or Connect
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Misc.-Category Forums › Music › Kind of Blue - Mono vs Stereo
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Kind of Blue - Mono vs Stereo

post #1 of 12
Thread Starter 

Dear all,

 

I want to buy the HDTrack of "Kind of Blue", they have two versions, and need a little help. Could somebody give me some advice?

 

Best Regards,

 

Daniel

post #2 of 12
Quote:
Originally Posted by daniel0407 View Post

Dear all,


I want to buy the HDTrack of "Kind of Blue", they have two versions, and need a little help. Could somebody give me some advice?


Best Regards,


Daniel


 



I'd stick with the stereo, that's the version everyone raves about.
There is a fair amount of information in the centre, but be warned, some solos are either hard left or hard right.
Edited by Chris J - 2/4/14 at 5:46pm
post #3 of 12
Thread Starter 

Hi,

 

Many thanks for your advice!

 

Have a nice day,

 

Daniel

post #4 of 12
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris J View Post

I'd stick with the stereo, that's the version everyone raves about.
There is a fair amount of information in the centre, but be warned, some solos are either hard left or hard right.

I'm not sure which transfer, mix and master the mono mix on HDTracks is, but I just ordered myself a copy of the limited edition mono vinyl only a couple days ago. You might find this review informative: http://www.analogplanet.com/content/miles-davis-kind-blue-monophonic-reissue-sonylegacy-analog-planet-exclusive

 

Sorry, but can't offer any personal input, yet. I also have the Mobile Fidelity Sound Lab vinyl and SACD pre-ordered, which are both due to come out sometime this year. If you decide you want the stereo version, and are willing to wait a couple months, the MoFi hybrid SACD might be worth considering, although no one has obviously heard it yet so there are no guarantees it'll be one of the best issues out there.

post #5 of 12

Both mixes on HDTracks are completely NEW remasters. That said, they are BOTH fantastic.

 

The Stereo version is taken from a safety copy of the master that does NOT have the pitch problem that plagued early stereo versions. It is conservatively mastered which means there is ambiance, good stereo separation and lots of DYNAMICS! The EQ is tastefully done as well. Not as natural sounding as I would like but it's very tasteful. IMHO, this is probably the best stereo version ever released.

 

All that said...why do you want the MONO?

 

Well...the mono has been the rarest version of Kind of Blue. Apparently it is the one that Miles Davis actually approved and gave input on. The problem is that nobody knows what happened to the mono master tape. It has been lost and missing from the Columbia vaults for a very LONG, LONG time. The only way to get the mono mix has been from mono vinyl pressings which have been very expensive. Even if you managed to find a copy, you never really know what quality the grooves would be in. 

 

Mark Wilder actually sat down with the work parts and a mint copy of the mono vinyl and completely recreated the mono mix. I have a mint mono 1st pressing vinyl and the new MONO mix is extremely similar if not identical but the new mono mix is in far better quality. 

 

So...which to get?

 

If you want what Miles Davis actually listened to and approved....then you want the MONO mix. If you want a Hi-Fi presentation that's extremely well done, get the STEREO. If you're like me and absolutely love and adore this album, then get both.

post #6 of 12

I've got both. 192 / 24 stereo and 192 / 24 mono. These recordings were made in what, '59?

 

We are about done.

 

Any improvements would be extremely incremental. I think we've reached about as good as they can get.


Edited by StratocasterMan - 2/5/14 at 7:23am
post #7 of 12
Quote:
Originally Posted by TJ Elite View Post

I'm not sure which transfer, mix and master the mono mix on HDTracks is, but I just ordered myself a copy of the limited edition mono vinyl only a couple days ago. You might find this review informative: http://www.analogplanet.com/content/miles-davis-kind-blue-monophonic-reissue-sonylegacy-analog-planet-exclusive

Sorry, but can't offer any personal input, yet. I also have the Mobile Fidelity Sound Lab vinyl and SACD pre-ordered, which are both due to come out sometime this year. If you decide you want the stereo version, and are willing to wait a couple months, the MoFi hybrid SACD might be worth considering, although no one has obviously heard it yet so there are no guarantees it'll be one of the best issues out there.
Analog Planet is a Stereophile owned Web side and as such cannot be trusted for an unbiased opinion, i.e. the site simply writes whatever their advertisers tells them to, so just follow the recommendations given by your fellow forum members. Yes I know that I'm being rather harsh but I have had it with all of Stereophile's bs and worthless information.
post #8 of 12
Quote:
Originally Posted by ralphp@optonline View Post

Analog Planet is a Stereophile owned Web side and as such cannot be trusted for an unbiased opinion, i.e. the site simply writes whatever their advertisers tells them to, so just follow the recommendations given by your fellow forum members. Yes I know that I'm being rather harsh but I have had it with all of Stereophile's bs and worthless information.

