds like this might well actually sound better (maybe), and in any case, the new liners would be enough for me to get it on CD.

https://pitchfork.com/reviews/albums/miles-davis-the-complete-birth-of-the-cool/

So then, I'm in, for this new reissue on CD.

[JSngry]

  Quote

 ...this new edition, mastered from the analog session reels for the first time since ’57...

Expand  

uh...what did they use for the RVG edition?

somebody's not got it right

[BFrank]

  On 6/19/2019 at 2:14 PM, JSngry said:

 

 

uh...what did they use for the RVG edition?

somebody's not got it right

Expand  

So between this question and the mention of being "pitch corrected," it would be nice to get a definitive answer about this release.

[JSngry]

I think the definitive answer is that if you actually buy it, then that's the answer.

http://www.thenightowl.com/reviews/botcrvg.htm

https://forums.stevehoffman.tv/threads/miles-davis-birth-of-the-cool-theres-no-good-version-on-cd.170218/

[Rooster_Ties]

  On 6/19/2019 at 7:54 PM, JSngry said:

I think the definitive answer is that if you actually buy it, then that's the answer.

http://www.thenightowl.com/reviews/botcrvg.htm

https://forums.stevehoffman.tv/threads/miles-davis-birth-of-the-cool-theres-no-good-version-on-cd.170218/

Expand  

I never bought the RVG with the upgraded sound (the one without the "live" tracks).  I'd much rather have it all on one CD, and the SQ upgrade wasn't all that critical to me (and I didn't want to have to have two CD's, with the studio-material duplicated).

But since this new version seems to be the best of both/all worlds, and new liners, I'm in.

[king ubu]

  On 6/5/2019 at 3:06 PM, Rooster_Ties said:

Interesting.  I would have figured that live material would have come out (legit) before 2001! -- well before 2001, actually.

Expand  

It did ... the CD with the live material is the 1998 one, not the 2001  -- guess I'll stick with my combo (same as post #1)

I used to have the Cicala LP, quite horrible ... but it was my first chance to hear the live half of the music, which definitely should be heard.

Anyone has a link to that article by Mike Zwerin? I remember reading it but recently tried to find it again, ending up empty though.

One thing I wonder though, will they get this right, this time around?

The first two tunes from the nonet ("The Theme" and "Move") are about a half-tone flat on Capitol CDP 94550 and Definitive.

from here: http://plosin.com/milesahead/Sessions.aspx?s=480904

[medjuck]

It finally arrived.  Haven't listened yet so I can't say anything about the sound (not that my ears are good enough to make me a reliable judge).  However I have looked at the liner notes.  Ashley Kahn's 20 or so page essay seems pretty good. The booklet does reproduce the Gerry Mulligan and Phil Schaap's notes  from the last "Complete Birth of the Cool" cd but not Pete Weldings notes nor Mike Zwerin's lovely reminiscence about playing with the nonet   

I don't think anyone here is more of a Gil Evans fan than I  am but I'm not sure Mulligan gets enough credit for these sides. He arranged 6 of the twelve numbers recorded.(Weirdly, in the 1989 "Complete" cd issue the notes say he arranged 4-- but that's corrected in the RVG release.) 

 

 

 

 

[jazzbo]

Oddly I did the opposite: I have listened to the cd but haven't read the liner notes. I just don't read liner notes with enthusiasm any longer.

Sound on the studio sides is very good, improved in the realms of punch and midrange richness. Sound on the live material. . . I think the previous "Complete" cd may even sound a bit better for the live sides. 

[Backwhat]

Question for those of you with this new CD, which I got in the mail today.

This CD is supposed to have corrected the pitch of (at least) two tracks from the 1998 release: Track 13 (Theme) and Track 15 (Move) were both about a 1/2 step flat on the 1998 release. It appears these have been corrected on this new 2019 CD.

But when I listen to tracks 23 (Move ... different date) and 25, these now sound like they are a 1/2 step flat now?? Compared to studio track 1 & 5?

Did we get two corrected tracks and in the process lose pitch on 2 other tracks? Can anyone else verify?

Edited July 3, 2019 by Backwhat

[B. Clugston]

I have the 2 LP set and it's a nice package. New extensive liner notes from Ashley Kahn. I wish they swapped out Schaap's notes for Zwerin's. The studio sides sound great, though I don't have previous editions to compare with. Mastering is credited to Robert Vosgien of Capitol Studios and Kevin Reeves and Seth Foster of Universal get credit for live restoration.

[Rooster_Ties]

  On 7/2/2019 at 5:05 PM, Backwhat said:

Question for those of you with this new CD, which I got in the mail today.

This CD is supposed to have corrected the pitch of (at least) two tracks from the 1998 release: Track 13 (Theme) and Track 15 (Move) were both about a 1/2 step flat on the 1998 release. It appears these have been corrected on this new 2019 CD.

But when I listen to tracks 23 (Move ... different date) and 25, these now sound like they are a 1/2 step flat now?? Compared to studio track 1 & 5?

Did we get two corrected tracks and in the process lose pitch on 2 other tracks? Can anyone else verify?

Expand  

Bump, specifically on this question again (as yet undiscussed, let alone answered).

