ajf67

Clark Terry "Duke With A Difference" OJC re-issue.

That's probably because they're digital Just kidding Wolff, let us know how they sound, and I do hope you enjoy them. This set is right up my alley to receive a lot of time on the turntable. Lots of Grant Green and Elvin Jones. Mostly medium tempo(Unity may be the exception). Some really beautiful tunes. What a great product Mosaic put/puts out. As soon as I stop missing their vinyl issues, I get another set and wish they still issued everything on vinyl. The sign of a great product for me is: I really, really want more of it. And I want more Mosaic's. Probably preaching to the choir. Very warm, smooth sound. I imagine the instruments are missing some(just a bit) of the bite and real life energy found on originals. Green's guitar doesn't have the snap, detail and body I know it to have on other original LP's from this period. Also, I'm pretty sure the organ is missing some bottom end. I'm getting too picky here. The sound is very, very good. I've have many, many all analog LP's that do not sound this good. The music flows and communicates very naturally, which is what I value most. Next stop...the Tristano set in about a week. Congrats on the Young. It's definitely on my list for someday. I hope you like the Tristano box too. I have it on CD and it's fascinating stuff. I've got on Bud Shank This Bud's For You with Ron Carter, Kenny Barron and Al Foster. Muse Records. 1984

Damn, I just looked at my E-Bay watching list. Porcy, you did buy a few didn't you? I also am glad you started this thread. Thanks.

What IS the deal with the RVG need to turn it up on the cymbals? The brightness is really off-putting. I have a Japanese King LP, I'll stick with that.

From what I've heard about Proper I'm going to skip them. But, I wanted to highlight Chuck's quote above because I think he is on to one of the major concerns in this whole area, which is what incentive do these companies have to protect the original source tapes? This is important for many reasons, which I and others have expressed on other threads. I only highlight the quote because I agree with Chuck that this element of it never gets adequately addressed.

I hear ya Chuck. But you HAVE stumbled into the VINYL thread, where geeks like us get to talk to other geeks about our love for analog. THe music is obviously most important and first, but this specific issue is also about getting what you pay for and expected out of a product. I suspect that most of the concerns expressed here come from the same place that mine do, which is that I love the sound of analog recordings and strive to find LPs that come as close as possible to the original product that was recorded in the studio (this doesn't always mean the oldest "label" or pressing, just the one that most accurately reproduces the recorded music it contains). In Mosaic, I had been under the impression that their LP issues were analog, and that they did go back to original tapes, etc. Finding out that they don't always is a disappointment, but not something that trumps the music within. Yes, but you are talking to someone who manufactured VINYL for around 20 years and might know something about it. Much, maybe the majority, of talk about analogue/vinyl on this and many other boards has very little to do with reality as I know it. Vinyl was a fine medium as is the cd - there are advantages and pitfalls for both. I cringe when I read comments I know are "stupid". Folks fretting about the transfers of "x" when you didn't have any complaints before are "stupid" to me. If you really loved the lps of "z" and are now "bummed" since you discovered it was mastered from a digital tape, I snicker. Nothing has changed to reduce your pleasure but your "investment". Most of what concerns people of this ilk is economics. I really don't care what you "invested in" but do care about the delivery of the music. Chuck, First of all, I would never attempt to play "who knows more about making records" with you, and I didn't think anything in my post reflected any such sentiment. You have forgotten more than I know about record making, and I respect your knowledge. No question about it. I say that with all sincerity, and with no attempt at sarcasm or anything negative. Your contributions to this board are among the best things about it in my opinion. But, I think you have mistakenly (and maybe understandably given that we don’t know each other and your only exposure to me is through written postings on this board and my two purchases from you) lumped me and others in with an "ilk" that I don't think I belong to. I think you may be basing your opinion of me (us) on a set of assumptions that I for one would quarrel with. Chief among them is the idea that I have an interest in LP versions of recordings for economic and/or “investment” reasons or some such thing. I guess i’ll chalk that up to your having dealt with too many “audiophiles” and people who don’t appreciate the actual music in your years in the business. About my being "bummed" regarding my Monk LP Mosaic: Yes, I remain disappointed because there is no improvement in the sound on these LPs from the old 80s CDs that I have. Does that mean I’m not going to listen to them? No. Does it mean I don’t like the set? No. Does that reflect at all on the music within? No. Does it mean I’m going to sell it on E-Bay (something I have never done)? No. I’m of an age when my first exposure to Monk”s Blue Notes was from the 80s CD versions. I have never liked the sound of them, but always assumed it was a problem with the original recording (and may still be). When I received the Mosaic LP set a while ago, I thought my assumptions regarding the original taping were correct as they didn’t seem to sound any better. But, I have never done a direct comparison of the two until now. What I am “bummed” about is the fact that I was not getting what I thought I was getting when I purchased the Mosaic. That’s it. Period. Another assumption that I suspect is lurking is that I always consider an LP to be the best sounding version of a recording. Again, not true. But, with respect to 50’s Blue Note material, I have yet to hear any CD that is as good as an LP from back then. I assume (yes, an assumption!) that this is also true for the Monk material on the Blue Note Mosaic set. Who knows. I’m not rushing out to buy those LPs though. In fact, in buying Mosaics, I usually go for the CD version. Ironic, given this thread! I think Mosaic does a nice job on them, I like the convenience of CDs, and they are cheaper than the LP versions. Perhaps that screws up my “investment” I don’t know. What I don’t like is when I spring for the LP version, only for it to be a CD version in disguise. Anyway, I hope we can get off this silly tangent and actually spend time talking about “reality as [you] know it.” I’d be very interested in hearing more about that. Drew

