2016 Miles Davis remasters

[CatManDo]

Thank you for the data. DR measurement is useful, but only to detect high compression (DR9 and lower). All the Miles Davis SACDs pass this test. When one mastering of a specific album is DR13 and the other DR15, the latter does not necessarily sound better. The DR values become irrelevant in that range IMHO.

 

The early Miles SACDs tend to sound brighter, but to me this is an artificial tweak. On the most improved MFSL SACDs mentionned above, the horns sound fuller and more natural.

[junker]

I disagree. In general I feel that DR can only be =< than that on the source tape. When I see any compression then I feel the hand of additional processing and I usually like to get as close to the original master with the freshest tapes possible. This has been a winning approach with realigning my library of: Pink Floyd, Jimi Hendrix, Led Zeppelin, The Beatles, and The Doors. In all of these cases the original rebook presses were by far the best easily surpassing any remaster or high-res release.

 

Of course, sometimes a touch of compression or EQ can sound better...at least upon initial inspection, especially if there was an issue on the original transfer...or if a better source became available. But just like TVs in the store turned on to "torch mode" to grab your attention they definitely need to be re-calibrated at home, so I want to be extra careful before committing to a later issue with 50-60 year old tapes.

 

Could I ask you a big favor? If possible would you consider providing a list of your preferred releases of Miles Davis to help in sorting out his library. From what you listed before it is definitely a little more complicated that what I had thought initially.

 

Thank you for the data. DR measurement is useful, but only to detect high compression (DR9 and lower). All the Miles Davis SACDs pass this test. When one mastering of a specific album is DR13 and the other DR15, the latter does not necessarily sound better. The DR values become irrelevant in that range IMHO.

 

The early Miles SACDs tend to sound brighter, but to me this is an artificial tweak. On the most improved MFSL SACDs mentionned above, the horns sound fuller and more natural.

[junker]

DR data for the OJC Bags Groove:

 

DRPeakRMSFilename

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

DR12-1.78 dB -16.18 dB 01 Miles Davis - Bags' Groove (take 1).m4a

DR12-1.25 dB -15.13 dB 02 Miles Davis - Bags' Groove (take 2).m4a

DR12-1.95 dB -15.53 dB 03 Miles Davis - Airegin.m4a

DR11-2.86 dB -15.57 dB 04 Miles Davis - Oleo.m4a

DR12-2.55 dB -15.75 dB 05 Miles Davis - But Not for Me (take 2).m4a

DR12-2.84 dB -16.50 dB 06 Miles Davis - Doxy.m4a

DR12-1.84 dB -15.69 dB 07 Miles Davis - But Not for Me (take 1).m4a

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Number of files:7

Official DR value: DR12

 

This is the DR data from the 2014 AP SACD ISO rip:

 

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

DR Peak RMS Filename

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

DR14 -2.20 dB -19.07 dB 01 Bags' Groove (Take 1).m4a

DR14 -2.01 dB -18.67 dB 02 Bags' Groove (Take 2).m4a

DR13 -2.55 dB -16.97 dB 03 Airegen.m4a

DR12 -3.86 dB -17.37 dB 04 Oleo.m4a

DR12 -2.82 dB -17.15 dB 05 But Not For Me (Take 2).m4a

DR13 -3.85 dB -18.27 dB 06 Doxy.m4a

DR12 -3.17 dB -17.51 dB 07 But Not For Me (Take 1).m4a

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Number of files: 7

Official DR value: DR13

[Le Concombre Masqué]

you're technically right but the mono is the best sounding 24/192 to my ears. I also read things about the MFSL sourcing that would rule it out of the competition for best sounding stereo but I actually like its stereo presentation better and the piano is gorgeous. Absolute best to my ears is Classic records 45 vinyl set, not by "analog" sound whatever it is but by how much more metal realism is extracted from Miles' trumpet.

Avoid the one on Acoustic Sounds which is based on the early Sony SACD.

 

Not that the SACD sounds bad, but the newer transfers are clearly better.

 

My favourite version is now the 2013 HDtracks stereo release in 24/192.

 

I have only heard the CD layer of the new MFSL SACD and couldn't compare it directly to the HDtracks version, so I can't say which one is better.

 

I've also heard the mono transfer, but I don't care about it, since it is just folded down from the 3-track tapes and not from the original mono tape, which is lost.

[CatManDo]

Could I ask you a big favor? If possible would you consider providing a list of your preferred releases of Miles Davis to help in sorting out his library. From what you listed before it is definitely a little more complicated that what I had thought initially.

 

Do you mean the best sounding releases for each album or my favourite Miles albums musicwise? I know every official Miles Davis album and many bootlegs, so in the first case, that would be quite a project ...