You have no way of proving whether their opinion is biased or not and your own opinion of them possibly being biased could be claimed to be biased in itself. Besides, I said nothing about paying attention to what they said about the vinyl under review; my intention was for people to read what was said about the state of the master tapes, how the most recent mono and stereo mixes were made, etc. Also what comes to trusting the recommendations of people on audio forums, I stopped paying any attention to what critics of any kind – music, audio, or otherwise – have to say years ago, but the people who write their opinions on audio forums I have equally low faith in. So many people out there think they know what they are talking about, but sometimes don't have the faintest clue in actuality. How many times have I seen an absolutely horrible sounding album unironically named as the best sounding album someone has heard in their life? How many times have I seen a piece of audio gear recommended for all the wrong reasons? How many times have I seen one of the most mediocre albums I've heard in my life be named the album of the year? A surprising number of audiophiles don't even know what is the difference between mixing and mastering, let alone how a well-recorded album differs from a well-mastered one. Taking anything anyone says – on the Internet or otherwise, but especially on the Internet – with a grain of salt when it comes to sound is more than a healthy approach and ultimately the one you can trust the most (hopefully) is you yourself and your own ears. Others' opinions can be useful as reference points but no one should ever take someone else's opinion and blindly make it their own.


Edited by TJ Elite - 2/5/14 at 12:51pm
post #9 of 12

Stereo has always been the superior choice for me. Mono gives it a much more authentic feeling, but as for quality, stereo is what I have always gone too. Hope that helps.

post #10 of 12
Quote:
Originally Posted by TJ Elite View Post
 

You have no way of proving whether their opinion is biased or not and your own opinion of them possibly being biased could be claimed to be biased in itself. Besides, I said nothing about paying attention to what they said about the vinyl under review; my intention was for people to read what was said about the state of the master tapes, how the most recent mono and stereo mixes were made, etc. Also what comes to trusting the recommendations of people on audio forums, I stopped paying any attention to what critics of any kind – music, audio, or otherwise – have to say years ago, but the people who write their opinions on audio forums I have equally low faith in. So many people out there think they know what they are talking about, but sometimes don't have the faintest clue in actuality. How many times have I seen an absolutely horrible sounding album unironically named as the best sounding album someone has heard in their life? How many times have I seen a piece of audio gear recommended for all the wrong reasons? How many times have I seen one of the most mediocre albums I've heard in my life be named the album of the year? A surprising number of audiophiles don't even know what is the difference between mixing and mastering, let alone how a well-recorded album differs from a well-mastered one. Taking anything anyone says – on the Internet or otherwise, but especially on the Internet – with a grain of salt when it comes to sound is more than a healthy approach and ultimately the one you can trust the most (hopefully) is you yourself and your own ears. Others' opinions can be useful as reference points but no one should ever take someone else's opinion and blindly make it their own.

 

X2

post #11 of 12
Quote:
Originally Posted by TJ Elite View Post

You have no way of proving whether their opinion is biased or not and your own opinion of them possibly being biased could be claimed to be biased in itself. Besides, I said nothing about paying attention to what they said about the vinyl under review; my intention was for people to read what was said about the state of the master tapes, how the most recent mono and stereo mixes were made, etc. Also what comes to trusting the recommendations of people on audio forums, I stopped paying any attention to what critics of any kind – music, audio, or otherwise – have to say years ago, but the people who write their opinions on audio forums I have equally low faith in. So many people out there think they know what they are talking about, but sometimes don't have the faintest clue in actuality. How many times have I seen an absolutely horrible sounding album unironically named as the best sounding album someone has heard in their life? How many times have I seen a piece of audio gear recommended for all the wrong reasons? How many times have I seen one of the most mediocre albums I've heard in my life be named the album of the year? A surprising number of audiophiles don't even know what is the difference between mixing and mastering, let alone how a well-recorded album differs from a well-mastered one. Taking anything anyone says – on the Internet or otherwise, but especially on the Internet – with a grain of salt when it comes to sound is more than a healthy approach and ultimately the one you can trust the most (hopefully) is you yourself and your own ears. Others' opinions can be useful as reference points but no one should ever take someone else's opinion and blindly make it their own.

Rather cynical view of the Internet, but I have say I agree with most of your points.
Very true WRT the recording/mixing/mastering knowledge or rather lack thereof.
post #12 of 12

I listen to critics and online commenters whose point of view I can understand. Even if I don't agree with an opinion, if I know the criteria for judging, I can learn from it. The problem is when people resort to subjective comments based on personal taste, not objective criteria.

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Music
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Misc.-Category Forums › Music › Kind of Blue - Mono vs Stereo