Comments on: Some Blue Notes That Sell, And One That Won’t

By: maarten kools

maarten kools — Thu, 21 Nov 2013 13:40:42 +0000

“olthough the ceiling in my parrents house was verry low, the sound was nice because of the wooden floor and the wooden cabbinets/closets”

The band in the livingroom, and i was sitting in the kitchen with my equipment, later me and my father build a glass wall between the kitchen and the livingroom.

By: maarten kools

maarten kools — Thu, 21 Nov 2013 13:36:41 +0000

…he also says:..’offcourse there where limitations in the old studio at my parrents house ..i had to consider my parrents and our neighbours, hollidays and sundays…so most recordings where at the end of the day, beginning of the evening..’ They recorded an album within 4-5 hours time… first job: 75 dollars..

By: maarten kools

maarten kools — Thu, 21 Nov 2013 13:27:41 +0000

i also like the old mono lps of blue note, but as always , those artists (in this case RvG) always state that their most recent work is the best. In a Dutch jazzmagazine he gave an interview in 2009,he states: …”Now everybody wants that ‘old sound’, but i can tell you, those days where quite difficullt… we had two mics, often we had to cut or slice from the tapes. The recording was already a verry, very difficult job, but after that it REALLY began with getting it right for the final vinyl. In the sixties, and most of all in the seventies, we got much better equipment.And nowerdays with digital equipment we ‘ve got great stuff. It’s all works faster and is much more precice. ….. …. With creed taylor and CTI i got a chance to broader my spectrum enormously ….i am unbelievably proud on my CTI period. That most journalists didn;t like it a bit of what we where doing at CTI… i would expect that they would enrich themselves with NEW music, just like i did…… ” by the way, i never knew his studio in hackensack was build by the Buro of Frank Loyd Wright under the supervision of FLW. Sorry for the ‘rotten’ translation from dutch to english.

By: DG Mono

DG Mono — Thu, 21 Nov 2013 04:57:12 +0000

Indeed it does 🙂 And yes I am positive the three speakers at Englewood were left and right for stereo and center for mono.

By: Shaft

Shaft — Wed, 20 Nov 2013 22:21:15 +0000

DGM Yes real mono should be played with one speaker. RVG had three speakers but claiming to mix with only one – that should be the one in the middle right.

No phase problem with one speaker – no waddling soundstage if you move your head slightly left and right. Just a beautiful point source smack in the middle – no distractions.

Sounds nice doesn’t it?

By: DG Mono

DG Mono — Wed, 20 Nov 2013 04:16:21 +0000

That seems to make sense Bill, but that has nothing to do with his preference for mono or stereo. Am I missing something? On a side note, please keep in mind that he has never, to my knowledge, explicitly stated that he prefers mono over stereo, this is just a conclusion I’ve drawn after much research.

By: bill

bill — Wed, 20 Nov 2013 01:22:47 +0000

I always thought RVG preferred digital. Here’s a quote from a 2005 interview:
These days, Van Gelder is also an enthusiastic supporter of digital audio and an avid learner of new gear and software. “I believe today’s equipment is fantastic,” he says. “I wouldn’t want to face a session without the editing capabilities of digital. There are still maintenance and reliability issues. Tech support helps. From my viewpoint, the essential difference between analog and digital is that analog does not like to be copied,” Van Gelder continues. “After the original is recorded, edited and mixed, then what? You need a digital delivery medium. In that sense, the final product can be much higher quality than in the ’70s.”

By: DG Mono

DG Mono — Wed, 20 Nov 2013 00:31:26 +0000

Shaft, I never thought about the possible differences between hearing mono sound coming from one speaker versus two…maybe the reverberation in the room would be different? Maybe the two speakers are ever so slightly out of phase?? Or are you referring more to a “true mono rig”? If you are, I’ve never actually heard one, but I know from experience that a modern stereo rig with the left and right channels summed sounds pretty damn good and it sounds much better than a mono record on a stereo rig without the channels summed.

By: DG Mono

DG Mono — Wed, 20 Nov 2013 00:25:06 +0000

My, Earl, that is a VERY unique take on mono vs. stereo that your brother has…very interesting!

By: Earl

Earl — Tue, 19 Nov 2013 22:31:42 +0000

DGM:
I do understnd what you are saying; it is true that what VG was hearing when monitoring was the mono sum of the two tracks, and it was from that he was judging the final mono pressing. I am not aware that he said that he preferred the mono, once stereo became possible, however. Perhaps I should not have said that the stero was closer to the original; but since the five numbers in the 1500 series (including 1595) were originally recorded in 2-track, and that was the tape used to press when stereo became feasible, I should think you can be justified in calling your stereo copy, original.

As to which you prefer, it is IMHO a matter of taste.

I have an older borther who played violin in an orchestra and owned many mon recordings; when stereo came out, he claimed that mono was intrinsically better, since the only reason an orchestra is spread accross a stage was that you couldn’t get them close enough together to have the sound emerge from a single point. My dear brother has always been known for his casuistic reasoning!