Miles Davis "Kind of Blue"

[Bob Stern]

Ted, I think you're right that Andrew Rose did not have access to the 3-track master tapes or copies thereof. The following sentence from the release notes suggest he was working from a 2-channel recording: "I've also employed phase correction software to analyses (sic) the phase difference between the two stereo channels and adjust for phase differences present between microphones picking up the same instrument."

 

That is consistent with most of Pristine Classical's work, which is based on the best LP or 78 pressings they can find rather than master tapes.

 

Also, Pristine Classical generally leans in the direction of attenuating surface noise at the expense of losing a bit of treble.

 

However, you cannot assume that 50 year old master tapes are in better shape than the cleanest LP they could find. Depending on how well the tapes were stored and whether they were periodically rewound, the tapes will have shed oxide and suffered print-through.

 

[Bob Stern]

Everyone has different taste regarding the tradeoffs among noise, detail and frequency response in restoring old recordings.

 

However, I think the effort expended by Pristine Classical goes way beyond the dismissive term "needle drop".

 

For what it's worth, the other two remastering engineers at Pristine Classical — Mark Obert-Thorn and Ward Marston — have been famous for many years as pre-eminent restorers of historical classical recordings, long before Rose founded Pristine Classical. Ward Marston's restoration of the complete Caruso recordings on the Naxos label is an amazing improvement over prior restorations.

 

[firedog]

Just went back and listened to my original LP (Columbia from the 70's, I think) and the 90's standard CD (flac from my server), and the 1997 remaster CD(also FLAC from my server).

 

I also have a 24/96 needledrop done on a good system with tube phono preamp from the Classic Records 200g vinyl, Mastered by Bernie Grundman.

 

To my ears the 1997 remaster is clearly the best sounding - more clarity, more resolution, more/better dynamics.

 

Not familiar with the 50th anniversary re-release or the "Legacy", maybe someone else could comment/compare.

 

 

 

[jhwalker]

While I enjoyed the new XR release, I hear some artifacts of the "restoration" process (particularly, a "watery" / ripply sound to the piano) that I don't like at all. I have an MP3 of one of the Columbia releases I bought from Amazon that is better

 

Do you have a link to where the 1997 remaster you're referencing is available? I'm assuming just on CD - would love to get it.

 

[jp11801]

While the term needle drop may be dismissive to you I assure you it is not to me. I have done many ND's and they can sound outstanding. They are particularly valuable for recording where there are no available master tapes or the current digital release is brickwalled and the LP is not.

 

I've done drops for people for records that are no longer in print and they were pretty blown away at the quality that is possible.

 

Back on topic I'd simply like to see transparency as to what you are buying.

 

[dsnyder]

Hello,

 

The 1997 release is Columbia CK 64935 (I think). I have attempted to order a copy from a website called MusicStack.com, but it looks like this is just a front for a bunch of other music shops, so I have no idea if my order will go through. We'll see...

 

-- David

 

 

[jhwalker]

If that's it, lots of them available on eBay for

[firedog]

I'm pretty sure this is the same as the one I have:

 

http://www.amazon.com/Kind-Blue-Miles-Davis/dp/B000002ADT/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1296228651&sr=8-1

 

from wikipedia:

March 25, 1997–Columbia CK 64935, compact disc, 20-bit remastering, adds alternate track, corrected speed

 

Also see:

 

http://www.musicstack.com/listings.cgi?find=miles+davis&t=kind&next=

 

http://www.nuggetsrecords.com/catcd.html

 

 

[Forehaven]

Just to mention, there's a SACD version of KOB too. It's the only disc I have, so no comparisons. Just, that this SACD sounds great.

 

[Panelhead]

And the SBM version, and the SACD. But will check tonight. Ordered the Pristine disc a couple nights ago. Love the music, I hear differences and usually play the 1997 version.

 

George

 

[airdronian]

I finally gave the new version a listen, and it does put the album in a different light. It is quieter, and I found myself following the bass on some tracks, where thru most of the album I had been used to focusing on the sax players or Miles.

 

I think Richard's post above nails the comparison with the 1997 disc. There isn't the same sort of drama, and the atmosphere isn't there.

 

That being said, it's not bad sounding. This release really is it's own thing.

 

Maybe most of all it was fun pouncing on this after Bob's post, in search of the holy grail of Kind of Blue recordings. Could Brubeck's Time Out be far behind ?

 

[dsnyder]

Hello,

 

Well, my 1997 remaster (CK 64935) just came in the mail. I'm loading it onto the NAS as I type this. It makes my third purchase of this album...hopefully the best...perhaps the last.

