Jazz Vinyl on eBay: Evans The Sideman, Lady Day
We were talking last week about albums featuring Bill Evans as a sideman. Well here’s one of the very early ones, for sale now on eBay: Lucy Reed, The Singing Reed, Fantasy 3-212. This looks to be an original pressing. The record looks to be in VG++ condition and the cover looks more like VG. The listing doesn’t mention the presence of Evans as a sideman, which would certainly attract bidders: However, the start price of $150 is pretty high, which might be a deterrent. We’ll see if it sells.
As Rudolf notes in the Reader Forum, there are a bunch of records now from the seller bobdjukic, who has been noted here at Jazz Collector many times for his hyperbole and his ability to get people to bid astronomical prices for his records. Here’s one that I have always assumed was a pretty routine record, but after reading his description even I begin to wonder:
Billie Holiday, Lady in Satin, Columbia 8048. This is a stereo pressing, which, according to the seller, seems to make it a big deal because there was an extra song printed on the cover. I’ve seen many copies of this record, mono and stereo, and never gave it much thought. Perhaps I should think again. This one is already at nearly $300 and there are still three days to go. There’s also this one: Art Blakey and the Jazz Messengers, Midnight Session, Elektra 120. This is a mono pressing and it’s already at $100. The appeal seems to be the difference between the mono a stereo covers. Ah well.
Stunning… Gorgeous…Mega…Impossible to find….True first…Impossibly rare…. Bob Djukic never fails to piss me off…
The Lucy Reed record exists in red translucent vinyl, and is quite collectable.
absolutely curious:I’ve looked and listened to 2 out of these 3 records last weekend,Lady and Buhaina.
In mono only.
I don’t think I’d want to spend hundreds of dollars on a record because of a misprint(Holiday). Now,if it contained a tune that was NOT on later releases or on mono versions,that would be of interest to me. Otherwise,not so much! The Lucy Reed is a favorite (for the cover design). Have yet to hear the lp,though. How’s Bill?
I agree with ceedee.
I’m a mono addict.
stereo only for what not on mono.
no exception.
I see a thread developing – mono or stereo? No doubt you have all been here many times, apologies.
Sometimes deliberately and sometimes inadvertantly I have both mono and stereo copies, both say on New York labels. Almost without exception the mono sounds better. It fills the soundstage in a way that it never occurs to you to that it’s “mono”. It just music, it sounds right. With the stereo copy you start to focus on the channel separation, the position of the instruments, Joe Henderson trapped inside the right speaker, Lee Morgan trapped inside the left. You marvel at the miking of the drums. None of this is “just music”
In a similar way, the box-office rage is now films in 3D. Real life isn’t in “3D” its just real life.
Why else does mono appear to command a higher price?
monsterly rare……. i like..
a part of my pissed off-ness is also that he has really beautifull records… i’m jealous.
LondenCalling: mono defenitely… but i can’t hold myself if i see a stereo pressing of a BN i do not have yet… the flesh is always weak…
London Calling,
I have tried for years to find a way to express why some, but not all, albums sound better in mono than stereo. You have hit it right on the head! In mono, everyone plays together! Amazing. For a non-jazz example, if you are one of the very few who have every heard Sgt. Peppers on vinyl in mono, it will make you want to throw away all of your Beatles stereo albums.
I read this a while back and thought it interesting when discussing blue notes mono vs. stereo.
http://store.acousticsounds.com/s/259/Blue_Note_45_RPM_-_Analogue_Productions_Reissues_Both_Sets?store=acousticsounds&banner_id=238
This does not represent my opinion. While I believe that there are some instances where the stereo is better than the mono, I don’t usually double dip so if I have a choice I go mono. I own quite a few blue note stereo presentations and find the stereo to be artificial. There is less of a soundstage, and more of what London Calling said where you have Lee Morgan in your Left channel. He sounds good, but is coming directly from your left channel and it the stereo doesn’t sound natural when compared to other Mono blue notes. I’ve heard similar sentiments many times. But honestly, if there is a record I like I’ll grab it whether Mono or Stereo. I just prefer the Mono.
Coincidentally, I own just the one Analogue Productions / “Acous-tech” reissues by Steve Hoffman – Grant Green’s miraculous suspension of time – “Idle Moments” 2x45rpm – because I couldn’t find an original anywhere for love nor money (Ed: please note – I tried neither)
Its like all the other contemporary re-issues – bottoxed bass, unconvincing overall presentation, and the grooves were choked with manufacturing detritus requiring a good clean before it could safely be played.
There is something wrong when all the money and modern technology in the world can’t beat a pressed vinyl biscuit from fifty years ago.
