Miles Davis - Kind of Blue Mono Speed Issues

I've searched the forum and found a lot of debate as to whether or not the original mono issue of Kind of Blue had the same speed issues the stereo version had.

Well, today I just received a NM copy of the mono version and checked it out.

It has the same speed issues as the original stereo tapes.

My matrix numbers on both sides end in -1A.

So, how can this be, if the mono tracks were taped on a separate machine supposedly running at the correct speed? Was the speed problem also on the mono machine? Sounds a bit weird. I would think that quite possibly, the mono is a reduction of the three-track tape with different EQ? How else can the speed issue be explained?

Anyone else who has the mono LP care to chime in? Maybe it's just the -1A pressing? Thoughts?

 

Can you briefly described the speed problem? I have a mono copy with matrix number -1AK on side one and -1A on side two.

 

The speed problem is one of the most famous speed problems this side of "Light My Fire". All issues prior to the '92 mastersound CD have been a half-step too fast on the side 1 songs.

Because this was an issue with the 3 track stereo session tape it was thought to affect only the stereo issues of the album. And there is no consensus on this forum as to whether or not the mono version has the same speed issues.

But I can undoubtedly tell you that the mono LP has the same issues.

 

Looking for Vinyl copy of Kind of Blue at correct speed

Hi to you all,

My first post on this forum...

I am looking for a VINYL copy of Miles Davis Kind of Blue with side 1 at the correct speed.

I believe (looking at Wikipeadia) that all issues after the 1997 had the speed issues corrected, but I am not sure if this relates to CD only or both CD and Vinyl.

Question: what issues (catalog#s) were produced at the correct speed apart from the Quiex (Columbia, Classic Records CS 8163, CS 8163 2001) issue?

I see Columbia issued a version in 2007 (88697160461), would this have used the remaster at the correct speed?

I also see that Columbia are about to re-issue the LP this month in the USA (no news about international). Would this be at the correct speed?

Thanks for you help.

 

This is a reason why turntables need pitch control. So do tape machines, including cassette decks. Even CD players need pitch control. You might not use it every time, but it is worth having.

 

You need to offer more evidence Jason...

 

You can say it, but can you prove it? A needledrop sample of an original mono and stereo pressing, made back to back on the same turntable setup would go a long way to validate your claim...

 

What speed issues?

I recently acquired a six eye mono KOB, and I believe there are no speed issues with the pressing. Stampers are -1AJ and -1AE. "So What" plays in D dorian, "Freddie Freeloader" is in Bb, etc. I played it back to back with a Classic records stereo reissue, and the pieces on side one were in the same key on both pressings when compared to a keyboard.

 

Apparently the speed issue only affected side 1 of the stereo release. This was corrected in 1992 when a new mastering was created from the backup copy of the stereo master tape.


http://www.stereophile.com/thefifthelement/206fifth/

 

Sorry guys. I'm not able to do needle drops. But I'm asking those with a mono LP to confirm. It's not like I'm making this up. I just compared the mono LP to the stereo Japan CD and the remaster CD, and the mono LP matched the Japan (which runs slightly fast) CD exactly.

 

The Classic record comes with two discs that have both speed variations on them. Are you sure you didn't compare it to the Classic record that runs slightly fast? Because on my mono LP, "So What" only matched the "corrected speed version" when I played along on piano when I lowered the varispeed down half a step.

 

Here's a 30 second sample from an original mono white label promo, stamper ending in 1D
http://www.megaupload.com/?d=N0RCSOWO

Hmmm. It does run slightly faster than the 50th anniversary CD I just compared it to. But it is possible that my speed was off... I could've accidentally moved the belt drive motor which would've changed the speed...

 

No, your belt drive is fine. it's the record.

 

How do you know? If you really want to get to the bottom of this, approach it scientifically, await more evidence... If enough people do a similar comparison test, then maybe there will be something worth believing.

In any event, the speed difference is so small, nobody would notice without doing a direct a/b comparison. (Maybe .0001% of the population would notice.)

 

There is also a single LP version of the Classic Records mastered at the correct speed.

 

The speed difference is half a step. It's small, but not unnoticeable. And there has been so much conjecture true on this forum in past threads about this topic. Many people were just assuming the mono didn't have speed problems just because they assumed it only affected the stereo tape. While others, who did have the mono copy "never noticed" because as you say, the difference is minute. So, I thought I would post my views having just listened to both versions.

 

A friend who's blessed/cursed with perfect pitch complained to me about the speed on the mono LP some time ago.
I just assumed that, since the wrong speed occurring on exactly the same tracks on two different recordings is so unlikely a coincidence, the change in tape speed must have been deliberate.

 

Or the mono mix is a reduction of the three-track tape that the stereo mix is based off of (and running slightly slow) and not from a separate full-track tape as we were led to believe?

 

That's what I have.

FWIW, any differences between the Classic records stereo and Columbia 6 eye mono I have are far less than a 1/2 step.

When I get back in town (Monday) I'll carefully compare the records and CDs I've got to an electronic keyboard that can be tuned. I'll be able to tell you exactly how much each pressing deviates from A440 tuning. I'm sure that none will be perfect. That is quite common for recordings from the era, as even if the tape speed is mostly correct, the piano may have been tuned sharp or flat. And don't forget to factor in any vibrato that will be present if the spindle hole is even a tiny bit off center.

 

Yes, but I don't think the trumpet or saxes would be sharp.

All I'm saying is that the mono matches the stereo in terms of being a half step too fast. I don't quite understand why other people would want to blame that on the belts on a TT or an intentional "artistic choice" when it perfectly matches the Unintentionally done stereo version and it was confirmed on this thread that the mono does run as fast as the original stereo.

 

My 14 year old musician son Milo and I just compared "So What" from a Classic 200g stereo Kind of Blue and a 2 eye mono (1CF/1CC) Kind of Blue. Without being told what to expect, Milo both listened to the piece and watched the notes displayed on his battery operated music tuner. He felt certain that the mono version is about a half step sharper than the stereo.

I couldn't tell.

 

Sure they could be--the horn players tune to the piano in the studio.

Unfortunately I'm out of town, so I cannot verify 100% that the Classic reissue and old Columbia mono are pitched the same. My memory recalls the mono was fairly close to A440 and certainly not a half step sharp in comparison. I also recall the Classic Records vinyl pressing was not spot on A440 either. I could be wrong...

On Monday night I will test it using actual records (no needledrops) on the same TT.

Until then, maybe some others can verify their experiences.

 

Is there any possibility that the speedup was intentional? It certainly wouldn't be the only time that was used as a production technique.

 

I doubt the speed up was intentional as they "corrected" it in 1992.

 

I've got original 6-eye mono & stereo copies plus the 200g Classic Record pressing so I'll try to do some needle drops tomorrow if there is still this confusion.