 

-- David

 

 

[jhwalker]

I just recently bought it, as well - noisier (tape hiss, etc.) than the XR release, but so much more "presence" and devoid of the warbly sound of the XR. Really nice

 

[dsnyder]

Still have not had time to compare in detail, but so far, the CK 64935 release sounds wonderful.

 

 

You may not be able to see it in the screen shot above, but the FLAC bitrate for the 1997 remaster is on average about 50 kb/s higher than my older copy (a bit harder to compress). More noise?

 

-- David

 

 

[TommyTunes]

The copyright has expired in Europe so it is now in the public domain. Kind of Blue was available in 2004 as a DualDisc with the DVD side containing the audio in 24/48 5.1 AC3 surround. It would be my guess that the download is extracted from that release. Perfectly legal in Europe.

The latest remaster of KOB done by Sony was for the 2009 edition.

 

[ted_b]

to "remaster" this, the results are the same as most other "no-noise" projects....the thrill is gone. The atmosphere, micro-cues, and "there" feeling has been removed. Not sure why some folks love to get rid of tape hiss; there's huge energy in there. Also, the pace and rhythm are mucked up IMO. Not a keeper for me.

 

[f1eng]

A friend of mine who is an acoustics specialist and a researcher and consultant in the audio business tells me that adding uncorrelated noise to a music signal gives the impression of more atmosphere and air, and if the noise is signal correlated the effect is greater.

I often wonder if this is why vinyl (and reel-to-reel tape) sounds so good...

 

[ted_b]

It's not like they added tape hiss in 1957 to make us think it's more alive than it was.

 

[wgscott]

Well, if your hearing went to 50,000Hz like mine, the tape hiss issue might be more of a concern...

 

 

 

[jhwalker]

I don't mind noise reduction, per se, *if* it is limited to the actual tape hiss and doesn't impact other elements - e.g., acoustic cues that allow us to "hear" a room, small noises made by the performers (breathing, rustling), etc. In this particular remaster (if we can use that term given the speculated provenance of the source material), the noise (tape hiss) is greatly reduced, but so are the "live" performance cues. In addition, some wobbly sound (don't know how better to put it) has been introduced, particularly evident in the piano melody at the beginning of "Blue in Green". This wobble isn't evident in the 1997 remaster (which I now own and prefer), so it's definitely an artifact of this particular "restoration".

 

[barrows]

loved the sound of the 1997 (speed corrected) remaster as well. I do not mind the tape hiss, and am not surprised that removing it results in other losses as well. It seems the more we learn about recording, the more find that "post production" can cause more problems than it solves a lot of the time.

 

 

[f1eng]

I was not suggesting that hiss was deliberately added to an old recording but informing people that adding noise to noise free recordings improves apparent ambience.

 

[wgscott]

Hence expensive tube amps.

 

[Panelhead]

The low level hash or noise can improve playback. The frequency involved makes a difference too. Lower frequency artifacts make the sound warmer (vinyl and tube heater noise) the high frequency hash (switching power supplies and poorly shielded cables) can make the highs more extended and add air around instruments.

Both can seem to make the sound more dynamic and louder. Reading over this thread I am not so excited about this remaster. But listening will tell ifit was waste to get the CD shipped over.

 

George

 

[elcorso]

Pristine Classical "Kind Of Blue" unmusical to my ears, when they trashed the tape hiss, also the music inside the music.

 

I believe I have all the available "Kind Of Blue" versions, but right now I'm waiting for the Blu-spec CD version from Japan.

 

David, please make listening comparison between the SBM version versus the Pristine Classical, I like the first one for a huge difference.

 

And wgscott, "expensive" tube amps do not have nothing similar to groove noise, nor to tape hiss. Not the "new circuit design" tube amps.

 

Also Panelhead, tube heater noise is not listenable on my Audio Research Amp., but yes in another tube Amps.

 

But my ears can not reach to 50,000 Hz, nor my dog. But, I'm very sensible to harsh noise and then to high frequency distortion, and my speakers can fly to very hi highs.

 

Tube sound second harmonic distortion is very kind to our ears, that's why some people (like me) prefer it over transistors, and also they have better impedance matching to electrostatic speakers (like mines).

But this is a discussion for another tread, where and I don't want to participate!

 

By the way, there is a great recording to download, I think it's DDD:

 

The Classical Shop: Alessandra Ammara, R. Schumann, Arts Label

 

http://www.theclassicalshop.net/Details.aspx?CatalogueNumber=AB%207755

 

Happy listening,

 

Roch