[Rabshakeh]

Sorry to ask what might be a rookie question but does anyone know how it came about that Mike's Davis led the Birth of the Cool band?

There were a lot of people involved, many of them there before Davis. Was it just that Davis had the idea to turn the jam sessions he was attending into a band?

[jazzbo]

This wiki article will be helpful I believe.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Birth_of_the_Cool

[Rabshakeh]

  On 11/8/2022 at 10:48 AM, jazzbo said:

This wiki article will be helpful I believe.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Birth_of_the_Cool

Expand  

Thanks. 

Reading that is actually what led me to post the above. It does not really explain why Davis took leadership of the group. 

As I understand it, it was a group of Thornhill people, with Gil Evans apparently the main artistic voice. Davis didn't start the group's meetings or apparently control it, so why did he end up taking the lead? Did e.g. Evans or Mulligan feel strongly about it? Perhaps Davis had the ready cash, or had a better relationship with the club they played? Or maybe he was more in control than the Wikipedia article or his biography (which always seemed a little uncomfortable in it's description of the session) make it sound.

It always made sense to me retrospectively because Davis is of course very famous, but query whether that was the case at the time. Maybe he already was more famous than the others? But would he have been a marquee name?

Edited November 8, 2022 by Rabshakeh

[jazzbo]

The recordings (besides the live set not commercially recorded) occurred because Pete Rugolo in his capacity as an A&R agent for Capitol Records heard a performance and made the recording of the 78s possible with the label. It's possible had that not happened we wouldn't be talking about the music.

I always assumed that with Gil Evans as his solid man at his back Miles just muscled his way into the leadership. I honestly got the feeling years ago from my immersion in Miles from Parker onwards that this was a concerted and dedicated effort for Miles to respond to the urgings of his ego and come out from under the shadow of Parker and make an impact on the genre, spear-heading a possible new movement of the music. I suspected that he seized the moment to be a leader on record dates with a name attached. Just seems to suit the notion I have of Miles' ego and drive of the time. And with Gil as one of the important arrangers and I suspect conductor and fellow-organizing catalyst in his corner it happened.

I've never seen a more detailed account of Capitol's deciding to fix the leadership to Miles.

Edited November 8, 2022 by jazzbo

[JSngry]

Miles had the cachet of having been in Bird's band. He was also a pretty together guy at the time, not yet having gotten hooked on that dope. The stories that I've heard say that Miles actually took the initiative to turn it into a band, to call actual rehearsals, start calling the players, etc. Just basic organizing that it would take to turn a workshop band into an actual band.

Here:

 

[medjuck]

Perhaps because of his association with Bird, Miles was also the best known of the group.  Mulligan (who seems to have done more charts than anyone else), was only known as an arranger at the time. 

[Rabshakeh]

Were any of the others "names" at the time? Thinking outside the bop world too.

  On 11/8/2022 at 1:46 PM, JSngry said:

Miles had the cachet of having been in Bird's band. He was also a pretty together guy at the time, not yet having gotten hooked on that dope. The stories that I've heard say that Miles actually took the initiative to turn it into a band, to call actual rehearsals, start calling the players, etc. Just basic organizing that it would take to turn a workshop band into an actual band.

Here:

 

Expand  

There we are: "Miles, the bandleader". Some hedged wording - not "Miles, the genius" - but maybe it was just that Davis was more together and pushed the thing forward whereas Mulligan did not.

  On 11/8/2022 at 1:34 PM, jazzbo said:

I always assumed that with Gil Evans as his solid man at his back Miles just muscled his way into the leadership. I honestly got the feeling years ago from my immersion in Miles from Parker onwards that this was a concerted and dedicated effort for Miles to respond to the urgings of his ego and come out from under the shadow of Parker and make an impact on the genre, spear-heading a possible new movement of the music. I suspected that he seized the moment to be a leader on record dates with a name attached. Just seems to suit the notion I have of Miles' ego and drive of the time. And with Gil as one of the important arrangers and I suspect conductor and fellow-organizing catalyst in his corner it happened.

Expand  

Davis' ego was obviously extreme, and he did have form for claiming to invent stuff - fusion being the best example.

But clearly the Birth of the Cool sides were really under his name. And not in the sense of e.g. the Konitz sides that became half of Conception. He does seem to have led the thing.

Maybe the answer is that it's the retrospective importance of Davis' role in these sides that elevates them above other stuff that that group of musicians were involved in at the time, and makes us focus on them. Perhaps he led them just because he led them; the sound was in the air and was getting established at the jam sessions and elsewhere, and this small set of sides was Davis' part of that wider picture. A bit like his role in fixing hard bop in the period after that sound had emerged.

If these dates were under Gerry Mulligan's name and not Davis', would they just be an interesting early comp of Mulligan's stuff, similar to the Pacific sides or Konitz' first records?

Edited November 8, 2022 by Rabshakeh

[JSngry]

[AllenLowe]

just ordered. If it is a sonic upgrade on the studio stuff, it is worth it. Haig always complained about this session (he was on a few cuts) because he said Max was in a separate booth (interesting that this was a mono session with concerns about leakage). But it is such an amazing recording and historically important. As for Mulligan - I always found his work to be a little precious, but it is worth another close listen.