"Francis Albert Sinatra & Antônio Carlos Jobim" Reprise LP FS-1021 studio take numbers, etc.

Most of it's clear. Interesting that it'd be a split signal; is it split before or after the console, or somewhere in the middle? Or are there two consoles as well?

Also; why A reel and B reel? I would have thought that would be a metric effton of tape used; but I guess that's what the erase head is for.

 

Steve may know more specifics, but I believe the consoles has mono and multitrack output busses.

 

I'm curious as to why anyone might expect UMe to reissue this album from the original mix when the main labels haven't done such a thing since 1988 when the album originally got its digital debut? There have been at least 4 different reissues since then and none are from the original '67 mix. As I think I might have said in another corresponding thread, even the KG all-analogue vinyl version from 2004 noticeably narrows the sound-stage from the '67 version (check out Matt's sound clips). It seems no one has ever been completely satisfied with the '67 mix, otherwise it would presumably have been left alone.

 

One possibility people should consider is that the upcoming 50th anniversary (blue vinyl) release might very well be the Kevin Gray cut. Although that was done for WB/Rhino in 2004, the rights are owned by the Sinatra estate (now licensed to UMe). I have no evidence that this will be the case; just sayin'.

 

That would be most welcome if it turned out to be true. Do major labels even think that logically these days? I mean they have an already great mastering they can use from 13 years ago but who would bring this to their attention and who would listen / have final say on the matter? One can't help but think they've probably got their chosen engineer beavering away on title after title on a conveyor belt and that's what we're get in 2017, not some older master unearthed from the past. In todays parlance 13 years is a very long time ago.

I do hope you're hunch is right anyway!

 

^^^ For Reprise titles, Frank Sinatra Enterprises calls the shots. The label (UMe) probably has very little to do with the technical mechanics (unlike the Capitol/EMI stuff which they own). Why put Ron McMaster to work when they already have a (very nice) Kevin Gray version in the can?

 

Or, in the case of certain producers apparently, *both* sets of reels were cut up.

 

Thanks! Makes perfect sense. So of course the practice stopped.

 

Maybe it's just me but want to get clarification.

The great sounding Kevin Gray stereo release in the early 2000's - is that the original mix from the original master tape? Or was there no master left to use?

How can one tell which 1960's releases used the master tape and original mix, mono and stereo? Are these the best sounding?

 

Studio 2 I guess? I can't find a vintage photo, but it's not Studio 1. Nor Studio 3.

Can't find any photos of what was in Studio 2, but here's Chuck Britz at the console that was installed in Studio 1 in late 1965:



Info on that (Studio 1) console here:

http://studioelectronics.biz/wp-content/themes/studioelectronic/newsletters/65dec.pdf

"This master recording console is geared to four-track recording, and offers 22 individually equalized microphone mixer channels. Simultaneous recording can be done in any three or four modes: four-track, three-track, two track or monaural. The balances and echo content can be separately adjusted for each mode."

 

As noted, that's from Studio 1. I'm assuming Studio 2 had a different console, but at the moment I'm not finding photos.

Lower quality, but more complete view of the Studio 1 console in the United newsletter, page 2. Huge section on the right.

 

Very interesting! I wish that I could find that posting that I read, back when Elliot was working on those Sinatra 5.1 surround mixes, regarding Elliot's then wife, as she was doing the final transfers for him and the whole building lost power and they thought that they lost everything, but, thanks to this one piece of equipment, everything luckily backed up perfectly! I'll keep hunting that info down for you, as I know that you would enjoy reading that.

 

Her name was Diana, I remember now! I found the article ...

Furman Sound Blackout Press Release

 

I just checked the Reprise 1021-2 with the suitcase on "Baubles" and they seemed virtually identical in Audacity

The only other version I have was the "Complete Jobim/Sinatra" 20 track compilation - this is the same file just mastered/normalised but they run completely in sync

 

‘Francis Albert Sinatra & Antonio Carlos Jobim’ Expanded 50th Anniversary Edition (post #131)

 

Are any of takes 1,2, or 3 complete? Will we hear a complete alternate or a partial? Or perhaps the released take 4 without any edits or the intercut?

The Press release says "recording session" while the U Discover website says "alternate take"?

 

That could be a session for one of Jobim's solo Warner LP's.

 

In 2005 I bought a sealed stereo copy of this title that looked like it had a chance to be an original pressing. I never opened it because I had the Kevin Gray which to me sounded really good (I have posted many times stating this). However, Saturday evening, inspired by the recent discussion of this album, I broke down, and opened and played the sealed copy! This will be my new go to copy. The sonics are fantastic - there is a magic that is hard to describe. Not quite as detailed as the Kevin Gray but the vocal is really, really full and lush. I believe it is an original pressing but not 100% positive. Others may be able to tell better than me.

The dead wax states:
side 1: FS-1021-A-30653-1L-
side 2: FS-1021-B-30654-1L-

Label is the "smiling Frank" Reprise.

The insert has what I believe to be the proof in the pudding; all of the LPs that are pictured on the insert were released prior to this album (1967), as far as I can tell - I checked all the FS albums pictured. I found a picture of this insert online and copied it below. Mine is actually in better shape than the one in the picture, hardly yellow and the paper has very good integrity - not bad for 50 years.

I was wondering if others think this may be an original pressing?

 

I think you have an original, teag. Sleeve is correct era for that LP. If not a first pressing, real close to one. Definitely a good pressing.