There are problems with the MoFi KOB. I don't understand those who prefer it over the Classic. There's the imbalanced bass. There's the glassy tonality up top. The lack of rightness overall (save for Evans' piano, I suppose). On the other hand, certain cuts sound better than others. This is, perhaps, where a heavier mastering hand, a Steve Hoffman, would have made this better.
Is the Classic KOB in stereo? Maybe the heavier bass and cymbal sonics being described are a product of the stereo mix? Sorry, I haven't heard either, just mono.
The Classic Records, along with the MoFi, is stereo. Classic Records had access to the original 3-session master tapes. MoFi did not. A 6-eye mono is my favorite pressing of the album.
I think listener reactions to the MOFI KOB are highly system dependent. I think it sounds incredible on my entry-level system. I heard "Blue in Green" on a Mac monoblock system with a Clearaudio Innovation w/MC cartridge, and it sounded kind of bloated.
As many other listeners have mentioned before, the MoFi KoB (both 45RPM and SACD) doesn't make sense if you haven't done your homework in acoustic treatment of your listening space/room. I don't believe the bass to be this 'heavy' on the tapes, either, but I think MoFi have done a great job rendering the bass more articulate and and giving Paul Chambers the room and presence he deserves. Previous versions always sounded bright and thin, with Chambers too low in the mix. So if one already has room modes, it is likely they will get even more noticeable with the MoFi KoB (while most jazz records like Blue Notes pose no problem since they have less bass weight). Anyway, it's funny to read all the different opinions (all have their merits): if you look at the beginning of the thread or the dedicated KoB MoFi thread, folks first complained about a muffled sound due to recessed/rolled off high frequencies. A stereophile reviewer on the other hand thought they sounded steely due to bumped up highs. Now people complain about a 'glassy' quality of the treble which suggests the exact opposite. In my opinion, the sound on KoB has never been more balanced than on the MoFi, giving the midrange finally the warmth it needed. While other versions still sound great, they sound 'thinned' out in the midrange. That's because most recordings from Columbia were inherently bright. Instead of adding more midrange and rolling the treble off a bit, most engineers just seemed to care about introducing (even) more clarity and detail to the sound, instead of making it sound natural. I think those complaining about the bass should give the record another chance under better acoustic circumstances. Unless that's the case, I would recommend to all those on the fence buying it to take these reviews with caution, as I know several users on this board with great listening spaces who agree to 100% with about this.
Great discussion keep it up. I think I'm going to add Four and More to my Miles MoFi collection. Can't comment on KOB. Mine is a 1 eye 70s repress in stereo. It's not a bad sounding record, though.
I have a high end, well-balanced system that is tonally neutral otherwise (Naim Audio, Clearaudio, Herron Audio, Dynaudio, REL). I play a lot of jazz and classical and nothing else in my collection sounds unbalanced and bloated in the bass like this KOB does.
I enjoy the MFSL Kind of Blue. Sounds great loud. The Classic 33 is good but the vinyl quality, as on a lot of Classic releases, is inferior to theMFSL. Just got the Ryan Smith mono and will listen today. Pressed at RTI also.
Might not be it but you might check the speed when you play 45rpm. Maybe it's a bit slow which would increase bloating. Just a thought with no malice intended!
This is what I'm saying. I don't have a high-end, well-balanced system that is tonally neutral. And the bass on MOFI's KOB sounds to me taut, woody, tonally accurate and lifelike. Not bloated or unbalanced at all. The whole thing sound right to me, unlike the Classic 33, which on my system sounded overly bright in the cymbals. My point is that this is system dependent, not that anyone is right or wrong.
I'm with you in that I have an 'ok' system (child's toys compared to some on this forum), and I'm happy with the MOFI. I prefer it to the current Sony stereo version which I also have, but that's the only comparison I've done. I guess it goes to show that there will never be 100% consensus. For example, a AnalogJ mentioned that had Steve Hoffman mastered the MOFI, it may have turned out better. That very well may be true, but I'm sure there would be those that disagree. For example, I have a copy of Grant Green's Idle Moments on Analogue Productions mastered by Mr. Hoffman. I think it sounds great, and I'm sure Steve would tell you he did the best he could with the tapes. HOWEVER, after doing some research, turns out that many people prefer the Music Matters version (which I haven't heard). Different strokes.
Yeah, we all have different systems and different ears. We are not all hearing the same thing, and so we are bound to describe what we're hearing differently. I'll add that I think people are used to KOB sounding one way, and the MOFI doesn't sound like that. Immediately, it sounded different from every version I've heard, because Paul Chambers is more prominently placed. His leading line in "So What" is allowed to lead. That's one of the biggest differences right out of the gate. I can appreciate people living with this album for decades thinking that sounds "wrong." I happen to prefer it, but that's just me.
For what it's worth I grew up on the remastered CD of "Kind of Blue" (late 90s or early 2000s this must have been released?) and I now have a nice stereo and I am in love with both the RKS cut Sterling mono KOB and the MOFI 45 box. I tend to grab the mono more, just cause it is easier to let play and sink in. But I wouldn't discourage anyone from either release!