I hadn't noticed... Have you seen that commercial??? I had to leave the room before my wife saw my face...I must have looked like that wolf in the Tex Avery cartoons and my eyes were about to fall out and bounce on the floor! Now I have to ask -- WHAT COMMERCIAL? Sounds like a must see.

Jackie McLean Disc 3. I can never hear "On The Nile" enough. What a great set this is.

This is the same burner I have and it works great. I highly recommend it. I'll second Wolff in saying that it makes great copies of LPs. I've done a ton for the car, and while I've never done any comparisons to released CDs of the same material, my ears like them.

Thanks for posting this. Glad Lou's still doing it! I hope he does another one of his weeks at the Vanguard this fall.

I hear ya Chuck. But you HAVE stumbled into the VINYL thread, where geeks like us get to talk to other geeks about our love for analog. THe music is obviously most important and first, but this specific issue is also about getting what you pay for and expected out of a product. I suspect that most of the concerns expressed here come from the same place that mine do, which is that I love the sound of analog recordings and strive to find LPs that come as close as possible to the original product that was recorded in the studio (this doesn't always mean the oldest "label" or pressing, just the one that most accurately reproduces the recorded music it contains). In Mosaic, I had been under the impression that their LP issues were analog, and that they did go back to original tapes, etc. Finding out that they don't always is a disappointment, but not something that trumps the music within.

Thanks for posting this. The seller, Atomic Records, has been selling from this collection for a little while. There have been some great titles. I seem to remember people on this board having mixed feelings about Atomic Records. I've won a few LPs from them and have been generally satisfied, although they tend to slightly overgrade their records in my experience, but nothing has been very far off that I have been upset by it.

Also, I e-mailed Mosaic asking them if they would supply information about the source material for their sets yesterday after this thread started. I'll share if/when i hear anything.

CRAP!! Is this the sound of the high bidder for the Larry Young Mosaic on EBAY? This really bums me out about the Young too the more I think about it. His vinyl is so pricey that I guess I'll be settling for RVG or plain old CD versions of this stuff. Or bid for the Mosaic CD set at some point.

The rest of tonight: Sonny Rollins: Newk's Time Japan Toshiba Stereo Sonny Rollins: A Night at the Village Vanguard Japan King mono Jackie Mclean: Destination...Out Japan, King Stereo

Thelonious Monk and Sonny Rollins Japanese Toshiba pressing SMJ-6627. Just got my first order from Early Records in Japan, of which the above is one. You guys who have been touting him are correct. The service and communication were fantastic. Very accurate on the condition descriptions, and better prices than E-Bay. I'll definitely be a return customer.

I did a comparison of my LP version of the Thelonious Monk Blue Note Mosaic with my old 1989 Ron McMaster CDs and they sounded identical to my ears. Bummer. I think you are OK on the Cherry set though, because if the above post is correct, the Q LPs are analogs.

If I remember right , blue is mono and black is stereo.

Yeah, I agree. That means spending less on the Young though (in the few times it surfaces...)

I like the French, and have been horrified by the anti-Frech sentiments expressed throughout American culture. I was going to add a well-written and reasoned article on the Iraq war titled "The French Were Right," but I figured that was best placed in the politics section. If you care to read it, it is posted there.

I don't know whether any of the following really answers the question, but the non-Q LP Mosaic sets I have state the following: Art Pepper: No mention of mastering or recording other than crediting Dick Brock with producing the original sessions Thelonious Monk Blue Note: Credits "Original disc transfers by Rudy Van Gelder or by Michael Cuscuna and Ron McMasters (sic); Tape transfers and remix by Bert Agudelo and Michael Cuscuna" Sidney Bechet: "Tape and disc transfers: Ron McMasters (sic)" Ike Quebec/John Hardee: "Original discs retransferred to tape by Ron McMasters (sic)" Johnny Hodges 1951-55: "Mastering engineer Rudy Van Gelder" No other mention of processing. There is no Van Gelder mark in the dead wax, although that may not mean a thing. p.s. I added the (sic) after references to Ron McMaster because I have otherwise seen his name without the "s"

Thanks for saving me the trouble of posting this. Just read this thread, and I second the seconding of Jazzmoose.

I am pretty sure some full and partial sets are from digital source. My Mosaic catalogs are buried away and they listed which were analog and digital. You may want to contact Mosaic to get accurate info. Thanks. I had thought that the LPs were always analog masters.

For reference: Jackie McLean CD and LP sets went on E-Bay within the past week. LP was $316, CD was $131.

Still on the Stones. I'm playing a boot 3LP set from the 1972 American tour. This version of the band was totally smokin'. They should have kept Mick Taylor around.