Sinatra / Reprise Sound Quality and General Discussion: "Sinatra and Swingin' Brass" - 1962*

Discussion in 'Music Corner' started by SinatraFan, Oct 21, 2014.

  1. Arkoffs

    Arkoffs Remote member

    Location:
    Right behind you
    I did look last night. Which reminded me, I have never owned a vintage stereo copy. I have the 2014 stereo LP, that's it.
     
    MLutthans likes this.
  2. MLutthans

    MLutthans That's my spaghetti, Chewbacca! Staff

    From another thread:
    Today, I received an e-mail about a stereo Swingin' Brass UK LP that has similar matrix info, i.e., R9-1005-A-1WMH (etc.).

    Anybody know who/what WMH signifies?
     
    hodgo likes this.
  3. MLutthans

    MLutthans That's my spaghetti, Chewbacca! Staff

    I'm amending that last bit ever so slightly.

    In revising the "conclusions" section of my web page for this album (at the bottom of the page, here), I'm noting Pieter's UK wide-stereo LP and my 1986 wide-stereo LW-1 LP as being my two favorite choices. I agree about the "anemic" thing (see Arkoff's comments above) on the '86 LP, and both LPs use the same mix that has way too much reverb on the vocal, but I think the pros and cons between the two pretty-well balance out.
    :shrug:
    Fielder's choice? (1986 LP clips here; same clips from Pieter's LP here.)

    The LP still could use a new mix, IMO.
     
    Arkoffs likes this.
  4. MMM

    MMM Forum Hall Of Fame

    Location:
    Lodi, New Jersey
    The LW has better overall balance vs the British LP.
     
    mpayan and MLutthans like this.
  5. Arkoffs

    Arkoffs Remote member

    Location:
    Right behind you
    I suspect I would think the fact the LW and the new one are a bit thin sounding was less of a problem if I spun the actual LPs rather than listening to mp3s via a computer and headphones. I remember liking the 2014 LP quite a bit when it came out.

    I will be keeping an eye out for an LW and a UK cut!
     
  6. MLutthans

    MLutthans That's my spaghetti, Chewbacca! Staff

    Yes, on all counts, although, "for the record," those are WAV files, not mp3s. :agree:

    Here's a little reminder about the LW, JW, and WW cuts from the mid-80s: There can be quite different from each other! I'm not sure where the lacquers were actually cut (there's no MASTERED BY CAPITOL in the runout, so I don't think the lacquers came from Capitol), but they were definitely PRESSED by Capitol. The WW cut I have has the bass blended into the center, which narrows things in considerably. I don't have a JW cut. The LW cut keeps the bass where it belongs, at far left.

    I have a copy that is WW-4 on one side, with blended-in bass, and LW-1 on the other, with as-intended wide stereo. Look for one that has LW on both sides, and you should be in good shape. I'd love to track down a JW for comparison.
     
    Arkoffs likes this.
  7. Arkoffs

    Arkoffs Remote member

    Location:
    Right behind you
    I have been assuming for the later '70s Capitols the codes matched where the lacquers were cut: J for Jacksonville, W for Winchester, L for LA... but, you're right, the LW cuts generally don't have the "Mastered by Capitol" stamp. It's very intriguing that the different codes are presenting such widely different mixes/masterings.
     
  8. MLutthans

    MLutthans That's my spaghetti, Chewbacca! Staff

    Do the JW or WW cuts have the MASTERED BY CAPITOL stamp?
     
    Arkoffs likes this.
  9. Arkoffs

    Arkoffs Remote member

    Location:
    Right behind you
    Hmm.

    I think ... no. Now that you mention it. I need to go look at some deadwax, I guess.

    Thinking about this a bit more is making me more curious. Are the JW/LW/WW codes used for anything other than Warner Brothers product? Maybe the J/L/W signified where the lacquers were initially prepared for, rather than where they were created.

    Just spitballing here. I always have assumed when WB switched their pressing to Capitol, that's where the mastering went as well, but I don't know if I've ever read much about it other than from the basic fact that WB changed where they were getting pressings done.
     
  10. MLutthans

    MLutthans That's my spaghetti, Chewbacca! Staff

    The whole JW/WW/LW situation intrigues me, too.
    •Who made the lacquers?

    I don't think there's any consistency here, i.e., somebody (a nameless staffer) was just cutting "replacement lacquers" as parts wore out. Seems to me that at least one person who was doing the cutting had a fondness for "low frequency blend (LFB)" the act of shifting bass frequencies to the center. That said, somebody doing some of the cutting did NOT choose to use LFB!

    •Where were the lacquers made?

    If at Capitol in that time frame, they all would have had "the stamp," no? There is plenty of WB, Columbia, and other non-Capitol product that had the stamp, yet these do not. I assume they were cut at a Warner facility.

    •Where was plating done? How about actual manufacturing?