I’ve wondered that too, I like the presentation of the original blue notes over the modern re-issues. I think the reason the originals are preferred is because the majority of modern re-issues are trying to do something different, i.e. put there sonic stamp on it. And they tend to have ramped up bass like you said and generally an overall unconvincing presentation in a variety of different ways. The japanese re-masterings are unconvincing in a different way than say the analogue productions re-masterings. Don’t get me wrong, I own many different re-masterings. I appreciate them, and I can’t afford to say I only want first pressings. And the one thing they do trump originals on is quietness, as well as when you buy a new record it is in Mint condition. IMO though, the best re-masterings I’ve found where the Music Matters 45’s. I just think that they stayed the truest to RVG, which gives a more preferable sound. I still don’t like flipping the record so often but it’s a small price to pay I guess. I’m curious if anyone else has an opinion on the best re-masterings(not the later blue note/liberty/UA re-pressings but the various re-masterings). Clearly they aren’t collectible like the records AL features on here, but without them I wouldn’t have a large collection of Blue Notes or other great labels.
I have to respond to this, folks. The true Beatles aficionados know that all of the fab four were always present when the final mono mix was made. The stereo versions were always done later by the engineers and Sir George Martin was not always present either, and these later stereo mix downs contain plenty of super obvious differences compared to the initial fab four approved mono mix downs, mostly because sometimes the engineers even used different takes to assemble the stereo mix down. After the white “The Beatles” double LP there was never a unique mono mix down anymore. In this case it basically depends if you grew up to what your folks had in their cabinet; mono or stereo pressings. Some prefer the mono version, some the stereo, but if you compare the two, you will hear MAJOR differences; not so much in audio quality, but simply in how the tracks were mixed. They bluntly differ from each other! But that’s when it comes to The Beatles. When it comes to Jazz records, I understand why some of us prefer mono: every speaker delivers the same, steady and often louder signal. But let us not forget -when we focus, for instance, on Rudy van Gelder recordings- that not ALL the stereo releases are fake or “electronically re-channelled” for stereo. Lee Morgan’s “Candy” for instance appeared in stereo for the first time when it saw its first U.S. re-release on CD in correct me if I’m wrong, 1987 or 1989. But with only two tracks to work with and with four musicians in the good ol’ Hackensack studio, (and this is how I think it went back then) Rudy had no other choice than to put Lee close to the mic on the left, bend a mic into Sonny’s piano and ‘pan’ him to the right, position a mic in front of Doug’s stand up bass and maybe line up a mic or two, three in front of Art Taylor’s drum kit, especially the rides, one of the trademarks of the Van Gelder sound in my opinion. And yes, this might sound like very hard “left-right” unnatural stereo, but if you put on your head phones and you listen closely, you can hear so many beautiful, intimate, details that it adds so much more to the listening experience that I just can’t discard a stereo pressing over a mono one. Now “Candy” is performed by a quartet. But when you listen to quintets or sextets, you can actually hear that one musician steps away from the mic while the other one moves closer for his solo. And all the while, on your headphones, you can hear that yummie sound coming from the “middle of the room” if you really focus on it, and even hear someone humming, lighting a cigarette, blowing the excess saliva out of his trumpet, the squeaking of a hi-hat pedal, etc etc. Those details are usually much less clear in mono. I have a stereo re-press of Mobley’s BLP1568 in stereo, and believe me folks: it’s heaven. Yes, it might have less ‘body’ than the original mono pressing, but that’s -again- because mono means the same signal of all musicians in both the left and right channel, hence a louder, thicker sound. Still the BLP1568 re-press is in genuine stereo, not fake or re-channelled, no: it’s whatever Rudy mixed to the left channel and right channel, now pressed onto vinyl. Last but not least I would like to mention that in the early days the word wasn’t necessarily “stereo”, but “binaural”. Even original mono versions of Elvis exist as “binaural” out-takes and “previously unreleased” versions, but believe me: listen to one of those “binaural” Elvis originals on your headphones, and you will notice immediately that it’s exactly what you would have heard with your two human ears if you would have positioned yourself smack bam in the middle between Elvis in his singing booth on the left side of the studio and the band on the right. It’s almost as if the Jordanaires are right there with you in the living room! And don’t get me wrong: I have no problem with mono at all, but please note that sometimes a “genuine mono” pressing is nothing more than a folded down representation of what initially truly was recorded on two tracks in “binaural” or stereo. Last but not least: my cousin, a trumpeter, sometimes uses “harsh” stereo pressings to rehears and copy existing trumpet solos. He simply uses his ‘balance’ dial, turns it all the way to the right (or left, depending on where the trumpeter is in the stereo image) and practices! From what I’ve read and heard over the years, I guess I’m not far away from the truth, but please do not hesitate to correct me if I’m wrong. And maybe the subject of mono or stereo also has something to do with personal preference! š
Mattyman, The Netherlands.