[firedog]

I disagree. In general I feel that DR can only be =< than that on the source tape. When I see any compression then I feel the hand of additional processing and I usually like to get as close to the original master with the freshest tapes possible. This has been a winning approach with realigning my library of: Pink Floyd, Jimi Hendrix, Led Zeppelin, The Beatles, and The Doors. In all of these cases the original rebook presses were by far the best easily surpassing any remaster or high-res release.

 

Don't agree with you at all. Old LP masters may well have been fairly highly limited in order to make records that pickups of the 50's and 60's could track, and because of the crap devices music was often played on back then. So a remaster could very well have a higher DR than an old LP where the basic tape tracks were compressed when the LP master (mix) was made.

 

Don't agree with you about the old rock albums either. I think some of the remasters sound better than earlier CDs, especially when talking about the Beatles and Pink Floyd. My 24/44.1 Beatles set is mostly an improvement over the earlier CDs, as is the 2009 mono set. As are the Capitol Beatles remasters. Ditto for DSOTM in DSD and hi-res. But no problem, listen to what you like.

[blownsi]

the original redbook presses were by far the best easily surpassing any remaster or high-res release.

 

When talking about the Beatles, I couldn't disagree more. The original CDs were dull and lifeless. The 24 bit 2009 remasters are in another league imho.

[junker]

Look up Black Triangle Abbey Road or Disque Americ Rubber Soul, Sgt Pepper, and Help! You won't regret it... They smoke the Green Apple set. But yeah a lot of those titles are rough including the monos.

 

And also let me add Bob Dylan to that list too.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Computer Audiophile mobile app

[junker]

And Pink Floyd no way in hell. I can provide actual CD version numbers if you want but that is another thread.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Computer Audiophile mobile app

[mkrzych]

Here is the answer from ProStudioMasters:

 

Thank you for your question concerning the Miles Davis remasters. My apologies for the delay answering your message directly.

 

Unfortunately, unlike the previously released Rudy Van Gelder remasters, no information regarding personnel nor the processes involved has been made available for the 2016 releases.

 

Based on this knowledge, as well as on our own analyses and comparisons of dynamic range and frequency spectra against the RVG remasters, we believe that these are newly produced, direct transfers from the original two-track analogue master tapes to PCM digital audio, which have been normalized to 0dBFS once in the digital domain.

[firedog]

 

And also let me add Bob Dylan to that list too.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Computer Audiophile mobile app

 

Which list?

Heard the Dylan Mono Set on CD? Sounds fantastic. Better than previous versions.

Heard the Blood on the Tracks SACD? Better than CD and LP.

[CatManDo]

Here is the answer from ProStudioMasters:

 

Thanks for that. I suspected these transfers to be new, since the RVG remasters already available on HDtracks were in 24/44 only.

 

Other OJC material reissues coming from Concord/Universal (not Analogue Productions) were often mastered by Joe Tarantino, whose work is merely decent. No comparision with Analogue Productions, MFSL or JVC XRCD remasters. His CD remasters usually didn't sound better than the original OJC CDs. DR was OK.

 

So if these Miles Davis Prestige remasters are mastered by Joe Tarantino, I will pass.

[junker]

 

[mkrzych]

Thanks for that. I suspected these transfers to be new, since the RVG remasters already available on HDtracks were in 24/44 only.

 

Other OJC material reissues coming from Concord/Universal (not Analogue Productions) were often mastered by Joe Tarantino, whose work is merely decent. No comparision with Analogue Productions, MFSL or JVC XRCD remasters. His CD remasters usually didn't sound better than the original OJC CDs. DR was OK.

 

So if these Miles Davis Prestige remasters are mastered by Joe Tarantino, I will pass.

 

I have several OJC records done by Joe and indeed they sound pretty good. Time to time they are a bit too metallic and bright, but this may be related to the A/D technology available then or what was actually captured on the tape.

 

APO is doing very good job as well on the releases - even mono sound is stunning!

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Kimo]

I just bought 5 of these. I haven't got through them all yet.

 

1. Steamin: Compared with the MFSL SACD, the download is a tad less creamy with more energy on top. I suspect most would prefer the SACD, but I could live with either.

 

2. Relaxin: Compared with the RVG download, this one is the winner. The new download is better balanced, less squashed, and less forward.

 

3. Workin: Nothing to compare with, but this one is presented in a similar fashion as Relaxin and Steamin. Actually, it may be the best sounding of the bunch, by a hair.

 

4. Cookin: The download is a bit different than the others. A bit softer on top and quieter overall. The old AP SACD is more energetic. Again, it is a toss up.

 

More to come. By the way the latest Coltrane downloads sound similar to the Davis downloads in terms of the mastering.

[odelay]

Thanks for your take on the new releases [emoji846]