    I think the metal parts were created at each individual plant, but at some point, it would appear that metal parts were being shipped around, probably as a cost-cutting move as sales for the LPs began to decline. For instance, my Swingin' Brass LP has the "Winchester Rifle" engraved in the runout on the WW-4 side, but the other side, which is an LW-1 cut, does not have the Winchester Rifle. It seems, then, that the WW-4 side was plated at Winchester, the LW side elsewhere (Los Angeles?), but that the WW-4/LW-1 LP was physically manufactured......somewhere! You cant manufacture one side in Winchester and the other in Los Angeles. The LP physically gets stamped one time.

    From another thread:
     
    Last edited: Dec 27, 2016
  11. MMM

    MMM Forum Hall Of Fame

    Location:
    Lodi, New Jersey
    I'm guessing that once Columbia stopped mastering and pressing for Warner/Reprise the mastering for these was done in house at Warners. The LW, etc. possibly has more to do with plating/metalwork location. Perhaps I'm wrong, but I remember that into the 80's you'd see Warner related records that sometimes had "SLM" (Sheffield Lab Matrix) inscribed within the dead area, which refers to such work being done by them.
     
    MLutthans likes this.
  12. W.B.

    W.B. The Collector's Collector

    Location:
    New York, NY, USA
    Where a record was pressed can be gauged by the pressing ring:
    - Jacksonville had a 1.5" diameter ring.
    - Los Angeles' ring was 1.5625".
    - Winchester had a 1.390625" ring that almost borderline went de facto deep groove.
     
  13. MLutthans

    MLutthans That's my spaghetti, Chewbacca! Staff

    My LP is a Winchester pressing, based on those identifiers. Thanks!
     
  14. hodgo

    hodgo Tea Making Gort (Yorkshire Branch) Staff

    Location:
    East Yorkshire
    I'd love to know the answer to this too because it still remains a mystery to me.
     
  15. MLutthans

    MLutthans That's my spaghetti, Chewbacca! Staff

    @hodgo -- the only mention I can find of WMH on Pye/Reprise pressings is this little blurb from discogs:
    Screen shot 2016-12-28 at 10.44.52 AM.png
    (LINK)
    I have no idea what this means, though!
     
  16. hodgo

    hodgo Tea Making Gort (Yorkshire Branch) Staff

    Location:
    East Yorkshire
    That's more than I've come up with Matt, I've been googling away and searching the net to no avail and I can't seem to find a name associated with those initials anywhere.
     
  17. MLutthans

    MLutthans That's my spaghetti, Chewbacca! Staff

    kennyluc1, paulmock and MMM like this.
  18. Bob F

    Bob F Senior Member

    Location:
    Massachusetts USA
    kennyluc1, paulmock, MMM and 2 others like this.
  19. Pieter Kozak

    Pieter Kozak Well-Known Member

    paulmock likes this.
  20. Beaneydave

    Beaneydave Forum Resident

    What time was it printed Bob!
    ;)



    Peace and love✌
     
    Record Rotator and Bob F like this.
  21. Bob F

    Bob F Senior Member

    Location:
    Massachusetts USA
    Re: "In my opinion (and who would know better) if it's on REPRISE it's fresh . . . it's new, it's my very best!"

    The subtext here was the bitter marketplace (and legal) battle between Capitol and Reprise. It wasn't so much about salesmanship as about a corporate feud.
     
    paulmock, MMM and Pieter Kozak like this.
  22. Pieter Kozak

    Pieter Kozak Well-Known Member

    Yeah I got that, Especially the (and Who Would Know Better) And On Reprise It's fresh.
     
    Bob F likes this.
  23. McLover

    McLover Senior Member

    It was Fresh, and Crunchy too! The more I hear these samples, the more I have found the 1980's LP pressings easiest to live with and listen to.
     
    MLutthans likes this.
  24. teag

    teag Forum Resident

    Location:
    Colorado
    This is one LP I never had a copy of until buying the Ume reissue a month or so ago. I had the EOTC CD and have never liked the sound of it. The sound quality of this reissued LP is very good.

    Content wise, this album strikes me as Sinatra marking time. Maybe this was one of the Reprise albums they made so that many of the song titles, being redone here, were available on Reprise and not just other labels? Although I really enjoy many of his Reprise albums, going from Capitol to Reprise sort of reminds me of the Wizard of Oz when Dorothy enters the world of color - only in reverse. I love September, Moonlight, Jobim, and a few other Reprise releases, but no comparison to the Capitol releases as a whole.

    Anyway, Ume did a good job on this one as others have stated. Just not much of an album artistically IMO.
     
    CBackley likes this.
  25. McLover

    McLover Senior Member

    Until Steve Hoffman or Kevin Gray get to master this the way we like, "Mastered for McLover", from original or best vinyl is my go to. Mine also needs no iTunes junk, and plays on Linux or BSD as well.
     

Share This Page

molar-endocrine