Miles Davis "Kind of Blue"

[Bob Stern]

Pristine Classical has an excellent remastering of Kind of Blue:

 

http://www.pristineclassical.com/LargeWorks/Jazz/PAJZ009.php

 

[jhwalker]

I bought and listend to this this morning. Very nice - I only had an MP3 rip from a secondhand CD before now

 

[Erwin S]

It's about 500 MB zip, so I presume it's 24/48, correct?

€14, not to bad. How much in USA?

 

Miles Davis is the man... Only Charles Mingus is his peer, IMO.

 

[jhwalker]

Yes, it's 24/48 FLAC, as of this morning's exchange rate, $19.68 US.

 

[dsnyder]

Hello,

 

It was $19.62 US for me. Five minutes left before the download is complete. Can't wait! :-)

 

-- David

 

 

[airdronian]

Am I ever glad to learn of this. My version is the Columbia Legacy reissue CD from 97. I had read of varying qualities of KOB in the different reissues, with the 50th Anniversary edition being considered the best by some in terms of sound quality. But it is around $90 on Amazon right now.

 

For $20 I am willing to give this one a try. Looking forward to it.

 

[wgscott]

Thanks for the tip. They are probably wondering what is generating all the commerce.

 

Looks like it is 48kHz.

 

Obligatory fftw:

 

 

[dsnyder]

Hello,

 

This new restoration is taking some getting used to. Perhaps I have become too comfortable with the flaws in my old 1992 Columbia CK 52861 release? What are your thoughts?

 

-- David

 

[wgscott]

I am uncontaminated by prior expectations. (I am not a Jazz fan.) I had a quick listen of the preview on iTunes. It sounded like a rather bad recording, so my guess is the restoration has really improved things.

 

This surprised me with how good it was.

 

[airdronian]

I loaded this version in, and had the briefest of samples (everyone else is in bed here).

 

On the first track it did sound narrower, but subjectively less harsh. Not enough time, at least it will be easy to compare the versions.

 

The release notes offer the following:

 

" Kind of Blue was original recorded on a three-track tape system, and over the years different stereo releases have varied the stereo width of the instruments. I've opted for slightly less than the full-width approach which can make headphone and close-up listening quite uncomfortable. I've also employed phase correction software to analyses the phase difference between the two stereo channels and adjust for phase differences present between microphones picking up the same instrument. The effect of this is a subtle but distinct sharpening of the stereo imagery.

 

I've also worked on the fine-tuning of each track, based on a precise analysis of the harmonic frequencies of the piano, noting that tracks on the current 'official' releases are between 0.3% and 0.5% sharp (raising A440 to between 441.3Hz and 442.2Hz). Some minor tape drop-outs, audible from time to time in the cymbals of So What, have been cured. I've also worked hard to reduce tape hiss without compromising the fabulously open sound of the recording. "

 

 

Looking forward to more listening tomorrow.

 

[tubes59]

Sorry if I'm particularly dense tonight but I can't seem to figure out how to buy the download. Everything I click does not lead me to where I can trade money for the download. What am I doing wrong?

 

[Erwin S]

You are on the link provided by OP, yes? Just below the code "PAJZ009" is a collum with buttons for the various downloadable versions: MP3, XR-16 bit FLAC, XR-24 bit FLAC. You click! I used Paypal, very fast purchase processing.

 

Was already way past midnight when I downloaded. Had a listen this morning of the whole album, only disturbed by one single phone call. Using my setup in the dining room. First impression: extended bass and the high hats of the drum seem to be very free. It's an in-your-face approach. Will do some comparison listening with the CD-rip from my 52CD Columbia box later...

 

[jp11801]

Ok first of all what is the source material for the "remaster"? To me a remaster is a new master taken from the original master tapes. Did Sony license this to them, I doubt it.

 

Does this make this a bootleg? Apologies up front if my assumptions are incorrect. But it is likely that the source for the remaster was a commercially available cd, sacd or lp. It is not better than my KOB from the cd to my ears or at least the sample was not.

 

 

[dsnyder]

Hello,

 

Ok first of all what is the source material for the "remaster"?

 

Good question. I was wondering the same thing. When I first read Andrew Rose's notes on the Pristine Classical website where he referenced the three-track original recording, I assumed that he was working from a high quality (possibly digital) dub of that. I'm not sure how one might affect the stereo width of the instruments from a two track mix-down, for example. There's no reference to the Sony copyright, which is kind-of odd.

