Awesome and please let us know your thoughts. Going to be a crazy night of music at my house as my wife wants to Rock out with some older British classics, followed up with her new Cage The Elephant...goodness knows what "Miles Smiles" will sound like to me after that...ha!
My replacement is coming in today! Went from music direct (about 20 miles from me) to Pittsburgh and back lol
Just arrived and spinning it now! Right away I can tell it blows the Speaker's Corner out of the water. Tons more instrument separation, much more punch and texture and vibrancy. Overall more alive and present. Herbie's piano is standing out to me as the biggest improvement. I'm in awe with how good this sounds. And I had high expectations given my experience with my other Miles MFSL's. Home run.
Awesome, just got home with my copy, and what an incredible job with the packaging. I ended up paying $48.99 at my local store where I always get free shipping...ha! And if not mistaken, that's $1.00 less than Music Direct, unless they apply some type of discount. Glad you are enjoying it and thanks so much for your nice comments.
It's interesting how my view of Miles Smiles relative to the other Second Great Quintet albums had dipped a little over the past couple years. In hindsight, I realize it's largely because it was behind the 8 ball, competing with the MFSL versions of all the group's other albums. Now that it's on a more level playing field, it's caught right up again. I don't think I realized just how anemic the Speaker's Corner pressing was. On another note, I really need to figure out which version of E.S.P. to get before the MFSL goes out of stock. I've seen some people speak highly of the MFSL but others seem to prefer the Impex. What to do, what to do...
Actually maybe I'll just pick up an original Columbia of E.S.P. given both the Impex and MFSL pressings have their issues it seems.
If you decide not to go the original pressing route, the decision between the MOFI and Impex (based on my recollection of comparing them directly) probably depends on whether you think the album needs more warmth or more treble. The Impex sounds thinner and brighter to me--I preferred the MOFI, which had a more natural sound on my system, with Ron's bass also being much more prominent, but YMMV depending on your system balance and sonic preferences. It's almost the same difference as that between the MOFI and Rhino versions of Love's Forever Changes (which makes sense, because I think I recall that in both cases it comes down to Kreig Wunderlich's vs. Chris Bellman's mastering approaches).
I actually haven’t listened to the Mofi yet, so unfortunately I can’t be of much help. But, the Impex sounds nice from what I can remember. From this thread and other information scattered throughout the forum I think the issue with ESP is that it is kind of the odd man out when it comes to the second quintet recordings. It wasn’t produced and recorded in the same ways as his other classic albums from this era, which resulted in what some consider to be lesser sound quality. At least that’s what I think I remember people saying...
That's what I gathered as well. I bet I can get a nice original Columbia for about the same price as the MFSL.
Good info, thanks! Based on that I'd probably prefer the MFSL. But I'm leaning towards getting an original methinks.
The seminal studio album, Seven Steps to Heaven, was recorded with two different bands, comprised of not mutually exclusive musicians. A portion was recorded in Columbia's studio in Hollywood on April 16-17, 1963; the other portion was recorded in Columbia's New York City studio on May 14, 1963. Miles Davis, Ron Carter and George Coleman did all sessions in both the Hollywood and New York City studios. It is credited as being produced by Teo Macero but whether he produced that portion that was recorded in Hollywood leaves me scratching my head. I wouldn't know whether he traveled to Hollywood to do it. The next studio album, E.S.P., was recorded January 20-22, 1965 with basically the "New York City" group from the previous album, with Wayne Shorter replacing George Coleman. This quintet would come to be known as the Second Great Quintet. For whatever reason, E.S.P. was recorded at Columbia studios in Hollywood. Why it was done in Hollywood rather than in New York City I do not know. Maybe someone with one of those Miles Davis day-by-day books can determine what they were all doing on the West Coast. It was produced by Irving Townsend -- not the great Teo Macero. The following studio album, Miles Smiles, is when, where and with whom all the planets aligned. Musicians, place and producer: Recorded October 24-15, 1966, it continues with the "New York City" musicians from their previous album. It was done in the Columbia Studio in New York City, aka The Church. And it was produced by Teo Macero. As and aside, as far as sound quality, " ...from this era, which resulted in what some consider to be lesser sound quality," I think the Teo Macero-produced My Funny Valentine and Four & More live dates more than hold their own. My personal go-to copies are Japanese issues circa 1977 (the Miles 25 series with the blue obis) but the MFSL, while sounding different, are great records. For my money the vintage Japanese issues in the 33 1/3 format are preferable to their MFSL 33 1/3 counterparts. I'm thinking in broad terms. I haven't heard, for instance, the MFSL Milestones or On the Corner.
Great points--but didn't Irving Townsend also produce Kind of Blue, which arguably has even better sonics than any of the later, Macero-produced albums? I only point that out to suggest that the studio possibly had more to do with ESP's sonic deficiencies than the producer.
