CIMP sound

[Chuck Nessa]

Am I the only member who's been inside the Contemporary studio/warehouse?

[Larry Kart]

Am I the only member who's been inside the Contemporary studio/warehouse?

Per that, and one of Jim's recent posts on this thread, I would love to read a knowledgable, inside account of what some of the classic recording studios were like as "rooms" -- Columbia's 30th St. Studio, RCA's Webster Hall, the place (don't recall the name) where the vintage John Hammond Vanguard recordings were made, the Los Angeles Police Academy Auditorium where IIRC both Pacific Jazz (the Cy Touff-Richie Kamuca album) and Contemporary (the first Hampton Hawes trio album?) did some nice work, RVG Hackensack and RVG Englewood Cliffs, etc. -- and I'm sure I'm forgetting ten or twenty times that many places. I don't mean how these rooms looked, unless that's relevant, but how they sounded in general, before a specific talented engineer went to work shaping what the room gave him to work with. Were there traits in common? Significant differences?

[Chuck Nessa]

Chris A has by far the most experience of members.

I have worked in 30th St, RVG Englewood Cliffs, Audio Innovators in Pittsburgh, many studios in the greater Chicago area and others that slip my aged mind.

[Д.Д.]

I have about 30 CIMP CDs and they mostly sound like shit. Drums are way up, shallow and boomy, bass is way down and colorless, reeds are flat. They do indeed sound like live recordings - but the ones done in a place really not suitable acoustically for music performances.

What is equally disappointing is how mediocre the music itself is - the discs I have are among the weakest in discogrpahies of these artists. Among the discs I have, the only two I would recommend are duo of Mark Dresser and Ray Anderson, and duo of Dave Burrell with Tyron Brown. Perhaps the Harris Eisenstadt's "Jalolu" too.

I like the cover art, though.

[Shawn]

I like the cover art, though.

Love that! My Mother had a mustang with a beautiful paint job, but the motor was blown.

[Guest Bill Barton]

CIMP (rhymes with SIMP) is crap, quite likely the fucking worst ever label (to record w/generally skilled/talented jass musicians) as far as quality versus # of releases. In fact, elder don & dewey clementine will assert without hesitation the entire label is missable & that the few exceptions... ain't that exceptional, really.

That a few hard-up musicians have recorded prolifically for CIMP doesn't change that fact, it only highlights the shittiness of the game & that some folks would rather do anything than handle their own biz. That's understandable but it doesn't make those 500-odd records any better. (Compare, release for release, to Nessa or even Tzadik, if we need to get the #s up.)

a motherfucking cd is NOT a goddamn live concert room, beginning, middle & end of discussion.

or do ya'll REALLY think some asshat in "The Spirit Room" with a DAT "discovered" something essential & transformative that eluded those who tried to get shit down for almost 100 years previously?

ersatz audiophila please!

the ** ONLY ** reason more people don't speak on this is bc in the three-starving-fuckers-fighting-over-one-goddamn-chicken-bone world of free jass or improvised this/that... Bob Rusch & co. have most of the cards.

they are, in fact, an embarassment both the record biz AND especially the engineering trade.

somebody tell Barton we've been beefing on this for 10+ years already; everybody's welcome to the party, of course, but he's a little late.

Support Live & Well-Recorded Music: BOYCOTT CIMP. (send Jay Rosen or Joe McPhee for example, $10 personally if ya'll really give a shit.)

Well, I'll be darned, here's something that edc and I agree on! My language was somewhat less colorful but the gist of the message is the same. They won't need to tell me, man, I've taken you off the "ignore" list. And, by the way, I searched the board for previous threads before starting this one and didn't find anything.

I haven't heard any CIMP recordings, but I have to agree with clem concerning "audiophile" labels in general. If you want to hear a live performance, go see a live performance. To eschew tools like compression and EQ, among others, in the name of some sort of purity (as if it is natural and pure to capture sound digitally to begin with) is like a painter deciding to never use yellow.

It is also antithetical to the entire concept of audio engineering itself. The mantra of audio engineers is to make a recording sound good on the widest variety of systems possible, not force the listener to invest in a prohibitively expensive stereo system just so the recording sounds good. In fact, if an engineer can't make a recording sound good on 99% of sound systems out there, than he or she isn't doing their job, imo.

Microphones do not "hear" like our ears. Speakers do not function like instruments. Tools like EQ and compression were invented to remedy these problems in as much as they can be remedied.

Again, if you want to hear something that sounds "live", then go see a live performance.

Of course, then you have to contend with what constitutes a live performance. Is it truly live if the instruments have to be mic'd and amplified through a PA system?

I got an audiophile label kick a few years ago before I realized that they mostly sounded like the stuff I used to record before I knew what I was doing.

Good points all, Jim, and I especially relate to your statement "...if you want to hear something that sounds 'live', then go see a live performance." And your last sentence had me ...

...I'm no longer writing for Cadence & I suppose I could weigh in here (god knows that during my tenure there I had to tread very carefully every time I was assigned to review one of their own releases), but truthfully I think the topic's been covered ad nauseam over the years.

My apologies if this stuff has been talked to death, Nate. As I said before, I ran a search and came up with no threads. And it just irked me how utterly crappy these things sounded on-air. Compression in and of itself isn't necessarily a bad thing. They sound pretty damned crappy on my decidedly moderately-priced home system too: distant, kind of "tubby," very ill-defined soundfields... Now I'm reminded yet again of why I rarely play any of their discs on the radio. And it's a shame, because there's some high quality music sprinkled here and there throughout the catalog, including the David Haney recordings I played Monday a.m., the Adam Lane stuff, some of the Joe McPhees, etc. Okay, nuff sed.

