Sinatra / Capitol Sound Quality and General Discussion: Come Fly with Me (recorded 1957)*

The only LPs that pass muster for me (of the ones posted thus far) are the MFSL and the 1984 UK reissue, and they sound very, very different from each other. To my ears, the MFSL has some EQ in the bass that lends Frank's voice a slightly wooly character that oddly I hear in only one other mastering: The Norberg CD! ....but I like the MFSL mastering, and don't care for the Norberg overall. The UK LP seems to present the orchestra in a similar fashion but with a slightly lighter sound to Frank's voice, more akin to the tone on the excellent Walsh CD.

On CD, that Walsh mix really nails it, possibly Walsh's best remix of a "classic pop" Capitol LP. What's odd is that the vocal seems to be all over the map (in a track-to-track sense) in terms of reverb. Some tracks are surprisingly dry, and others are a bit on the wet side, but each track seems to work on its own terms.

I'd be totally okay with any of those three versions -- MFSL, UK 1984 LP, Walsh CD -- being the only version available. They are all excellent, IMO, but all quite different from the other.

I hope others will chime in, too. The samples are posted here: mono and stereo.

 

Two new additions, same page: http://www.11fifty.com/Site_108/1958_-_Come_Fly_with_Me_Stereo.html

1. Roughly half way down the page, I post samples that demonstrate odd little quirks in the MFSL and 1984 UK pressings. I'd love to know what's going on there.

2. At the bottom of the page, some "Segue"-style clips to help clarify differences between some of the masterings, including a look at reverb levels amongst three different mixes.

 

Yeah, I seem to recall going round and round on this in some other Sinatra thread (or maybe this one), and more-or-less agreeing that the 21-CD case used the Alan Dell liner notes and was packaged in a way similar to the big multi-LP Alan Dell LP set from several years earlier, but that the sources were not identical. Dell was, in fact, deceased for 3 years when the CD set came out.

 

I think they both are sourced from some incarnation of the common stereo mix. Whether or not it's literally the same tape, or whether or not the 1998 CD is made from the same 1984 digital tape that served as the source for the 1984 LP, is anyone's guess as far as I can tell. Some titles, as you suggest, are definitely 100% different. Others? I dunno.

Matt

 

Regarding that mono version: It's the natural echo of one (or more) of the echo chambers beneath the studios, piped in in whatever amount the mixer (engineer) deemed appropriate in October of '57. It's totally dialed in, "seasoned to taste." (Waaaaaay too much for my personal taste.) There was virtually no naturally-occuring reverb in the Capitol studios.

Matt

 

This is a definite "pick your poison" title. Mono: Closer mics; more detail; sea of reverb; bad tone. Stereo: Wide-range tone, two mics on the orchestra; drier vocal recording (almost totally dry on some tracks of the Walsh remix); distortion on 5 of 12 tracks.

To me, the mono is an interesting listen, but I'll take the stereo, despite its defects. Different strokes!

Matt

 

Now posted here: Sample from a December 1957 acetate "proof" of the mono LP, presumably cut straight from the session tapes (as were the "D" cuts, of course).


Also, I'm still curious if anybody has any thoughts on the little quirks in the MFSL and UK pressings, here.

Matt

 

What strikes me so odd about the MFSL "rill" clip (the file titled RillUK-MFSL-UK-MFSL.mp3 <--- click to hear, but it's best if heard in context about two-thirds of the way down this page) is that the hum runs throughout that first track of side two, then it fades out right at the end of the first track, then does not appear at the start of the second track. If the "original master" mixdown tape were being used, it seems to me that either:

•The hum would run continuously through side 2, if it were an equipment problem on MFSL's part introduced at the cutting stage;

or

•The hum would appear on the same track on other editions of the LP, which assumedly used either that same master tape or a dupe made from it.

(In other words: If the stereo mixdown for that song had the hum on it in the 1960s, it would be audible on other [non-MFSL] pressings, presumably, but....it isn't. On the other hand, if it were introduced at the cutting stage by MFSL, it would be audible during the entire length of side two, unless they were 1.) cutting that song from one tape, then switching sources on the fly for the rest of that LP side; or 2.) Dare I say it? Using digital mastering? Let the rock throwing begin! ...or suggest another cause.)

I don't get how that hum is ONLY on the MFSL release, and ONLY on that one track, but not on any other releases, unless there is some sort of tricker-pokery going on.

Inquiring minds want to know....

 

Matt, a lot of +2 @ 5k on your acetate!

 

Yeah, I was wondering what all that label stuff was. I knew it was some sort of EQ marking. (Referring to the acetate photo a few posts back.)

Matt

 

Could have been worse, those empty spots could have been filled as well!

 

I thought some of those marks could indicate two-and-a-half dB boost at a given frequency, too.