Nice, thanks! I knew there was a different producer and location but couldn’t remember who or where. Thanks again!
So this is what "Miles Smiles" sounds like, holy S!!! Just one incredible sounding album...Sound - 10/10...Performance - 11/10
IMO, the Speakers Corner of MS was atrocious. Shrill city. I’m curious about the MoFi but the original is already so good. And this new version being from the Wilder remix, I hope to see some comparisons to early US pressings but I am tempted.
My MFSL was delivered to my previous address two weeks ago (since it had been on preorder for many, many months). If I can manage to track it down or persuade Music Direct to send me another copy, I'll gladly compare to my mono and stereo originals and jot down my thoughts here.
Swung by the old house, saw the owner hosing down the driveway, who immediately handed me my sealed Music Direct package. What a nice guy, and a pleasant surprise (I once had an LP mailer stolen off the porch of the same house so I was prepared for the worst). Okay, now on to Miles Smiles sonics, a shoot out with my clean original US stereo 2-eye, 1A/1A machine-stamped matrices. And by clean I mean I purchased it still-sealed, played it maybe a total of 3 times, since I prefer the mono and instinctively reach for that instead. I didn't see a point in comparing the MFSL with the mono mix, since it is tonally quite similar to the original stereo mix, just more focused and intense. Plus all the switching back and forth between 33 1/3 and 45 - you get the idea. In terms of vinyl quality, it's no contest, the MFSL is a slam-dunk. Even my minty first pressing has the occasional small pop and click during the quieter passages, such as on "Circle" (yeah, I know, I should clean it again, but ugh). Pops and clicks notwithstanding, the noise floor of the MFSL is substantially lower, letting the music roll right off the wax as if there was no wax at all. You know that groove wall thingy where you can hear the next groove during quiet parts? The MFSL 45 eliminates it. Let's be clear, the MFSL is the Mark Wilder remix so this isn't exactly an apples-to-apples comparison. If you want to get an idea of the difference between the original mix and remix, compare with 32DP 724 or your favorite needle drop (mono will work too!) to get an idea what you're going to hear when you're spinning vinyl. Both are excellent in different ways. The best way to sum it up is the individual instruments seem to have more "saturation" or reverb on the original mix, but the mix itself is drier because it doesn't need any more wetness. With the remix the individual instruments are drier, or they hit with less saturation, so to compensate the overall mix has more reverb added (wetter). You'll hear that in the digital realm as well as with these LPs. What about the detail, the romance, the emotion, the feel? The MFSL has a little more treble and detail, thanks in no small part to the remix, which is a little less muffled than the original mix. There is more instrument separation, but again, they are also drier sounding. With Miles and Wayne I can hear more air, more breathing, more agility, but the sound from their horns also occupies less space, if that makes sense. Herbie's piano sounds woolly either way, but it sounds more lifelike on the remix. The piano notes all sound so blunted on the original mix, because the decay just evaporates immediately. Ron sounds good either way – his bass isn't quite as full on the MFSL, but he's more forward in the mix, so it compensates. Tony's percussion is fabulous on the original mix, but it has even more snap on the remix. Tony also sounds a little more upfront on the original LP, while I feel like I'm straining to hear him more on the MFSL - again, due to the soundstage of the remix. If I had to sum it up, winners and losers, it would be: Miles – more natural on the MFSL; more romantic on the 2-eye Wayne – more natural on the MFSL; more romantic on the 2-eye Herbie – piano sounds more like a piano on the MFSL; on the 2-eye, not so much Ron – more agility on the MFSL, fuller bass sound on the 2-eye Tony – more present and more of an animal on the 2-eye vinyl quality and low noise floor – MFSL clarity, detail, air, separation, life-likeness – MFSL romance – 2-eye, but not by a wide margin wallop – 2-eye less sides to flip – 2-eye It's tough to declare a winer here. There are things to like and to dislike either way. If you already have a clean 2-eye and love the way it sounds, you are probably okay passing on the MFSL, because it's not going to provide you with an epiphany of any kind. For everyone else who has a turntable and doesn't already own a clean copy of Miles Smiles, word.
It’s a safe assumption. It’s been out for a minute now and has received enthusiastic reviews....I liked it so much I ordered a second copy for the “archives”.
Was Friday night (having a good time) when I posted after I first listened to "Miles Smiles" MoFi 45...Unfortunately I do not have any other version to compare this one to, since my standard CD sounds pretty lame to begin with. Anyhow I am so impressed with this new version, it really is like hearing this again for the first time. Super flat/quiet pressing and sounds just magical to my ears. Enjoyed reading "rxcory" comments posted above, I thought he did a great job articulating this along with the comparisons! It had been a very long time since I heard this masterpiece on vinyl, and this was money well spent and then some! Have enjoyed all the comments here regarding this release.
Good review. I'm not clear at all though what romance means for sound. I'd think that the more natural sound you're describing on the MFSL would be "romantic"?
