DrJ

I'd say $250 is a great price to get the music, assuming the vinyl is in great shape. I got lucky and won one on eBay for $180 a while back, but it usually goes for more there. I guess if you were real patient and in no hurry to get one, you could wait it out for a relative eBay bargain, but if I'd ever seen one for sale for $250 before I got mine, I'd have jumped all over it. This is such a great set, chock full of wonderful music. I had much of it on CDs but I learned about this music after most were already out of print, and never could find some of the series...plus I believe some of the music in the LP set never was released in the CD series. I found the CDs to have merely acceptable sound; the vinyl is a definite step up there - typically dead silent surfaces on these Japanese pressed records and more dynamic range. It's likely the vinyl was made from the same digital masters as the CDs but I still think the vinyl sounds better (maybe my bias of course).

I honestly don't know what more I can say, so let me just recap: 1) Some guy comes and posts about how great DVD-A/hi res is. OK so far, everyone is entitled to an opinion, etc.... 2) I have the "audacity" to make a reasoned, rational post that disagrees, explaining this is just based on MY EARS and that I tried hi res and wasn't impressed. Never, ever did I say that I don't "believe" in hi res...it just isn't for me. More power to you folks who enjoy it, hey, more used vinyl for me! 3) I get a snippy retort back from the new guy, the point at which the "argument" began...who then tries to pass off the rudeness in his retort as humor. If humor was the intention (which I doubt, but OK, I'll get past that), well, NOT FUNNY at any rate; I'd have laughed if it was. You want Star Wars humor, how about reading this in your best Yoda voice: "A fucking break give me!" 4) I respond in kind, yes a bit more snippy than I usually would be, but when you bait people, sometimes they descend to that level temporarily. I did apologize for that. 5) Somehow I'm one of the "grumps in the road." Just so we're clear. This may be the kind of thing that has me posting little to none around here these days. BTW Jazzmoose your CD is in the mail.

Well Allen I agree, and in fact I only post the studies out of interest, just to show that even from a theoretical standpoint it's not a forgone conclusion that DSD in particular is necessarily going to be an audio improvement - it's been so ridiculously over-touted in that regard and I think some balance needs to be restored. But ultimately it's ear testing that makes a difference, and I think CD on a decent playback system wins, that's what I base my buying decisions on...I basically NEVER read the specs on gear, except in the occasional instance when I've narrowed it down to maybe 1 or 2 that are real close listening wise and I'm trying to find little things to decide which might have the edge for purchase. For example, if one looks at lab testing results on the Audio Note "1x oversampling" DACs, it often looks BAD...but I think one has to take a step back and ask why that might be? A big reason is that the testing itself has been geared toward discriminating among various over/upsampling CD players in regard to performance...so those "specs" may not even be applicable to non-over/upsampling DACs. The other possibility is that the specs don't matter PERIOD, that the techies are barking up the wrong tree and our ears are way smarter than any lab test (that's my personal bias). So specs really don't matter to me except to stimulate discussion - I know what I hear. I went in to listening to the Audio Note gear prepared to hate it...it just seemed so esoteric and even a little arrogant to use that approach, sounded like a gimmick, and their stuff is a little pricey even at the "lower" end, but damn they sound GOOD, the closest thing to analog from a digital source I've encountered (and there are probably other real good non-over/upsampling DACs too but I'm only familiar with AN). Now to address Colin: look, for the record, YOU began the snippiness here with your original response to me, using flippant phrases from Star Wars etc. I responded in kind...so I apologize about that, but it irked me. I've been at this forum for much longer than you (1700+ posts versus 20 something...) and honestly feel my track record speaks for itself - you're the new guy, you need to be a little more polite IMHO and establish some credibility with those of us who've been here contributing for literally years. So let's move on, OK? Second, and more on point to the matter at hand, I feel like you're creating a major straw man argument with the idea that one has to have a "billion dollar" CD system to realize redbook CD's potential. When I say "good playback system" I don't mean "one that costs a lot of money." The system I have is VERY modestly priced compared with some of the CD rigs out there...roughly $2500, which I know is a lot compared to a Sony at Best Buy but trust me, you can drop a WHOLE lot more very quickly in the "audiophile" realm. To me, even a $2500 investment up front a bargain if I can avoid having to rebuy the literally thousands of redbook CD titles in hi res over time (I have over 2000 standard CDs....at SACD/DVD-A prices, even if I only rebought 100-150 of those in hi res format I'd already have spent what it cost my for my CD playback gear - so again, it's really quite a bargain for the diehard collector to spend a bit up front and extract the best from the CDs one already has). Finally, as one of the articles above points out: "The DSD process may produce such a high level of noise at such frequencies that if the replay system cannot handle it, it may fail. You are therefore left with two choices: either use more robust equipment that will handle absurdly high levels at absurdly high frequencies, or filter the input signal and thereby remove one of the main alleged benefits of DSD, namely an extended HF response, by "turning it down" to 96 kHz PCM levels." Another article I saw talked about how at SACD demos at shows etc they always had unbelievably advanced and expensive tweeters hooked up that could handle the additional high frequency information - the type of gear that just isn't available to all but the most well-heeled music fans in their own homes. So purchasing the kinds of amps and speakers that will handle "absurdly high levels at absurdly high frequencies" produced by SACD is NOT going to come any cheaper than buying a decent CD playback system, emphasizing that extracting the full potential from hi res isn't going to come cheaply either. Anyway, my main point is that you owe it to yourself to do some comparisions between SACD/DVD-A and CD with these reasonably priced but stellar performing CD playback systems. Comparing hi res with lousy CD is no comparison at all, and hi res is going to of course win that battle every time, which is why I believe for mid-fi gear it probably does make some sense. I just wish people would think more broadly about this "upgrade" as opposed to investing in a good redbook CD front end, particularly die hard collectors with a lot of money tied up in standard CD already.