[Stefan Wood]

The Odean Pope, Byard Lancaster, Kahil El Zabar, Frank Lowe and Billy Bang CIMPS are very nice sessions.

[JohnS]

The Odean Pope, Byard Lancaster, Kahil El Zabar, Frank Lowe and Billy Bang CIMPS are very nice sessions.

I'll endorse Ahmed Abdullah too

[jazzbo]

The favorite among those I have are the Rudd Herbie Nichols volumes.

[skeith]

I am not sure about the sound quality, but love Ernie Krivda on those CIMP recordings!!!

[Nate Dorward]

Yes Adam Lane's discs for the label are very good. The duo & quartet with Tchicai is a charmer, & the trios with Golia & Vijay Anderson are excellent. & Dresser/Anderson is great. I also like the first Frank Lowe disc Bodies & Souls & James Finn's Faith in a Seed.

But, yes, the hit/miss ratio is pretty low, as is inevitable with any label releasing such a ridiculous amount of material. That's setting aside issues about the sound quality.

[clarke68]

Fascinating thread...thanks to all who have contributed.

I'll join the minority opinion, I like the "CIMP sound". I only have two albums of theirs: a Trio X and a solo date by Jay Rosen. The Rosen is particularly amazing, it puts a live drum set in my living room better than any other recording I own. I completely disagree with the notion that you need a $xxxxx system for these recordings to sound good...I put my system together carefully and it's not mass market stuff (most of it), but it's far from the nosebleed section of the price continuum. In fact, I played the Rosen CD on a friend's (much better, much more expensive) system, and it didn't have the same magic I get at home.

I think it's fair to say that the "minimalist" sound is not for everyone, it is distant and somewhat lacking in impact, but its advantages (the immediacy, clean instrument timbre and holographic soundstage) more than make up for it. CIMP makes their aesthetic pretty clear, you should know what you're getting before you lay down your $$$.

That said...

The mantra of audio engineers is to make a recording sound good on the widest variety of systems possible...if an engineer can't make a recording sound good on 99% of sound systems out there, than he or she isn't doing their job, imo.

Microphones do not "hear" like our ears. Speakers do not function like instruments. Tools like EQ and compression were invented to remedy these problems in as much as they can be remedied.

The very idea of capturing "natural" sound is pretty much akin to chasing one's tail.

But there is still nothing natural about the act of recording music.

I got an audiophile label kick a few years ago before I realized that they mostly sounded like the stuff I used to record before I knew what I was doing.

These are great points. Perhaps these opinions are very common in the recording industry, but I've never heard them stated so succinctly, and I find them remarkably refreshing. As much as I like all (well, most of) the CIMP, Chesky, & Mapleshade albums I own, I don't actually listen to them as often as more "normal" sounding albums like what the other Jim A. does. I'm glad people are active doing this minimalist miking stuff, but I'm equally glad that not everyone is doing it.

CIMP is **** ... the ******* worst ever label ... the entire label is missable ... they are, in fact, an embarassment both the record biz AND especially the engineering trade.

FACT: CIMP has set the game back more than moved it forward

What's with the vitriol? I mean, fine if you don't like the label or whatever, and maybe I'm out of touch with the impact they have (very few people I know have even heard of CIMP), but do you really think the world would be a better place if these 500 or so releases didn't exist? Some people say the same thing about Manfred Eicher, Wynton, Norah (and by association, Bruce Lundvall), etc. but I hardly think any of them, regardless of whether or not I like what they do, is doing more harm than good.

[Guest Bill Barton]

Fascinating thread...thanks to all who have contributed.

I'll join the minority opinion, I like the "CIMP sound". I only have two albums of theirs: a Trio X and a solo date by Jay Rosen. The Rosen is particularly amazing, it puts a live drum set in my living room better than any other recording I own. I completely disagree with the notion that you need a $xxxxx system for these recordings to sound good...I put my system together carefully and it's not mass market stuff (most of it), but it's far from the nosebleed section of the price continuum. In fact, I played the Rosen CD on a friend's (much better, much more expensive) system, and it didn't have the same magic I get at home.

I think it's fair to say that the "minimalist" sound is not for everyone, it is distant and somewhat lacking in impact, but its advantages (the immediacy, clean instrument timbre and holographic soundstage) more than make up for it. CIMP makes their aesthetic pretty clear, you should know what you're getting before you lay down your $$$.

Thanks for joining the discussion and offering another perspective. There are indeed some folks who swear by their approach, just as there are plenty who swear at it

CIMP is **** ... the ******* worst ever label ... the entire label is missable ... they are, in fact, an embarassment both the record biz AND especially the engineering trade.

FACT: CIMP has set the game back more than moved it forward

What's with the vitriol? I mean, fine if you don't like the label or whatever, and maybe I'm out of touch with the impact they have (very few people I know have even heard of CIMP), but do you really think the world would be a better place if these 500 or so releases didn't exist? Some people say the same thing about Manfred Eicher, Wynton, Norah (and by association, Bruce Lundvall), etc. but I hardly think any of them, regardless of whether or not I like what they do, is doing more harm than good.

Vitriol is Clem's middle name (edvc). When he makes a point it stays made, that's for sure. Discounting the label's entire catalog may be a bit over the top but I can appreciate the rhetoric. In terms of the up and down quality of the music - engineering aside - I've cast my vote for two CIMP recordings in my Top Ten lists for CODA magazine: The Adam Lane Quartet's Fo(u)r Being(s) and the David Haney-Julian Priester duo Ota Benga of the Batwa. The former struck me at the time as being of much better sound quality than some of the other CIMPs; the latter was chosen for the music alone as the engineering - to put it bluntly - sucks.