And as a response to Mike’s comment on different remasters: I’ve emailed Al about doing a guest column, and as soon as I have the time, I will deliver one and also discuss remasters. Especially the Japanese ones! š
Mattyman.
ā¦As for the extra track on Billie Holiday’s final testament, āLady in Satinā on Columbia CS 8048…The so-called missing Track #6 – “The End of a Love Affair” is in fact on both the Mono (CL 8048) & Stereo (CS 8048) copies of the original/first DG six eye pressings of this one. Itās not missing from the LP itself, but just on later pressings for some reason. Thankfully, for all us Lady Day lovers out there, it reappears again in both a mono & a stereo bonus track on the Columbia Legacy Edition CD…Our āfriendā bob-da-jukieā seems to be ebays answer to the olā time ācarney grifterā selling us the proverbial snake oil with his shameless side-show postings once againā¦ Does anyone else smell the insider bidding on this one as well? ā¦This one is not that rare.
…I just checked the original MONO copy (CL 8048) and my stereo pressing (CS 8048) but the stereo isn’t a DG. Does anyone out there have the original Stereo 6-eye DG copy of CS 8048 ? Is the track actually missing ?? Could bobby-j be telling the truth here ??? (He only shows the groves on side 1, leaving my comment above to be a bit inconclusive for the moment, sorry guys !)
Don-Lucky,
All original stereo six-eye copies of CS 8048 Lady In Satin list 12 songs on the jacket yet only play 11 (reflected on the label also). The mono version, CL 1157, plays all twelve tracks including “The End Of A Love Affair”. The same thing happened around the same time on CS 8053 Ellington Indigos. The stereo copies leave off a track, “The Sky Fell Down”, which was included on the mono copies and listed on the front of both. So on these two Columbia albums you had to pay an additional dollar for the stereo version and you lost one song vs. the mono. Bottom line folks, don’t fall for Bobdjukic’s hype.
Thanks,Aaron-I’d forgotten about the Ellington. Now,besides knowing that the “hype” on the Holiday is misplaced,does anyone have any idea how such screw-ups happen in the first place? That’s right up there with the mispelling of Cannonball’s name on early Kind Of Blue covers-and MUCH worse than those companies that issued different takes on mono releases than on stereo issues! Quality control,someone?
interesting piece Mattyman!
No, there’s is no need to fall into Bob the Joker’s trap :
http://www.popsike.com/php/quicksearch.php?searchtext=billie+holiday+lady+in+satin&thumbs=&currsel=&x=12&y=15
Thanks for the clarification on that one Aaron & Michel… I admit I pushed the panic button on that one a bit too soon !
I wonder if there is some difference in the mastering process on a stereo pressing that may have had something to do with the missing track… It was still a pretty recent format. Could they have just run out of space or perhaps they only recorded track 12 in MONO originally…
Ceedee you make an interesting point on the issue of quality control (Some of which was definitely needed in my past comment about bobby-j). In the old days they these mistakes would be used to get around recording contracts like in the case of Charlie Parker aka.”Charlie Chan”.
Hereās another example for you: I just noticed the same issue with spell check / quality control on a recent purchase of Billie Holiday’s 10″ Jazz at the Philharmonic on Clef MGC 169. The copy I picked up says “Billy Holiday” on the cover spelt with a ‘y’ instead of ‘ie’ at the end of Billie. Most of the original covers have this mistake corrected, but from a collectors standpoint, these mistakes can certainly add to the value and rarity. This seems to happen in the printing process all the time especially with things like stamps. I guess at the end of the day a mistake costs the company money to toss them out, so in order to keep the shareholders happy, and save their jobs they just released them anyway thinking no one would really take much notice. It is afterall about the music. Bob Cranshaw’s name also seems to be mistake prone as well… Check out an original copy of Lee Morgan’s Sidewinder, they spell his last name as “Crenshaw”, but like most of us, I let it slide and bought the album anyway.
Cranshaw is also misprinted “Crenshaw” on Granchan Moncur’s “Evolution” !
On Mr Bob Djukic, I’ve always tried to consider the desirability of a item independently of the hyperbole of the salesman trying to sell it to you. Mental fingers in ears.
He does sometimes have some fine records to sell, for which some are willing to offer a high price. You are free to make up your own mind, or equally, free to allow Mr Djukic to make it up for you.
Seems to me the market is never wrong.
At Maarten: thanks for the comment! For a second I thought that nobody read it š
Mattyman, The Netherlands.