Wow, lucky day I guess! I know how it is, guy, I "spaced" on a vintage Beatles vinyl auction today, checking in on it about 5 minutes after it had already ended! A real good condition original Parlophone Yellow & Black label, mono copy of WITH THE BEATLES sold for UNDER $20!!! Sheesh...the ONE time I space...normally when I wade in on those original UK Beatles pressings auctions, some crazy fool bids them up into the stratosphere... Not sure how that one flew under the radar.

Finally, here's something about Audio Note DACs and the "1x oversampling" approach - I honestly don't know if this technology is what makes their CD playback systems sound so good, but they do sound phenomenally musical compared with any other redbook CD playback I've heard, and maybe this explains why I'm so unimpressed with supposed advantages of hi res. 1x oversampling DAC technology BTW I don't own that $30,000 DAC!!! But they use the same technology and overall build quality in their less pricey DACs, like the relatively "lowly" 2.1 Signature I have.

And an excerpt from a piece by David Hickford, SOUND ON SOUND magazine: "(DSD) sounds a wonderfully elegant approach and a lot of people swear by the sound quality it delivers, but as with all things digital, it's actually a lot more complex and compromised than it first appears. For a start, it is not practical to perform any meaningful signal processing on a single-bit data stream, so the DSD signal has to be converted to a 4- or 5-bit signal for most signal processing, and that essentially involves the same decimation and oversampling processes that the scheme was trying to avoid in the first place! Secondly, I don't know of any DSD converters that actually generate a single-bit output directly. Most seem to generate a few bits with conventional delta-sigma stages, and then convert that to the required DSD output. Next is the issue of noise: DSD claims a bandwidth in excess of 100kHz and a huge dynamic range in the audible band, but the fact is that there is inherently an enormous amount of ultrasonic noise (created by the noise-shaping technique used to achieve a respectable dynamic range in the audible part of the band). This can affect amplifiers and cause intermodulation problems in a largely unpredictable way."

Interesting excerpt from an article by Richard Elen, full piece at http://www.ambisonic.net/sacdvdada.html "Not everyone agrees about the theoretical technical superiority of DSD and the Super Audio CD. There have been many learned papers presented at successive Audio Engineering Society conventions recently in which the pros and cons have been hotly debated. One complaint is that the DSD process introduces a very high level of ultrasonic noise. Demonstrations of SACD often make special mention of the audio system’s wide frequency range, including, for example, tweeters that will handle up to 100 kHz. It is, of course, doubtful whether there is any "audio" information at such high frequencies (and if there was, it would be submerged under the noise, with a dynamic range of only 40 dB). The DSD process may produce such a high level of noise at such frequencies that if the replay system cannot handle it, it may fail. You are therefore left with two choices: either use more robust equipment that will handle absurdly high levels at absurdly high frequencies, or filter the input signal and thereby remove one of the main alleged benefits of DSD, namely an extended HF response, by "turning it down" to 96 kHz PCM levels. There are also challenges with DSD when it comes to digital signal processing. To handle DSP operations – necessary in the process of making most records, where mixing, level changes, EQ and compression often take place in the digital domain – the DSD signal must be decimated (turned into something very much like PCM), processed and then returned to the bitstream format. There is arguably little point in using DSD if you are going to turn it into something like PCM on the way to the master. It has also recently emerged that in the studio environment, DSD does not employ a "bitstream" at all, but rather a form of quasi-PCM, albeit at a very high sample rate, probably in order to allow DSP processing as described above. Some people have considered this a form of cheating. As a result of all this, it has been suggested that the primary application for "pure" DSD is for recordings in which the technique is essentially to capture a live performance and then edit it without the use of digital signal processing. This may be particularly possible in the classical field, and for other types of music where there is an actual performance to capture, but this only applies to about five percent of recorded music. The rest is created in the studio, multitracked, and reliant on a great deal of mixing, processing and other digital operations. It may be that for these types of recordings – i.e. most of the recordings that are carried out – PCM is more appropriate. However, it may also have an application where analog recordings are being reissued."

