Sinatra / Capitol Sound Quality: "Come Swing with Me" (1961)

Full disclosure: I've spent virtually zero time with SHE SHOT ME DOWN, GREAT SONGS FROM GREAT BRITAIN, or WATERTOWN, so I'll give those the benefit of the doubt, out of fairness. I know a lot of people have spoken highly of the new SHE SHOT ME DOWN and WATERTOWN, especially, so they (the albums, I mean) are very likely worth checking out, no?

As far as the titles I've actually spent time with:

•Come Fly with Me in mono? Probably the best of the HD bunch, mastering-wise.
•Maybe Sinatra and Swingin' Brass, although it's a pretty revisionist remix (of a mix that was in dire need of revision) that brings its own brand of offbeat funkiness to the table, and could probably use a little revising

The rest run the gamut from poor to pretty good, I think, but none would be my "go-to" copies. Mostly it's a case of "The emperor has no clothes," IMO. (Sorry to be a poo-poo-er.) If I hadn't worn the shoes outside, I'd take 'em back to Nordstrom for a refund, if you catch my drift.

Just my opinion, which is of no more value than anybody else's, so whether you take my word for it or somebody else's, listen to the clips at sites like prostudiomasters.com, and if you like what you hear, take the plunge and enjoy the music. That's the main thing.

 

@Henley : Don't even get me re-started on that soup-city stereo mix for Nice 'n' Easy.

I was relieved to see recently that somebody agrees with me:

(Henley, I don't place any fault on MFSL's mastering on the disc that @MarkusGermany was referring to. It's the mix that's the problem.)

 

Re: Come Dance with Me:

Nothing to apologize for! I'm glad you found a version you like. My only thoughts on the new version -- based solely off the clips -- is that it's a little treble-heavy, but not much. (I think I referred to it as a little "tipped up" in another thread.) I know that @MMM dug what he heard, and that says a lot, IMO. That said, there's still something goofy with track 7, even if the rest of the album is fantastic sounding.

 

Markus and I have chatted a bit about this off-forum in the last month or so. There is an EU CD out there that's a needledrop of (what sounds like) a US mono LP, and it's not bad for what it is. Whether or not the mono LP *technically* is a fold-down, it is *effectively* a fold-down, meaning that there is nothing different you will notice between taking, say, a 1962 mono LP and comparing it to a 1962 stereo LP with the mono button pushed on your stereo. The balances, reverb levels, etc., are identical in the original mono vs. original stereo "mono-fied." Those 1962 Capitol mono LPs are pretty squished in terms of dynamics, so if you want to hear the album in mono, get a more dyanmic (later) stereo pressing (original stereo mix, still), hit the mono button, and there's your better version of the mono mix, minus the squishies.

The UK mono LP I have absolutely kills my US mono LP. Much, much better tone.

The Walsh CD, of course, is a remix, not merely a remaster, so it's apples vs. oranges. Hard to say it's better or worse, but it's absolutely different.

 

The stereo mix and mono Nice 'n' Easy mix have the same amount of soupiness. (It's a long story, but I think they may have been created simultaneously [or nearly so] from the 3-track raw tapes.) There have been some dry-ish releases of individual tracks here and there, and the 1991 Walsh CD is a very different, somewhat dry remix, with less soup.

 

Beef hasn't appeared in that context for years. Time for a cameo:

----------------------

Back to Come Swing with Me.....
This album should BLOW YOUR PANTS OFF with dynamics. Almost literally, anybody who listens to a well-mastered version of this album should have major pants issues. It's humongous brass on the left and humongous brass on the right, plus a great rhythm section. Remember "The Wham of Sam" album? This is the "The Double-Wham of Frank" album.

I'm not exaggerating when I say there is one release -- one -- that has wide-open, unrestrained dynamics, and that's the 1983 MFSL LP. I have no idea why nobody else seems to be able to open up the sound of their pants -- I mean, "this album" the same way, but every other release has compromised dynamics, and I don't mean subtle little differences that only some nit-picky jerk like me is going to notice. I'm talking about serious differences in quality and tone. (....and I'll say for the umpteenth time, YES, the MFSL is about 10% brighter than it should be -- no argument from me on that -- but everything else about it is fantastic to my ears. Turn down your treble half a notch, or burn yourself a very mildly tweaked digital file, and you'll smash the competition.)

Side two, especially, is vastly different sounding on the MFSL LP vs. the UK CD.

MFSL LP left; UK box CD right.

I show the numbers just as a shorthand expression. The main thing is: They SOUND notably different. Clearly, the HD format must be unable to contain wide dynamics.

Or the mastering is subpar and introduces compression where it's not needed.

...and it's not a situation of "MFSL needs to get their hands on this," although I'd be okay with that, as they tend to do a good job with this stuff. It's a matter of finding somebody to sympathetically master the material.

There is one track that was well mastered from this album on the 1980s UK CD, "20 Golden Greats." It may not be quite "MFSL quality" in the eyes of some, but pretty good. Maybe a hair of noise reduction (maybe), but largely "unfutzed." Here are three brief clips that start with the 1998 UK CD (compressed dynamics; flat top end), then repeat the same segment from "20 Golden Greats." Both use the original mix. The "20 Golden Greats" is a definite improvement over the 1998 CD, which is, from what I've heard, superior to the 2015 HD version. Have a listen, if you wish: https://app.box.com/s/zc51gfslnmpcdi75mfat0qpkwqu2s483

EDIT:
(The first 90 seconds of the song are on the ProStudioMasters website, so I'm not giving away any free music here.) Just how far off-balance is the HD version? Here is a comparison that changes sources with each vocal phrase in this order: 20 Golden Greats - HD - 20 Golden Greats - HD - 20 Golden Greats - HD. I'm confident you will have no difficulty in spotting the right-heavy HD version. (Also, notice how nice the mastering is on 20 Golden Greats. The only reason we have not had a truly fantastic CD/digital version of COME SWING WITH ME is the lack of will to make it happen. This track sounds very, very good on that old UK CD.) Here's the track: https://app.box.com/s/226cj6ozfz1gzhwgqusgs44zu5xx5b3j

 

By "previous incarnation," do you mean the 1998 UK CD in the boxed set? If so, I think that's just a matter of the UK disc being mastered from UK (dub) tapes, with the obvious problems there likely being problems that are unique to that particular tape. I think it's a safe bet that the new HD versions are prepared from US tapes housed at Iron Mountain.

 

I'm pretty sure the UK CD box (1998) used MOSTLY (there are exceptions) UK dub masters, while the UK LP set (1984/1985) used mostly digital copies of US tapes. Both sets are MOSTLY well-mastered, though, so I'm not too concerned with the original/dub situation. They sound good....


....mostly.

 

For that very reason, it's common for people to gravitate toward the mono version. (The stereo does not bother me one bit, but "different strokes," of course!) Here's an old post that you may find interesting/germane:

My usual disclaimer: I have no doubt that a "mono master" set of tapes exists for this album, and it may well be a dedicated mix, as has been stipulated. That said, there are zero differences in balance between between the mono mix and the stereo mix summed to mono. Reverb levels are the same, instrumental balances are the same, vocal vs. instrumental balances are the same, so whether or not it is TECHNICALLY a fold-down, the mono mix functions as a fold-down. There is one fly in the ointment that points me to this actually being a fold-down, and that is the piano overdub (or tape-to-tape superimposition???) on "Yes, Indeed." It's *not* on the 3-track tapes, yet it *is* on the original stereo mix ("hard left"), and is identically there on the mono mix. How does it appear on the mono mix unless the mono mix is derived from the stereo mix? That's my lingering question, I guess.

Also: