DVD/DTS Poll Davis, Miles - Kind of Blue [DD DualDisc]

[Bob Romano]

Please post your comments, thoughts and observations.......

 

[sallymae_hogsby]

Please post your comments, thoughts and observations.......

I've been holding off getting this, because I'm dubious about how the surround sound mix was created. Does anyone know if the original recording sessions involved more that 2 channels of recording?

 

[tcdriver]

This is the same mix as the SACD and sounds about the same. Taken from the original three-track masters and with the speed correction, this is a fine recording. Not much of anything in the surround channels which is just as it should be for this recording. The center channel fills in very nicely and anchors Miles Davis clearly in the center of the sound field. The documentary, Made In Heaven includes rare archival footage, newly-discovered photos and interviews with Bill Cosby, Herbie Hancock, Ed Bradley, etc., I purchased the DualDisc just for the extras as I already had the SACD. Highly recommended.

tcdriver

 

[analogdemon]

An absolute must-have. The mix is actually 5.0 (according to the Dolby Digital processor on my receiver). The rears are purely for ambience. The fronts take care of delivering all the sound and I love how Miles and his trumpet are always in the center, with piano in the left and drums in right usually. Excellent album, excellent sound, highly recommended.

 

[neil wilkes]

Another "recommended" from me too.
Shame it's only Dolby, but the treatment is really nice & well done.
NOt sure about the previous comment about Miles always being in the centre though - I could swear that on my copy, the trumpet switches channels from left to right sometimes.

Don't like the audio on the menu though. That always spoils a disc for me.
Still - grab it while you can.

 

[Dylan Berichon]

If the mix is the same as the SACD, it's very well done considering it was recorded in the late 50s.

The SACD sounds astounding. Nothing short of breath taking.

This is a mix that you really need a center channel for full enjoyment. I don't imagine this would have been nearly as good with the center folded into the 2 fronts.

 

[filper]

If the mix is the same as the SACD, it's very well done considering it was recorded in the late 50s.

The SACD sounds astounding. Nothing short of breath taking.

I got the MC/Stereo SACD yesterday... I fully agree.

 

[LizardKing]

I've got the SACD of this, and bought this version (dualdisc) for my brother - thinking that it was a DVD-A - Wrong!!!!

The documentary is OK....

Buy the SACD rather than this version.

 

[DKA]

Always considered this a decidedly average mix. With so many versions of this album out there, and so much care paid attention to it, you would have hoped a 5.1 mix knocked it out of the park.

 

[neil wilkes]

Trouble is that Dobly just sounds, well, bloody awful.
Always has,. always will.

 

[Quad Linda]

Miles! Want to listen? Get the SACD Multi. If you don't own a copy, you don't like jazz. The DualDisc is still a must have. I bought it for the video content. You get 5.1 here. Buy it for that, too, if you're not an SACD person. No one here.

Can't believe I've been on QQ for three months and never posted on this thread. I'm a Miles hardcore fan. Saw him live 6 times. At Chicago Symphony Center, he held up poster boards with band members' names. Saw him live at Chicago Theater once with Marilyn Mazur on percussion. She's not on any album, but on one DVD.

Like some tracks on Nat King Cole Story, I prefer listening to this on the 2ch portion of the SACD. I've not heard the 2 disc 45RPM vinyl, but assume it's the best version on wax, though I've never owned it. In fact the only vinyl I've ever owned of this is blue from the box set and I've never played it.

The 5.1 mix was well done. My objection is that it was artificially created by placing speakers where the mikes were and recording the ambience for the rears. It was recorded in the same room both times. Sort of a natural, analog, synthesized surround. Nice. Not gimmicky. Brubeck's Time Out was done the same way. Still, I prefer 2ch. The music you know. If you don't, take yourself to the woodshed. Would you like that? The essence of modern jazz and/or modailty.

For those who may not know, the tape machine for the original sessions was running slow. Anyone who owned a battery tape machine knows it speeds up playback. That was finally corrected about 20 years ago with the CBS Mastersound gold disc, and subsuquent reissues. The Mastersound long box is my vote for worst packaging.

I have this as an SACD multi, Dual Disc, Expanded CD box w/blue vinyl, Miles/Coltrane box, gold CD, Complete Columbia Albums 71CD/DVD box, 2 disc expanded w/T shirt, 1st domestic (fast) CD, and the (fast)CBS Jazz Masterpiece (not Mastersound) reissue. 12 pressings of the same thing. I am nuts, you know.

Linda
Kind of Blue Eyes

 

[Quad Linda]

BTW: It's an 8 because it's not true surround. The surround here isn't advanced res, either. Everything else about it goes to 11.

Linda

 

[DKA]

The 5.1 mix was well done. My objection is that it was artificially created by placing speakers where the mikes were and recording the ambience for the rears. It was recorded in the same room both times. Sort of a natural, analog, synthesized surround. Nice. Not gimmicky. Brubeck's Time Out was done the same way. Still, I prefer 2ch. The music you know. If you don't, take yourself to the woodshed. Would you like that? The essence of modern jazz and/or modailty.

That sounds like an interesting way of getting to surround with an album like this. While I prefer to throw the rulebook out the window and go aggressive, no matter the genre, I can see how this would produce a pleasant and accurate soundfield.

