Daniel A

There's an older thread about Stockholm jazz shops; see if you can find it. There's really no decent shop left that sells new CD:s, but we still have northern Europe's greatest vinyl jazz store, 'Andra Jazz'. They do have some CD:s, particularly free-ish labels, but the vinyl selection is the main attraction. Mats Gustavsson used to hang out there, I suppose it was when he still lived in Stockholm. Send me a PM a few days before you arrive and I'll check if it's open while you're here. Otherwise, there are a few places where it might turn up something of interest, but as far as newly released stuff goes everybody is ordering from the internet there days.

That's the spirit! You're getting it because you have already run out of space.

Yes, the web archive is a great resource, but it doesn't really work for message boards. Here's a classic I remember: http://web.archive.org/web/20020318092812/http://www.bluenote.com/bulletinboard/ubb-cgi/ultimatebb.cgi?f=19&t=000433&ubb=get_topic

I got this reissue based on the praise for this album in another thread and my experience from Jonathan's previous reissue of Clare Fischer's 'Extension'. The overall quality of the reissue regarding sound and gatefold sleeve matches the best that has ever come out from Japan. It's hard to believe that this was recorded more than 50 years ago! As for the music it's by far the best I've ever heard from Steig and it's progressive within the boundaries of standards based jazz in a way that few other dates I've heard are. Discouraging as it may seem, I find Zeitlin's first recording to be one of his best. While there's something pre-conceived and scholarly to his "free" playing, he comes up with some terrific voicings that sound very forward-looking. Recommended listening!

If there's some kind of splice, digital or analog, maybe some adjustments were by mistake applied only to one of the two sources?

Official (Blue Note) reissue of 'Lighthouse '69' with previously unreleased material was planned and IIRC even announced, but was pulled. There's a thread about that somewhere here. I seem to recall something about an inordinate cost of remastering the multitrack tapes that had numerous edits. It's a good album - has Buster Williams on bass and features one of his compositions which is always a plus. Can't remember I've ever seen another recording of 'Ruby P'gonia'!

Well, if the timings were identical (as were - I would assume - the artist and title info) nobody would have needed to submit a new entry to the CDDB for the Definitive release. In that case the info regarding the previous release would just keep on popping up whenever a copy of the Definitive release is inserted into the player.

One aspect of releases from PD labels is that they are often making the product available through streaming services like Spotify. The administrative cost is low, and the (albeit diminutive) proceeds are seemingly going right into the pockets of these shady businessmen. When these releases are sitting side by side with the legitimate ones it gets very clear: by clicking on this track it's three cents to the company that remastered this and made it available, by clicking on that same track as released by a PD label it's three cents to the shady businessmen.

This may not be as bad as it appears. The CDDB, which most media players and ripping software use, ID:s the disc solely on basis of the TOC (number, length and order of tracks). Therefore the players can't separate two releases containing the same track timings. Of course, Definitive may have copied the previous release anyway.

It's on the Mosaic set, no? From those mentioned so far I've heard the suites of Russell, Graettinger, Mingus and Albam and I prefer the Russell. Haven't listened to the Albam in ten years, but I think I found it a bit pretentious and too film score-ish.

Listening tests are the only way to verfy that a certain psychoacoustical codec is producing a result that sounds the same as the uncompressed source. I was not referring to anectdotal information. I would think the best way to do that is to do a null test on the compressed audio and the uncompressed audio. I'm no expert, but I believe a null test would indicate differences that are not audible when listening to the original compressed signal, since psychoacoustical compression algorithms are relying on masking effects. The purpose is to discard acoustical information that isn't perceptible for humans. Obviously, this doesn't work when the compression gets too heavy, but when one (hopefully) has reached the level where the compressed signal is indistinguishable from the original, a null signal test would probably show a difference anyway.

Returning to Neil Young, Pono has passed 3.5 million dollars on Kickstarter with 30 days to go. You can even get a special Herbie Hancock edition of the hardware!

A bar that would probably have one of Neil Young's worst albums cranked up loud on their PA system.

With a few reservations, I'd say yes.

Listening tests are the only way to verfy that a certain psychoacoustical codec is producing a result that sounds the same as the uncompressed source. I was not referring to anectdotal information.

One possible point of confusion is that I've been talking about MP3 and you're talking about AAC. I don't think that CD "blows MP3 away", but ABX tests show that some people are able to hear the difference on some samples. MP3:s will always be about a size-quality tradeoff. For me there's no point of going past 256 kbps VBR. Others may have a different cut off point. Those dismissing MP3:s as inferior often do not seem to have performed ABX tests, and it's my opinion that the format is better than they think. But as long as someone still is able to hear the difference at a given bitrate, you can't say that it will be "indistinguishable - period."

This is not the case, since there are people that really can hear the difference, even at 320 kbps. They are just not in majority, and it all depends on the conditions. Sorry, I'm just not buying it. The people that claim they can hear the difference are also the same people who think the ABX test is a sin against god. If I ever see a definitive and conclusive ABX of these mythical golden ear types, then I'll believe it. Until then, I'm calling bullshit. Well, visit the Hydrogen Audio forums and see for yourself. ABX tests are the only accepted method of evaluating the development of the LAME MP3 encoder. Maybe we're talking about different things. Since Jerry was talking about MP3:s, I had the highest possible bitrate, 320 kbps, of standard 16 bit MP3:s in mind. There are known "problematic" samples that are often used in the developing process. If some people couldn't hear the difference, further development of psychoacoustical codecs wouldn't be possible.

This is not the case, since there are people that really can hear the difference, even at 320 kbps. They are just not in majority, and it all depends on the conditions. MP3 is a lossy format, so there has to be a lossless source to begin with (unless the files are compiled on the fly by the recording device). But there's room for many different formats. If you want to use MP3:s chances are you'll find a compression rate that's good enough for you.

It is true objectively. CDs are wav files, a lossless format. If the bandwith from 20 to 20 khz is saturated with signal, even 256 VBR will miss something. Try an ABX test and tell us if you still think CD:s blow MP3:s away. It's easy to compare any and every format with CD:s since they've been around for so long. But a recording may be technically inferior to a 16/44 wav and still be indistinguishable from that, depending on the material, compression rate, listener, listening conditions etc.

In the light of your first paragraph, the one that starts with "Hey..." comes across as a bit rude in itself. I'm sure no offence was intended. However I think most of us (myself included) have something to learn from the thoughtful attitude of Mr Aloc himself.

You should, and post your results. I can tell a difference at 160kbps, but haven't tried 192 yet. Who knows, that may be my threshold. Daniel, did you hear a difference at 192? It was a few years back, so I actually can't remember. I really should do it again, because the compression algorithms have been fine-tuned since then. Since becoming a father (for the second time last year) I've hardly had time to make any MP3s. Spotify has also replaced much of my to-go listening.

For MP3:s made with the LAME encoder, it was at a VBR setting resulting in an average of around 256 kbps. Of course, there may theoretically still be problem samples where I would have been able to tell the difference, but for the purpose of MP3:s, it's really good enough.

In just a few days, Neil has managed to raise two and a half million dollars on Kickstarter. https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/1003614822/ponomusic-where-your-soul-rediscovers-music The good news: it's actually just a FLAC player! But then, what's really the point?

It looks good. A pity there's not more of his symphonies. though. From: http://claude.torres1.perso.sfr.fr/Milhaud/MilhaudParMilhaud/Erato63484-4.html

"Merry Go Round" was reissued in Japan in 2010 as TOCJ-8678. It's now out of print.