Claude Schlouch Posted July 15, 2005 Report Share Posted July 15, 2005 Hi folks, I don't understand why this CD has been reissued so often but only in mono, while a stereo copy of the LP has been sold on Ebay this month. Thanks for your help! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brownie Posted July 15, 2005 Report Share Posted July 15, 2005 Never searched for the CD. I have an original vinyl of this album. Black Riverside stereo! A bientot, Claude! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nate Dorward Posted July 15, 2005 Report Share Posted July 15, 2005 Maybe something happened to the stereo tapes? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chuck Nessa Posted July 15, 2005 Report Share Posted July 15, 2005 This was recorded about the same time as Monk' Music and it has been demonstrated the mono master of that date is superior to the "experimental" stereo. How is the sonic picture on your copy Brownie? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stereojack Posted July 15, 2005 Report Share Posted July 15, 2005 This was recorded about the same time as Monk' Music and it has been demonstrated the mono master of that date is superior to the "experimental" stereo. How is the sonic picture on your copy Brownie? ← This is debatable. I like the stereo "Monk's Music". Gigi Gryce/Donald Byrd "Jazz Lab" was issued in stereo originally, but turns up in mono on the CD. I guess it has to do with one's preferences, and probably the system on which one listens. Whoever is making these choices at Fantasy obviously prefers the mono, but doesn't mean that we all will agree with him. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paul secor Posted July 16, 2005 Report Share Posted July 16, 2005 This was recorded about the same time as Monk' Music and it has been demonstrated the mono master of that date is superior to the "experimental" stereo. How is the sonic picture on your copy Brownie? ← This is debatable. I like the stereo "Monk's Music". Gigi Gryce/Donald Byrd "Jazz Lab" was issued in stereo originally, but turns up in mono on the CD. I guess it has to do with one's preferences, and probably the system on which one listens. Whoever is making these choices at Fantasy obviously prefers the mono, but doesn't mean that we all will agree with him. ← The Acoustic Sounds 2 LP 45 rpm edition of Monk's Music is in stereo and sounds very fine to my ears - it should, considering what it costs. But, as a wise man (or was that a salesman) once said - good music is priceless. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wolff Posted July 16, 2005 Report Share Posted July 16, 2005 I'll just add my 2 cents, but nothing of use to original posters question. Opinions vary on the Monk's Music issue. First time I heard Monk's Music in stereo, I thought "Whacky", big sound stage, but not realistic and instruments are too far off mic." It sounded totally screwy and unlike what I was used to hearing from other Riverside stereo's. I much prefer the mono version, as the stereo sounds weird to me. OTOH, the engineer who mastered Paul's copy thinks the recent mono reissue is/was a mistake, but also feels the stereo has it's flaws. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brownie Posted July 16, 2005 Report Share Posted July 16, 2005 This was recorded about the same time as Monk' Music and it has been demonstrated the mono master of that date is superior to the "experimental" stereo. How is the sonic picture on your copy Brownie? ← Should have added in my first post that the sound on this is similar to a number of Riverside releases from around that time. I had that Dorham session on a Japanese vinyl mono reissue and thought the sound was missing on the copy: little dynamics, sort of muffed overall sound. The stereo original (and the stereo spread is there) is even worse, probably why it was not reissued! The sound volume also has to be pulled up to get a listen at a reasonable level. As I already complained a number of times, the sound on too many Riverside originals was off. No comparison to what labels like Contemporary, BN, Prestige and some others managed to produce in the same era! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter A Posted July 21, 2005 Report Share Posted July 21, 2005 As I already complained a number of times, the sound on too many Riverside originals was off. No comparison to what labels like Contemporary, BN, Prestige and some others managed to produce in the same era! ← I agree with you, Brownie. However, I wonder if this bad "sound" on Riverside originals is caused only by bad recording or also by the bad pressing quality of the vinyl. For instance, the first Riverside pressings on thick vinyl with the white labels actually do sound quite good. I have the (first) Bill Evans and Kenny Drew LP's and they have a crisp sound with a thick bass. Unfortunately I don't have the Dorham title, so I can't comment on that one... Peter Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brownie Posted July 21, 2005 Report Share Posted July 21, 2005 I agree with you, Brownie. However, I wonder if this bad "sound" on Riverside originals is caused only by bad recording or also by the bad pressing quality of the vinyl. For instance, the first Riverside pressings on thick vinyl with the white labels actually do sound quite good. I have the (first) Bill Evans and Kenny Drew LP's and they have a crisp sound with a thick bass. Unfortunately I don't have the Dorham title, so I can't comment on that one... Peter ← Peter, the few Riverside white covers I have heard sounded good to very good! Those white covers were not issued past 1956 or 1957. Sonic quality of the later Riverside releases tended to me somehow erratic with some albums lacking the regular crispness of the earlier LPs. This showed more often on stereo releases. The Japanese vinyl reissues of many Riversides had the same problem and I do not remember running into this with the other Japanese vinyls reissues. Many of those pretty often sounded as the next best thing to the original US issues. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter A Posted July 21, 2005 Report Share Posted July 21, 2005 Yes, it's a pity about the - lack of - sonic quality of Riverside LP's (Atlantic originals do not sound fantastic either). Perhaps the reissues on labels like Analogue Productions (on 45 RPM) have an improved sound quality? I have not bought these myself (yet) as the price is rather high and I prefer originals. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jazzhound Posted July 21, 2005 Report Share Posted July 21, 2005 the original mono pressing sounds fine. Many riverside recordings incorporate a sigificant room sound which some musicians often wish for. When they hear it they often don't like it as the instruments lack presence. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
_forumlogo.png.a607ef20a6e0c299ab2aa6443aa1f32e.png)
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.