Sorry Colin but your impassioned argument means little to me without knowing what you have been listening to CDs on. Wait, it doesn't really matter...because I felt exactly the same way as you did, before and spent a lot of time comparing with MY OWN SACD/DVD-A player in my OWN SYSTEM - in case you missed that part, which evidently you did. So hey, I DID at one point "give in to the force Luke" and I found that it was, for me, a major hoax, at least when one has a decent system in other ways. Thoroughly, unequivocally UNCONVINCED about hi res myself, so I sold the player. Particularly DVD-A which is quite frankly the vastly inferior of the two hi res formats, to my ears, by a long shot. The "added noise/artifact" versus "added music" issue with digital hi res is anything but a bogus one...informed people have written a lot about this from a theoretical standpoint, but most importantly to me, I trust my ears. Again on the properly outstanding playback system, you hear precious little additional music and sometimes more distracting sonic byproducts. Perhaps these are less glaring with mid fi systems, in fact I'm certain of it. I'm not talking about record clicks - those aren't a big deal. I'm talking about a glaring harshness introduced into the very margins of the audible music range that is there in ALL digital formats and is arguably even more apparent in hi res formats. And certainly DVD-A in particular suffers from "bloated bass" syndrome on the opposite end of the spectrum. It just don't sound natural, using vinyl (or better yet live performance) as the gold standard. CD isn't perfect either of course, but it comes closer to my ears if your playback system is up to the task. And I fail to see what cassettes etc have to do with anything. First off, they're not digital...second, they have much LOWER resolution than the formats we're discussing. And third, they have a more compressed dynamic range. What a weird analogy! Or maybe you're just not familiar with the concept that the human ear is capable of hearing only a specific frequency range as pleasing/musical? Anyway, I'm not trying to "convince" you to feel as I do - never said that anywhere, just had put in my personal insights - and so would appreciate it if you'd stop trying to descredit my views in a rather sarcastic and offhanded manner. AT least take the time to read my posts carefully before responding - it's clear you somehow missed that I had actually owned a hi res player and so am not one of the "dismiss it out of hand" camp, dude.

I don't have any of this stuff, I don't believe - and the lineups sound just grand to me - so count me in. Re: excitement, well I'm just so far behind on Mosaics in print already, and gradually filling in the "back catalog" of OOP Mosaics on eBay, that I don't get excited about any new offerings from them right away anymore. It will easily be several years before I catch up with this one!

Well Jazzmoose, sure! First: in the interest of fairness it was actually only a $5.99 initial bid and nobody bid...I had estimated $4 shipping US priority, so $10 would be your total if you want it sent that way. If you're OK with Media Mail shipping instead it would only be $8!!! Just send me a PM with your preferred shipping method and address and I'll probably be able to get it out to you tomorrow PM. Thanks!

