Blue Note LPs: Mono or Stereo

I have heard that Art Blakey 4003, recorded October 30, 1958, was the last Blue Note title to have simultaneous mono and stereo decks run at the recording session. Every mono recording after this was a fold-down. However, original mono pressings issued after this date seem to sell for a lot more money. Would it not be wiser to find original stereo pressings of these albums?

 

Much more wiser(and cheaper) to find Steve's recent 45rpm Blue Notes for SQ and/or investment, IMHO.

 

I own quite a few of the Analogue Productions Blue Note 45 rpm pressings and they are worth every cent. Wonderful releases.

 

While I'll agree the 45rpm titles sound great, they don't even begin to scratch the surface of the Blue Note catalog. If you want to hear the likes of George Braith, Leo Parker, Don Wilkinson, Harold Vick, Jack Wilson, Eddie Gale, Tyrone Washington and many more of the equally talented, but lesser celebrated Blue Note artists, you really have no choice but to hunt for earlier pressings.

Work from men like those mentioned will most likely never see an audiophile release. Most of the 45rpm reissues are "safe releases" that will sell, and are sure shots. You'd be doing yourself a disservice if all the Blue Note you have are just from AP or MM. That's literally a drop in the bucket. There's a world of stuff out there.

 

Hi Uncle Hippie

My two cents regarding the mono/stereo Blue Note issue, from the limited amount of original pressing I have heard until now. Some original RVG-cut stereo pressing have a weird issue where the stereo field narrows down during quiet passages and gets wider during louder ones. I have only heard one with this issue: Tony Williams' Life Time, from 1964. I don't know how many there are like this, probably not much. Maybe other forum members have more info. As regarding to why this happens, I remember reading a comment of Steve's about this (something about the compressor Van Gelder was using in mastering the vinyl?).

Also, while I understand that technically the monos are fold-downs, I personally don't think it's philosophically fair to consider them fold-downs, but rather consider them mono "mixes". Rudy has often stated that the mono mix was what he was after. He also stated that up to a certain point they didn't even monitor in stereo, because they only had one speaker in the control room. So in balancing the instruments across the 2 tracks, he was balancing them so they sound good when the channels were to be collapsed. Since he was ONLY working with 2 tracks, folding the channels is really the only sensible mono mixing option anyway (other than individually EQing either the left or the right channel). For one thing, when listening to the mono "mixes" (I'll call them that, but still cautiously use quotes) I feel that the piano and the bass are stronger, since the "center" channel gets boosted by 3 db. Something people often forget when complaining the his piano sound is too "distant".

Of course you can do your own fold-downs by using the mono button on your receiver, but frankly I think that does not achieve the same. I have a needledrop of "Midnight Blue" deep groove mono and it sounds nothing like a mono'ed stereo of the same title. The mono sounds thicker and smokier, with thundering bass and mellow cymbals. I'm sure it all comes from RVG's vinyl mastering magic, but that is the point of buying those monos, isn't it?

To answer your question, if I had all the money in the world, I would definitely go for the monos, as is it the music "as originally intended to be heard" and because I have quite a few other gorgeous sounding mono jazz LPs in my collection. That being said, I thoroughly enjoy Steve's stereo Blue Note SACDs.


On a side note: does anybody know if Van Gelder EQ'ed the two channels individually? This is sort of indirectly stated in the liner notes for "A Love Supreme Deluxe Edition", so maybe he did it for the Blue Notes too?

 

Great, great post, crispi. That really answers the OP's question in a nutshell.

IMO, the Hoffman/Gray masterings are the very best ever for the stereo pressings. But when it comes to the original RVG pressings, there is definitely a case to be made for the monos.

 

Interesting points that I hadn't before considered.

 

I would love to hear the mono lps, thus far I've only heard OJC reissues of that stuff - all stereo.

 

Most of the early stereo recordings are pretty hard left/right which is why a lot of people prefer the mono versions. I'm not sure what kind of prices they're going for these days but the Classic BN monos are very nice.

 

Many jazz purists tend to prefer mono until you get to the late 1960's. So mono LP discs tend to fetch a premium. Most Blue Notes up to the late monos tend to be best in mono.

 

What is the truth and why is (or was) Rudy hiding it?

 

Just so people aren't confused... There are no OJC Blue Notes. There are RVG recordings on OJC, but only on labels like Prestige.

 

Sorry, boss. Didn't know that.

 

Not sure what you mean by "Jazz purist." I have, from time to time, hung around several jazz discussion forums, and this mono v. stereo thing seldom, if ever comes up.

IMO the mono premium, if such a thing exists, is more a collector thing than a music, or sound quality thing.

 

Yes, I've always wondered about those early sessions. I took RVG by his word and attributed his clear balancing of instruments to some kind of black magic of his. Thanks for teaching me otherwise.

 

I think the stereo mixes sound better played back in mono, because it brings out more of the bass and piano. The piano sometimes gets lost in stereo. Playing them back in mono helps.

 

I prefer the monos and the original pressings almost always..
the stereos sound completely unnatural...


and i don't like reissues... also, at $50 they weren't exactly giving them away... and i hate having to get up after every song...

 

I much prefer the stereo cuts, I love the perspective; real turn off the lights and there's a band in the room with me stuff. I wish people recorded like that these days, I especially like the drums being a solid entity / ensemble instrument in a single location and acoustic, not the ridiculous wide-panning we get fed these days with the kick and snare centre, hi-hat right, toms and cymbals panned all over the room. Even worse are pianos with the left and right hands panned - those are records that should be folded down to mono, not RVG's wonderful wide stereo of the 50s and 60s!

Tony.

 

yeah but the sax is coming out from one corner and the rest from the other ..

its unnatural. when you go see a band live it does not sound like that.

 

i agree with steve if there is either a stereo lp or a fold-down mono of the same lp, id prefer to have the stereo, the mono will sound more lifeless. case in point something like the sidewinder, comparing my NY USA stereo vs. my liberty-era mono, the mono is only cooler cause its autographed by bob cranshaw, otherwise, its stereo pressing all the way, as originally intended. if i wish to pay the sidewinder at my friends dougs house, who as an AM radio station broadcasting throughout the house, however, id bring my mono copy

 

I've got a NY 'ear' mono of 'Sidewinder' and I'd take it over the stereo any day. The title track just cooks, the drums and bass are really tight and the cymbals sizzle. In mono it's hot, in stereo it's still cool, but cool.
It may not be 'natural' sounding, but often, with records, 'natural' is not what I'm looking for. And the mono mix sounds very different to the stereo folded-down. There's eq and compression and stuff happening in the cut.

 

I never understood this 'unnatural' argument. I see live jazz all the time. Are the horns & other instruments not dispersed/separated across the stage? Is live music supposed to sound like it should come from one fixed, central location? Also, these sessions were mostly recorded in a studio, not on a band stand, so I don't know why the live music point is always used. It isn't live music. They are studio recordings.

If it's an original mono master, and not a fold-down great. Give me mono. But why would anyone want a mono fold down from an original stereo master? I'm around a lot of hardcore blue note devotees, and the mono debate is only an issue with the "collectors". Never the guys who just want the music, or even jazz musicians themselves. Never heard it brought up or mentioned. But the "collectors", they always bring it up! I'm sure they know something these cats don't!