Sad to say that my Miles fandom began after he died. It just wasn't cool before that to be into jazz when you're my age unless you were in band. My first jazz concert ever was a Miles tribute right after his passing. Now? I'm about as big a 70's electric Miles fan as can be.

I do wish people would really place the final nail in the coffin of terms like "true surround." It's about what sounds good, not how it's achieved. It's so incredibly infuriating for those of us who dedicate ourselves to getting to surround from non-traditional places, such as stereo, to hear terms like this. Anyways, not really directed towards you in a negative manner, as I always find your posts fascinating, but more just giving some information as to where I come from.

 

[Quad Linda]

DKA, you are entitled to your opinion on the use of the "fake Quad/surround" term. I believe it is a valid term and can alert potential buyers to what they're getting into. I've bought many titles, especially ones that were only available as Q8's that had no Quad effect, except to slap some echo in the rears. I could have done better by synthesizing Quad from stereo. Fake.

The technique used to create the 5.1 Kind of Blue is a valid one. It is reconstituted, but certainly tasteful. Although I prefer to listen in stereo, it is well done in 5.1, considering what they had to work with. "Fake surround?" In this case, it's debatable. I heard about how they did it prior to purchasing the SACD multi, and was excited about getting it. The DualDisc is the same mix, though not advanced res. Both versions are worth owning!

What is "fake Quad or surround?" If it is not mixed for Quad or surround using multichannel masters, it is fake. It may be tasteful and might sound better than stereo, but it is still fake. A classical title where the actual concert hall or recording studio is used to create the rear channels is not fake. It is simply a multichannel recording with natural hall effect. I greatly prefer these to stereo. Having had season tickets for the Chicago Symphony under both Solti and Barenboim, I know what a live orchestra should sound like. If I'd rather have a more intimate sound, the option of switching to the 2ch layer or info is there. In the case of Quad, switching from SQ or QS to 2ch will eliminate the hall effect, without loss of program information. I rarely choose to eliminate that REAL hall effect, though the option is there.

A pop recording, which is normally assembled anyway, and has no natural rear ambience to utilize, is most definitely fake if ambience is added to create rears. It is not fake if the multichannel masters are remixed. If multiple Quad or 5.1 mixes are created over the years, they are all "real Quad or surround." Different reinterpretations by different engineers, but all very real. Kind of Blue is closer to real classical surround than to traditional "fake Quad." It is reconstituted and recreated, rather than having mikes capture the hall effect while the musicians are there. I would suspect that the flooring, acoustical tiles, etc. in the studio have been replaced since '59, so it might be subtly different. That's negligible.

Even if I know the title is "fake Quad or surround," I'll buy it. Then, I have the opportunity to judge for myself and choose fake Quad/surround or stereo. I also am a completist. Surprise? Probably not for anyone who has read my posts. Yet, I can't help but feeling ripped off when I cue up a Quad/surround title that has multichannel masters, only to find hall effect and nothing else in the rears. It smacks of being done "on the cheap." Sometimes, the ineptitude of the record labels causes the multitrack masters to become misfiled, lost or stolen. "Fake Quad" varies from pleasant to horrendous. The CD-4 of Tony Orlando's Greatest is horrendous. My vote for most awful "fake Quad" ever is the Q8 of Tapestry. I prefer any 2ch copy to this mess. Yet, the REAL 5.1 mix on the SACD multi of Tapestry is one of the best ever pop surround discs.

Kudos to CBS for a project well conceived and executed. That helps make amends for the best selling jazz album ever being available as the wrong speed for 30 years. The more we speak out against fakery and demand the real deal, where possible, the more things will be properly done. If Kind of Blue were made in the '70's as Quad, it would have been at the wrong speed and echoey "fake Quad" besides. In light of what was available, Kind of Blue was very well done.

Linda

 

[britmarc]

Greetings -

I have read that the Miles Davis, Dave Brubeck, Nat Cole SACDs were all recorded 3/0/0 Left/Center/Right as were the re-releases of some
of the late 50s RCA Red seal and Mercury Living Presence SACDs...

Marc

 

[rusinurbe]

Did you knwo that Sony in the US at least also region coded this disc, i found that out when i ordered from the US before it gained an EU release.

What kind of Moroninc company region codes a Music DVD ?

 

[fredblue]

Did you knwo that Sony in the US at least also region coded this disc, i found that out when i ordered from the US before it gained an EU release.

What kind of Moroninc company region codes a Music DVD ?

The kind of moronic company that killed SACD and invented DualDisc?

 

[fredblue]

I gave this a "7" when I first joined here over 3 years ago.
I still feel the same.
It's very nice for what it is and I appreciate the artistry and musicianship.
Just in the context of surround sound and sound quality, that's the most I felt I could give it and still do.

 

[GOS]

I've had this DualDisc for some time now. Figured I'd drag it out and listen to it again...so I could vote here at the great QQ!

I really do think this sounds very good. I've seen LOTS of Jazz musicians play in Chicago over the last 30 years...so I know what great Jazz sounds like. Eh...this is great Jazz.

I think this little DD 5.1 sounds great. Just super. I give it an 8. Just close your eyes.....and I feel like I'm in some dark, dank bar in Chitown.....great stuff.

 

[Franklin]

Err, where is the "Miles Speaks" section, and the photo gallery on the DVD-V side?