Chiming in late to wholeheartedly agree with Wolff re: the most important factor being great turntable and great phono stage. I make killer "needle drop" type burns with a very modest stand alone CD recorder (old, old Sony). They used to be just "fair" but when I substantially upgraded my analog front end and amp (Nottingham Spacedeck, Sumiko Blackbird cart, Audio Note Meishu integrated) the CD-Rs sound quality jumped accordingly. They routinely blow away manufactured CDs of the same material. While I do plan to upgrade to a "better" burner at some point this whole experience has made me realize that it's the analog front end that makes most of the difference, while the quality of the A/D converters in the burner are a (vanishingly?) smaller issue. Worth noting that I am not compulsive about the needle drops...in fact I don't declick or manipulate them in any way. If the vinyl quality is solid VG+ or better, and your vinyl playback system is up to the task, you really shouldn't have to. With this type of CD-R recording set up, and a real good digital front end for redbook CD playback (I prefer transport/tube DAC approch - again Audio Note- but there's also great all in one players like the Meridian) you don't need any "hi-res" format IMHO. The LPs burned to CD-R sound every bit as good or better. I had an SACD/DVD-A player as part of my system briefly and sold it because once I had a proper digital front end for redbook CD - one that actually can extract all the music from the disc that's on there - I could scarcely detect a difference, and when I did I often found my ears preferring CD to "hi res" which sounded artificial on the low end and harsher on the high end ("hi res" doesn't mean "more music," it can also mean "more non-musical noise" especially up high). Let me hasten to add that SACD and DVD-A do seem to me to be a real boon to "mid fi" - before my upgrade with a Denon AVR-3300 based home theater type set up SACD and DVD-A were a noticeable jump up from redbook CD. In that sense such players are a particularly cost-effective way to upgrade a mid-fi system.

I've personally only had vinyl hassles, J.A.W., but I think it's telling that you've had only one hassle and yet it was an out-of-country CD buyer...illustrating just exactly what I'm saying. I don't think recording format is so much the issue; rather it's the issues I mentioned re: distance and people perceiving "rip off opportunity." Also, and again no offense meant, but I think there are some general cultural differences among collectors of vinyl AND CD in different countries that have made me equally cautious as a buyer whenever international deals are concerned. What's acceptable in some places to the average joe may not be elsewhere, grading systems differ, etc. Short of filing disputes, the only items I've ever had to return as a buyer, because I felt they fell far short of advertised quality, were (you guessed it) out of country - including Canada and the UK - and in both instances it was a protracted process with VERY slow response on the seller's end. I just don't have the time to deal with all that and again, normally my stuff sells readily regardless. My initial point remains that early jazz, sadly, just has a mega-small receptive audience unfortunately, which I find personally disheartening - not money wise - we're talking $10 or so at most so that's not the issue - but because so many people are missing out on so much great music...

I'm as much a fan of Cadence as the next guy, but it's really not much of a "sale" on those Mosaics if you do the math...works out literally to a couple of dollars "savings" on some as opposed to purchasing from Mosaic. If that's the case I'd just as soon give my money directly to the folks that spent all the time and resources producing them...

That's JUST what I do...but it illustrates my point. Maybe our public radio station gains some listeners by being the aural equivalent of wallpaper, but it also loses a lot of potential listeners by doing this too...me included. Basically I listen to some morning news, Fresh Air (when I can), and Weekend Edition and then pop in CDs because the jazz programming is so dull. I wonder if they tell potential advertisers buying time during the jazz programming about THAT...

Re: "Worldwide" sales on eBay... Perhaps it's just bad luck but I've only ever had to file eBay dispute claims with international transactions...I'm not saying "people outside the US are dishonest!" Most definitely not. Rather, I just think a few sad people feel it's going to be easier to rip someone off from thousands of miles away and in another country. For example, I've read similar opinions by sellers from other places (e.g. Germany and other European countries). Some of the Web-based used vinyl sellers have messages right on their order pages, saying they will no longer sell to U.S. buyers, because that's the only instances where they have had rudeness and major hassles. Distance gives some idiots license to be...well, idiots, regardless of their citizenship. So that's why I post "US only" in my auctions. Sorry. It's never, ever resulted in not selling an item before, that doesn't explain it folks. BTW, there were 9 "watchers" so clearly a few people were contemplating...

This really sucks, but not surprising...radio has become so homogenized, even college and public stations. In Sacramento, Capitol Public Radio features mostly jazz programming for music (a lot of talk/news/etc too), but it's typically only the most "innoffensive" stuff...not that SOME of it isn't excellent fare - you do hear for example people like Renee Rosnes and other artists who have a lot on the ball musically but present themselves in a mainsteam, "quiet" manner as a rule - but after about an hour my eyes start to glaze over. The sameness is deadly, and also much of what they play is basically (IMHO) MOR dreck with a jazzy veneer. You'd rarely if ever hear Ornette. I knew I was in trouble when, shortly after I first arrived, I e-mailed the programming director to ask whether they might find time for stuff like Jackie McLean's prime period Blue Notes, Archie Shepp, etc. He e-mailed back with something like (paraphrasing) "our demographic isn't into McLean except maybe some later ballads, and certainly not Archie Shepp." He said in the past they had supposedly tried having dedicated shows/time slots where more adventurous stuff was played and nobody listened. Well, maybe...but I'm not at all sure that this isn't just a really lazy approach to programming...and that with a little creative effort one might find a way to present the music. They manage to dedicate an entire show to "acid jazz," which to be honest I generally find to be a terrible bore and precious little to do with jazz at all...and beyond that I don't even think it's a "hip" marketing label anymore as it was for a hot minute a few years back.