I am listening to the MFSL KOB now. I do have low bass capability in a large room. The midrange is just great. The bass is very full, and it may not work for some systems. What I can tell you is that when "So What" on the first side was done, I couldn't wait to play the other side. You'll never hear Bill Evans' piano like this on any other version - at least none that I've heard. This is very much a case by case, system dependent purchase. But if anyone is sitting on the fence, just keep an open mind.
E.S.P. On this one maybe Mofi compensated since they didn't have the absolute master, but I have an original 360 and the 45RPM Mofi has really been pushed in the upper mids. I do think the Mofi has a bit deeper bass and I like it, but the top end is a bit too screechy compared the my original. With horns (especially trumpet) I think engineers have to be careful how much detail they open up with top end. And what I'm hearing is that maybe that top end was pushed a bit too far for me. Some would probably hear it differently. Dynamically, again, there seems to be little to no advantage to the 45RPM idea. I recorded both so I could look at the peaks and they are very similar. And on Dynamic Ranger Meter, the title track scores a 14 on the original 360 pressing and a 14 on the Mofi 45RPM. So unlike Sorcerer, for this one I think I favor the original press.
To answer to that, my TT is calibrated for correct speed for both 33RPM and 45 RPM. Furthermore, if I have issues with system setup, then it won't be revealed by playing KOB. I have plenty of other jazz 45s. Those would also illustrate problems, but they don't. Whether one likes it or not the boosted bass is a function of the recording and mastering, not my system. The thing about a higher end system is that it can be very revealing. That is both good and bad in that it brings out more of the music on one hand, but exposes mastering issues more explicitly on the other.
Agreed. Besides, I'm not sure the first explanation as regards different taste should be that it must be about your system. And TBH, if I heard a system where somehow the KoB bottom end didn't sound overcooked and bloated, I'd be really concerned that other records on such a system would be WAY too light on bass.
Yeah, that's pretty much my point. If the KOB bass didn't sound bloated on my system, then I'm pretty sure the awesome sounding bass of Ray Brown on my AP 45 of Oscar Peterson "We Get Requests" on Verve – for example – would likely sound anemic.
My system is fairly entry level as well and I found the bass to sound wonky. Though I'm holding onto it for a future system and listening room (dreaming) and I guess I'll see then if I like the mastering more. Personally I really love the mono mix of the album, I feel like everything just really gels there.
I prefer the mono mix, too. The piano on "All Blues" is right where it should be on the mono mix, and I think everything just coheres better.
Alright so I'm discounting last night's listening sesh to a late night, tired ears, and not able to fully turn up the volume (I'm in an apartment building with shared walls). I just think the stereo separation along with the really different mastering threw my ears off into left field. I'm listening again today and full volume and this time I'm comparing directly against the RSD Mono. I can tell you I much prefer the mono, and it's not really close. The biggest things I can point to are the clarity of the horns and the ride cymbal. I'm a drummer so I'm very sensitive to how drums sound and the ride on the MoFi sounds grating and muffled whereas on the mono it sounds firm, bouncy, and vibrant. The horns sound a bit on the shrill side too. On the mono everything is crystal clear and more engaging. I'd even go as far as to say it sounds much more dynamic. Maybe it helps having a more full sound from both channels being full on the mono, but I do think the mastering on the MoFi sounds off. There's one aspect I may like more about the MoFi which is Bill Evans' piano. I'll keep giving it chances to see if my ears adjust since I'm so used to hearing this album presented a certain way.
That's because most folks are used to slightly bloated, non-linear bass frequency in their rooms. If you were to measure the frequency response in all of the users listening rooms, you would find out that it's VERY uneven in 95% of all cases. The problem is a) that your personal hearing, regardless of age, gets used to a certain degree of non linearity/room modes and b) unless you listen to very bass-heavy music all the time, you won't necessarily notice it because note decay is so short the standing waves don't really get in the way of the music. That's especially the case for Jazz, where a walking bass, while able to reach the 40hz area, won't sound as overbearing as a steady techno bassline most of the time. But: once you master a bass line to a realistic output level and the bass isn't dry (which is rare, BUT THE CASE FOR KOB: remember, Paul Chambers' bass is in the center channel and therefore went to the echo chamber, just as Miles' trumpet did), you will start to notice room modes even when your used to moderately excessive bass, because they get pronounced all the more. Addendum: having a flat response will not necessarily make records sound bass light; it will just represent the bass as it was recorded. it's pretty much the same logic you would apply to dynamic range: when everyting's mastered loud, the original loud parts won't stand out anymore. The same thing goes for bass: if your room or equipment/ EQ makes for excessive bass, the visceral impact of short, but heavy events such the use of a bass drum will be buried under the bass notes that should be relatively less loud.
I've read a lot of praise for the Mono mix in this thread - are we talking original 6-Eye, or recent reissue? Please specify
