Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.


Expand Messages
  • spacelights
    Nov 10, 2006
    • 0 Attachment
      --- In RedHotJazz@yahoogroups.com, "David Brown" <johnhaleysims@...>
      > David implied that the King Jazz and Retrieval sets are synonymous. This
      > never was so and I've just relistened. The Retrieval is far far
      > More body, resonance, space, detail and dynamics, albeit at the
      > cost of more surface.
      > If indeed these are from the same JRT tape --- and they certainly
      sound as
      > if from the same copies -- and assuming that no further filtering
      > /equalising etc, digital or otherwise, was imposed by King Jazz -- (
      and I
      > suspect it was ) --then this indicates just how influential the actual
      > digitalising process is.

      The implication perhaps wasn't intentional, but the use of the
      singular word "set" could cause someone to think the two CDs were the

      I've noticed a somewhat similar dichotomy between King Jazz and
      Retrieval CD issues of Morton's 1923-1924 solos, which I'm guessing
      came from identical transfers. King Jazz does have more surface
      noise, and the sound varies a bit from track to track. In a few
      cases, this may provide a greater opportunity for equalization "to
      taste," at the lisener's discretion. I like the character of the
      Retrieval sound, which seems more uniform--usually something achieved
      through mastering.

      King Jazz credits John R.T. for "Transfers," Cesar Garcia for
      "Pre-mastering Re-recording," and Digipro for "DAT Mastering."
      Retrieval simply credits John R.T. with "Audio Restoration."

    • Show all 25 messages in this topic