Yes, as I mentioned I do have the Fuller CD set and it's one of my favorites...I'm just interested in impressions of the sonics (hopefully better!) with the vinyl version. As a resident of St. Louis from 1987-91, I fondly remember perusing the stock at Euclid records. Sorry that eBay listings mean less ability to get "dibs" in the shop, spinlps, I know what you mean...there's a local store in Sacramento here called The Beat, and generally what they have in store vinyl wise is good musically but usually pretty "beat" condition-wise (and overpriced)...they seem to list better condition stuff on eBay.

My only other Mosaic LP set of 50s and beyond era Blue Note recordings is the Ike Quebec 45 sessions set - fantastic, in fact one of my favorite collections of music of all time, but also from digital masters so not truly the vinyl experience in its purest form. So I'm EXCITED about scoring the Fuller set, by my understanding these Q LP Blue Note Mosaics are fully ANALOG...can those who have it chime in regarding sonics? I already have the CD set (and will be putting it up on eBay once the LP set arrives safely) so I am "fully" (bad pun) aware of the greatness of the music.

Didn't sell...first item of many I've listed on eBay that didn't sell. Just proves again to me that pre-bop jazz just doesn't sell, sadly, even at a bargain price. These CDs cost $30+ new, have the original 30s cover art, and sound great! Ah well...guess I'll keep it! -_-

Up - only a little over an hour left on this auction, just FYI.

Some Mosaic lunacy: Maynard Ferguson CD set is going for over $500 and still has 10 hours to go! Master Jazz Piano box (vinyl) went for $255...not too crazy, but I scored a copy of this just a couple weeks back for under $100! Go figure...

I'm still trying to pick my jaw up off the floor concerning the score of the Goodman Mosaic box for $36 sjarrell made note of here a while back...hot damn, that has to qualify as one of the music deals of the century. I just narrowly lost out on an auction for the vinyl set today - shoulda bid a shade over $130 and would probably have got it, and that (according to my searches for winning bids of other auctions) would have been a relative bargain. THIRTY-SIX DOLLARS! Geez... My interest in this set has been piqued by hearing some of the original 10" records, some of my dad's recent acquisitions. I gotta say that I am inclined to disagree with the lukewarm reviews, with years of hindsight (and without the entrenched preconception of what Goodman "should" sound like) this music really holds up for me.

Jimmy Raney - THE MASTER (Criss Cross) Miles Davis/Gil Evans - COMPLETE COLUMBIA STUDIO RECORDINGS (Mosaic) LP 1

While I agree there are a lot, there could be a lot more (and that could include smaller "Mosaic Select" type boxes). In addition to those listed by Mike: Complete Gigi Gryce New Jazz Recordings Complete Red Garland Prestige Recordings (that would be a BIG box) Complete Walt Dickerson New Jazz Recordings Complete Jaki Byard Prestige/New Jazz Recordings Complete Johnny Griffin and Lockjaw Davis Jazzland Recordings Notice that all these folks are well-loved by jazz afficionados but not "marquee" names - which frankly is what the Fantasy boxes have focused on. Great, but how about the less heralded folks? Enter Mosaic??? Again I'm not saying necessarily RIGHT NOW for any of these hypothetical sets, but IF some of the individual titles go out of print. Also worth noting: one thing that has always irked me about Fantasy's single CD reissues is that often they are REALLY short and they COULD have readily fit 2 LPs on a single CD but chose not to. In that context their pricing is really not that great a bargain. If someone like Mosaic started issuing Selects it might actually be better value for money as 4 or even 5 LPs could fit in a 3 CD set...and those of us who have not been able to keep up with Fantasy's literally 100s of single CD issues could start to fill in holes more cost effectively.

Interested parties will kindly direct their attention here: Summertime: Sidney Bechet & the Port of Harlem Jazzmen TOCJ-66007 Part of the mega hard to find "Blue Note Classics" series of CDs, issued by Toshiba in the late 90s and covering Blue Note's early days. I have finally now acquired all of this music on various Mosaic LPs so no longer need the CD. It's a killer, great and mostly obscure early (1939-40) Blue Note recordings in good sound - the likes of Frankie Newton, Josh White, and JC Higginbotham in addition to Bechet. $5.99 initial bid, no reserve, happy bidding!