 

I need to give this another listen or two, but on first pass, I felt like some of the room reverberation and decay was lost in the restoration. Less tape hiss is nice, but I miss the environmental queues. I'm also confused by what's going on with the drum kit. It is mostly located just inside the right loudspeaker, but sound from the high hat or cymbals jumps unexpectedly out of the left loudspeaker, leaving me with an incoherent view of the instrument. Mr. Davis always came at me from the back of the soundstage, but in this version, he seems to be standing about six to eight steps further back. Generally speaking, I like what Andrew did with Bill Evans' piano, giving it a fuller, less cardboard-like sound; however, I also noticed that some of the sustained notes are now marred by what sounds like tape speed flutter, something that I thought he would have corrected along with the other restoration work. Overall, the level seems to be a bit lower than my 1992 CD release; however, in spite of that, details including micro-dynamics and subtle vibrato are more apparent. While instrument position and width is more precise, the recording sounds more closed in with less air and breathing room around the players. Trails from their playing don't seem to reverberate around the room like they do in the CD release.

 

Well, those are my thoughts anyway. I don't regret the purchase and it will probably grow on me the more that I listen to it.

 

-- David

 

 

[f1eng]

They have already been posted

 

[dsnyder]

Hello,

 

I'm pretty sure that I did, but I may have missed something. Can you provide a link?

 

-- David

 

[ted_b]

permission, or allude to the source of his XR remastering, other than to say he tried it with "the recording". Where did we miss it?

 

[dsnyder]

Hello,

 

I just noticed that the track lengths are a bit longer on the XR version:

 

 

Have not looked yet to see if this is due to more content or a different playback speed.

 

-- David

 

[f1eng]

I assumed that access to the 3 track masters implied permission. I may be assuming too far.

In terms of track times I guess that the easiest way to correct the pitch as described would be to change speed?

I haven't bought a download yet since it goes through PayPal and I can't yet find a way to pay in Euros rather than Sterling with the exchange rate fee, which goes against the grain when I have a euro credit card...

I have submitted a question to PayPal but am not holding my breath.

Frank

 

[firedog]

Would definitely like to hear some more comparisons to other versions, as I've don't like every version I have and don't want to blow money on another one I won't like.

 

Thanks

 

[Richard Dale]

 

I have a 1997 Sony CD of Kind Of Blue which was the first one where they fixed the tape speed problem. Other than that, I think they were trying to capture the sound of the tape played back on the original 3-track recorder as closely as possible. I've spent this afternoon playing a track from the Pristine Classical version, followed by the same track from a rip of the 1997 CD. I can't really complain about being forced to listen to Kind Of Blue carefully, there are worse pastimes to be had than that for sure .

 

 

 

The Pristine Classical doesn't have the atmosphere, drama and dynamics of the 1997 CD, although it does have less tape hiss. To me, it doesn't work. Possibly to tone of the piano is more accurate, but for me the piano in Kind Of Blue has never been what it is about. The piano is an essential ingredient, but the other instruments provide the drama. When John Coltrane, Cannonball Adderly or Miles Davis enter with a solo it sets the hairs on the back of your neck on end. The drums and bass also add drama, and to me that drama is missing from the Pristine Classical version. The tape hiss has been removed, but along with it the sense of the instruments being played in space and excitement.

 

 

 

I also bought a Charley Patton album from Pristine Classics and I felt that worked much better. The sound quality of Charley Patton 78s is really bad. I have a Charlie Patton LP which I haven't played much because it has so much surface noise. The tracks on the Pristine Classics album are completely different to the LP I have, and so I can't do a direct comparison. It doesn't sound like Charley Patton is in the room, but it is on a par with the other 20s and 30s recordings I have, and with better bass. So I think the 'MX' process works well for really bad recordings, but for late 50s recordings like Kind Of Blue which do have real ambience and dynamics, it just throws away too much stuff to be worthwhile.

 

 

[Bob Stern]

In the US at least, section 8.4.b. of the Paypal User Agreement says you can completely avoid currency exchange fees when making an international purchase if you "fund" the payment with a bank account rather than a credit card. You can still designate a credit card as a backup to prevent the payment from being delayed while waiting for the bank transfer to "clear".

 

[Bob Stern]

It is an interesting question how Pristine Classical got their hands on the 3-track tapes.

 

Pristine Classical specializes in recordings that were released over 50 years ago. This means that their copyright protection in Europe has expired, so they cannot be considered "bootleg".

 

In the US, Walt Disney Co. periodically induces the US Congress to pass new laws extending the period of copyright protection longer and longer so that the copyright on Mickey Mouse won't expire.

 

[jp11801]

I'd like to separate the two issues one is the legality of the "remaster" and the second is the source.

 

Ok it may be legal but the 3 track tape is in the Sony vault and to me research, largely on the Steve Hoffam forum, indicates that it has only been out of storage for the digital transfers done for their release and the Classic records release. There are dubs of the two track mix in circulation and a friend of mine has one. So it is possible he has a dub of the two track mix but unlikely that it is the two track master.

 

Folks you can believe what you like but this is similar to a well executed needle drop. Many are excellent but this is not like getting a copy of the master from the record company. So while it is not considered a bootleg in countries where the copyright has expired but does that make it a high res remaster, I for one do not consider it to be.

 

That does not take away from the fun of the release.

 

[ted_b]

access to the tapes. He mentions them as being what the album was recorded on, but doesn't say that's what he used.